Rebecca Newhouse

Investigating the acceptability of cervical screening, using conventional clinician-taken cervical samples or urine self-sampling, at 6 weeks postnatal: A cross-sectional questionnaire

Objectives United Kingdom (UK) guidelines recommend delaying cervical screening due during pregnancy to 12 weeks postnatal, despite a lack of supporting evidence. This questionnaire-based study aimed to determine the feasibility of a clinical study of cervical screening and urine self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) at 6 weeks postnatal, as pilot work suggested this would improve uptake, if offered at the routine postnatal check-up. Methods Females who were pregnant/recently pregnant were invited to participate in a web-based questionnaire. Questions assessed acceptability of postnatal cervical screening at 6 weeks postnatal, analysed with chi-square, Fisher's exact and Mann–Whitney tests. Free-text responses were coded using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) to conduct a qualitative content analysis. Results Among the 454 participants, 266 (58.6%) would be more likely to undergo cervical screening if offered at 6 weeks postnatal, and an even higher proportion expressed increased willingness if urine self-sampling were offered ( n  = 338; 74.4%). Two-thirds (308/454; 67.8%) would be willing to be screened at 6 weeks postnatal for a research study and 356/454 (78.4%) if it would be limited only to urine self-sampling. When considering screening modality, over half (245/454; 54%) would prefer urine self-sampling to cervical screening, although a fifth (93/454; 21%) preferred conventional sampling. Free-text responses were provided by 279 participants, and these highlighted that affective attitude and burden TFA constructs underpinned prospective acceptability of having screening at 6 weeks postnatal. Conclusions Offering cervical screening at the 6-week postnatal check-up has potential to increase cervical screening participation. Most participants would be interested in taking part in the research. The feasibility of screening at 6 weeks postnatal and concurrent acceptability should be tested in pilot clinical studies.

Advanced epithelial ovarian cancer in older patients

We aimed to analyze management and survival outcomes of older patients (≥75 years) with stage ≥II epithelial ovarian cancer across gynecological cancer centers in the United Kingdom. Retrospective cohort study performed using the IMPRESS project data set. Clinical information for patients diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer from 6 sites of varying size and population demographics was collated between January 2018 and December 2019. We compared treatment of patients aged ≥75 years with those <75, within and between centers, using multivariate analysis to understand effects on outcomes. After exclusions, we assessed 721 patients for overall survival and 702 for progression-free survival. Patients aged ≥75 years had poorer performance status and more comorbidities. Older patients were less likely to receive combination treatment with surgery and chemotherapy (in either order) (overall = 392/721 (54.4%); <75 cohort = 320/495 (64.6%); ≥75 cohort = 72/226 (31.9%), p < .0001). Treatment varied between sites, with some having no active treatment rates of 49% for patients aged ≥75 years. Older patients had twice the relative risk of death (relative risk 1.98, 95% CI 1.63 to 2.39, p < .001). Adjustment for confounders individually caused only a relatively modest reduction in magnitude and strength of association. Adjustment for treatment led to this association essentially disappearing (relative risk 1.10, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.38, 99% reduction in χ Older women may do as well as younger women in terms of survival if treated similarly, although this varies depending on treatment groups. Treatments varied between and within sites, with some sites treating older women differently than others.