Cervical screening: the evolving landscape

Davies-Oliveira, Jennifer C; Round, Thomas; Crosbie, Emma

doi:10.3399/bjgp22x720197

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 22 publications

(24 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although screening programs and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines have helped reduce its incidence ( 8 ), approximately 310,000 patients with CC die annually ( 9 ). CC tends to develop at a younger age ( 10 , 11 ); however, older patients also often have dismal prognoses ( 12 , 13 ). EC, which is second only to CC in terms of the incidence of reproductive system cancers, ranks seventh among the most prevalent malignancies among females ( 14 – 16 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical characterization and genomic landscape of gynecological cancers among patients attending a Chinese hospital

Jiang

Liu

et al. 2023

Front. Oncol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundGynecological cancers are the most lethal malignancies among females, most of which are associated with gene mutations. Few studies have compared the differences in the genomic landscape among various types of gynecological cancers. In this study, we evaluated the diversity of mutations in different gynecological cancers.MethodsA total of 184 patients with gynecological cancer, including ovarian, cervical, fallopian tube, and endometrial cancer, were included. Next-generation sequencing was performed to detect the mutations and tumor mutational burden (TMB). Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) and Gene Ontology (GO) enrichment analyses were also conducted.ResultsWe found that 94.57% of patients had at least one mutation, among which single nucleotide variants, insertions and InDels were in the majority. TP53, PIK3CA, PTEN, KRAS, BRCA1, BRCA2, ARID1A, KMT2C, FGFR2, and FGFR3 were the top 10 most frequently mutated genes. Patients with ovarian cancer tended to have higher frequencies of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, and the frequency of germline BRCA1 mutations (18/24, 75.00%) was higher than that of BRCA2 (11/19, 57.89%). A new mutation hotspot in BRCA2 (I770) was firstly discovered among Chinese patients with gynecological cancer. Patients with TP53, PIK3CA, PTEN, and FGFR3 mutations had significantly higher TMB values than those with wild-type genes. A significant cross was discovered between the enriched KEGG pathways of gynecological and breast cancers. GO enrichment revealed that the mutated genes were crucial for the cell cycle, neuronal apoptosis, and DNA repair.ConclusionVarious gynecological cancer types share similarities and differences both in clinical characterization and genomic mutations. Taken together with the results of TMB and enriched pathways, this study provided useful information on the molecular mechanism underlying gynecological cancers and the development of targeted drugs and precision medicine.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical characterization and genomic landscape of gynecological cancers among patients attending a Chinese hospital

Jiang

Liu

et al. 2023

Front. Oncol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Environmental considerations in healthcare matter to patients, with a survey finding high public support for actions that reduce the NHS carbon footprint, including those requiring behavioural changes 39 . A future cervical screening programme that provides a choice of screening options, 40 including less resource‐intensive approaches, has potential to improve screening uptake while simultaneously reducing its associated carbon footprint on a population scale.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of the carbon footprint of alternative sampling approaches for cervical screening in the UK: A descriptive study

Whittaker,

Davies,

Sargent

et al. 2023

BJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo understand whether self‐sampling can reduce carbon emissions (CO2e) from the NHS cervical screening programme (NHSCSP) by comparing the carbon footprint of three sampling strategies: routine cervical sampling, vaginal self‐sampling and first‐void (FV) urine collection.DesignDescriptive study.SettingNational Health Service (NHS), United Kingdom (UK).Population or SamplePatients aged 25–64 years eligible for cervical screening in the UK.MethodsA carbon footprint analysis was undertaken for three cervical screening sampling approaches, from point of invitation to screening through to preparation for transport to the laboratory for HPV testing. A combination of primary and secondary data were used, with a bottom‐up approach applied to collection of primary data.Main Outcome MeasuresWe report CO2e per sampling approach, which is the unit used to express carbon footprint and harmonise the contributions of greenhouse gases with different global warming potentials.ResultsThe total carbon footprint of routine cervical sampling is 3670 g CO2e. By comparison, vaginal self‐sampling had a total carbon footprint of 423 g CO2e, and FV urine sampling 570 g CO2e. The largest share of emissions for routine sampling was attributable to the carbon footprint associated with an appointment in a primary care setting, which totalled 2768 g CO2e.ConclusionsRoutine cervical sampling is up to 8.7‐fold more carbon‐intensive than self‐sampling approaches with equivalent effectiveness. We found negligible differences in the carbon footprint of alternative self‐sampling methods, supporting the need for an informed choice of screening options for participants, which includes sharing information on their environmental impacts.

show abstract

Cervical screening: the evolving landscape

Cited by 2 publications

References 22 publications

Clinical characterization and genomic landscape of gynecological cancers among patients attending a Chinese hospital

Clinical characterization and genomic landscape of gynecological cancers among patients attending a Chinese hospital

A comparison of the carbon footprint of alternative sampling approaches for cervical screening in the UK: A descriptive study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About