[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]

Global Association of COVID-19 Pandemic Measures With Cancer ScreeningA Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Educational Objective
To identify the key insights or developments described in this article
1 Credit CME
Key Points

Question  Is the COVID-19 pandemic associated with a decrease in the number of cancer screening tests globally?

Findings  In this systematic review and meta-analysis of 39 publications, the screening types analyzed were associated with a significant overall decrease (−46.7%, −44.9%, and −51.8% for breast, colorectal, and cervical cancer screening, respectively) from January to October 2020. This decrease showed a U-shaped trend with a negative peak in April 2020 (−74.3% for mammography and −69.3% for colonoscopy and fecal occult blood test or fecal immunochemical test) and in March 2020 for Papanicolaou test or human papillomavirus test (−78.8%).

Meaning  COVID-19 pandemic measures were associated with widely reduced cancer screening services, which was possibly associated with delayed cancer diagnosis and increased cancer mortality.

Abstract

Importance  Public health services, including cancer screening tests, have been affected by the onset of the COVID-19 epidemic.

Objective  To investigate the pandemic’s association with cancer screening worldwide.

Data Sources  In this systematic review and meta-analysis, databases such as PubMed, ProQuest, and Scopus were searched comprehensively for articles published between January 1, 2020, and December 12, 2021.

Study Selection  Observational studies and articles that reported data from cancer registries that compared the number of screening tests performed before and during the pandemic for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer were included.

Data Extraction and Synthesis  Two pairs of independent reviewers extracted data from the selected studies. The weighted average of the percentage variation was calculated between the 2 periods to assess the change in the number of cancer screening tests performed during the pandemic. Stratified analysis was performed by geographic area, period, and type of setting. The systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline.

Main Outcomes and Measures  The main outcome was the weighted average percentage variation in the number of screening tests performed between January and October 2020 compared with the previous period.

Results  The review comprised 39 publications. There was an overall decrease of −46.7% (95% CI, −55.5% to −37.8%) for breast cancer screening, −44.9% (95% CI, −53.8% to −36.1%) for colorectal cancer screening, and −51.8% (95% CI, −64.7% to −38.9%) for cervical cancer screening during the pandemic. For all 3 cancers, a U-shaped temporal trend was identified; for colorectal cancer, a significant decrease was still apparent after May 2020 (in June to October, the decrease was −23.4% [95% CI, −44.4% to −2.4%]). Differences by geographic area and screening setting were also identified.

Conclusions and Relevance  A summary estimate of the downscaling of cancer screening tests since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic is provided in this systematic review and meta-analysis. This could be associated with an increase in the number of avoidable cancer deaths. Effective interventions are required to restore the capacity of screening services to the prepandemic level.

Sign in to take quiz and track your certificates

Buy This Activity

JN Learning™ is the home for CME and MOC from the JAMA Network. Search by specialty or US state and earn AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™ from articles, audio, Clinical Challenges and more. Learn more about CME/MOC

CME Disclosure Statement: Unless noted, all individuals in control of content reported no relevant financial relationships. If applicable, all relevant financial relationships have been mitigated.

Article Information

Accepted for Publication: May 18, 2022.

Published Online: July 7, 2022. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.2617

Corresponding Author: Paolo Boffetta, MD, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Via Massarenti 9, 40138 Bologna, Italy (paolo.boffetta@unibo.it).

Author Contributions: Drs Teglia and Angelini had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Concept and design: Teglia, Angelini, Boffetta.

Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Teglia, Angelini, Astolfi, Casolari.

Drafting of the manuscript: Teglia, Angelini, Astolfi, Casolari.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Teglia, Angelini, Boffetta.

Statistical analysis: Teglia, Angelini.

Supervision: Teglia, Angelini, Boffetta.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

References
1.
Sung  H , Ferlay  J , Siegel  RL ,  et al.  Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries.   CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209-249. doi:10.3322/caac.21660 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Canfell  K , Kim  JJ , Brisson  M ,  et al.  Mortality impact of achieving WHO cervical cancer elimination targets: a comparative modelling analysis in 78 low-income and lower-middle-income countries.   Lancet. 2020;395(10224):591-603. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30157-4 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Ortiz  AP , Gierbolini-Bermúdez  A , Ramos-Cartagena  JM ,  et al.  Cervical cancer screening among Medicaid patients during natural disasters and the COVID-19 pandemic in Puerto Rico, 2016 to 2020.   JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(10):e2128806. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.28806 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Sharma  KA , Zangmo  R , Kumari  A , Roy  KK , Bharti  J .  Family planning and abortion services in COVID 19 pandemic.   Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;59(6):808-811. doi:10.1016/j.tjog.2020.09.005 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Stover  J , Kelly  SL , Mudimu  E ,  et al.  The risks and benefits of providing HIV services during the COVID-19 pandemic.   PLoS One. 2021;16(12):e0260820. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0260820 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Patt  D , Gordan  L , Diaz  M ,  et al.  Impact of COVID-19 on cancer care: how the pandemic is delaying cancer diagnosis and treatment for American seniors.   JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2020;4:1059-1071. doi:10.1200/CCI.20.00134 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Puricelli Perin  DM , Christensen  T , Burón  A ,  et al; International Cancer Screening Network ICSN.  Interruption of cancer screening services due to COVID-19 pandemic: lessons from previous disasters.   Prev Med Rep. 2021;23:101399. doi:10.1016/j.pmedr.2021.101399 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Yong  JH , Mainprize  JG , Yaffe  MJ ,  et al.  The impact of episodic screening interruption: COVID-19 and population-based cancer screening in Canada.   J Med Screen. 2021;28(2):100-107. doi:10.1177/0969141320974711 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Moher  D , Liberati  A , Tetzlaff  J , Altman  DG ; PRISMA Group.  Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.   PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Siu  AL ; US Preventive Services Task Force.  Screening for breast cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.   Ann Intern Med. 2016;164(4):279-296. doi:10.7326/M15-2886 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Curry  SJ , Krist  AH , Owens  DK ,  et al; US Preventive Services Task Force.  Screening for cervical cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.   JAMA. 2018;320(7):674-686. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.10897 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Davidson  KW , Barry  MJ , Mangione  CM ,  et al; US Preventive Services Task Force.  Screening for colorectal cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.   JAMA. 2021;325(19):1965-1977. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.6238 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Krist  AH , Davidson  KW , Mangione  CM ,  et al; US Preventive Services Task Force.  Screening for lung cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.   JAMA. 2021;325(10):962-970. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.1117 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
Grossman  DC , Curry  SJ , Owens  DK ,  et al; US Preventive Services Task Force.  Screening for prostate cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.   JAMA. 2018;319(18):1901-1913. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.3710 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Oxford Centre for Triple Value Healthcare. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP). Accessed March 3, 2022. https://casp-uk.b-cdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/CASP-Qualitative-Checklist-2018_fillable_form.pdf
16.
Hale  T , Angrist  N , Goldszmidt  R ,  et al.  A global panel database of pandemic policies (Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker).   Nat Hum Behav. 2021;5(4):529-538. doi:10.1038/s41562-021-01079-8 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
17.
Egger  M , Davey Smith  G , Schneider  M , Minder  C .  Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test.   BMJ. 1997;315(7109):629-634. doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
18.
Hall  IJ , Tangka  FKL , Sabatino  SA , Thompson  TD , Graubard  BI , Breen  N .  Patterns and trends in cancer screening in the United States.   Prev Chronic Dis. 2018;15:E97. doi:10.5888/pcd15.170465 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Mazidimoradi  A , Tiznobaik  A , Salehiniya  H .  Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review.   J Gastrointest Cancer. Published online August 18, 2021. doi:10.1007/s12029-021-00679-x PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
Wu  F , Zhao  S , Yu  B ,  et al.  A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China.   Nature. 2020;579(7798):265-269. doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2008-3 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
21.
Pai  C , Bhaskar  A , Rawoot  V .  Investigating the dynamics of COVID-19 pandemic in India under lockdown.   Chaos Solitons Fractals. 2020;138:109988. doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2020.109988 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
Atun  R , de Andrade  LOM , Almeida  G ,  et al.  Health-system reform and universal health coverage in Latin America.   Lancet. 2015;385(9974):1230-1247. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61646-9 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
23.
Loud  JT , Murphy  J .  Cancer screening and early detection in the 21st century.   Semin Oncol Nurs. 2017;33(2):121-128. doi:10.1016/j.soncn.2017.02.002 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
24.
Sharma  KP , Grosse  SD , Maciosek  MV ,  et al.  Preventing breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer deaths: assessing the impact of increased screening.   Prev Chronic Dis. 2020;17:E123. doi:10.5888/pcd17.200039 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
25.
Del Vecchio Blanco  G , Calabrese  E , Biancone  L , Monteleone  G , Paoluzi  OA .  The impact of COVID-19 pandemic in the colorectal cancer prevention.   Int J Colorectal Dis. 2020;35(10):1951-1954. doi:10.1007/s00384-020-03635-6 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
26.
Maringe  C , Spicer  J , Morris  M ,  et al.  The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer deaths due to delays in diagnosis in England, UK: a national, population-based, modelling study.   Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(8):1023-1034. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30388-0 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
27.
Ebell  MH , Thai  TN , Royalty  KJ .  Cancer screening recommendations: an international comparison of high income countries.   Public Health Rev. 2018;39:7. doi:10.1186/s40985-018-0080-0 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
AMA CME Accreditation Information

Credit Designation Statement: The American Medical Association designates this Journal-based CME activity activity for a maximum of 1.00  AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.

Successful completion of this CME activity, which includes participation in the evaluation component, enables the participant to earn up to:

  • 1.00 Medical Knowledge MOC points in the American Board of Internal Medicine's (ABIM) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program;;
  • 1.00 Self-Assessment points in the American Board of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery’s (ABOHNS) Continuing Certification program;
  • 1.00 MOC points in the American Board of Pediatrics’ (ABP) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program;
  • 1.00 Lifelong Learning points in the American Board of Pathology’s (ABPath) Continuing Certification program; and
  • 1.00 CME points in the American Board of Surgery’s (ABS) Continuing Certification program

It is the CME activity provider's responsibility to submit participant completion information to ACCME for the purpose of granting MOC credit.

Close
Want full access to the AMA Ed Hub?
After you sign up for AMA Membership, make sure you sign in or create a Physician account with the AMA in order to access all learning activities on the AMA Ed Hub
Buy this activity
Close
Want full access to the AMA Ed Hub?
After you sign up for AMA Membership, make sure you sign in or create a Physician account with the AMA in order to access all learning activities on the AMA Ed Hub
Buy this activity
Close
With a personal account, you can:
  • Access free activities and track your credits
  • Personalize content alerts
  • Customize your interests
  • Fully personalize your learning experience
Education Center Collection Sign In Modal Right
Close

Name Your Search

Save Search
With a personal account, you can:
  • Access free activities and track your credits
  • Personalize content alerts
  • Customize your interests
  • Fully personalize your learning experience
Close
Close

Lookup An Activity

or

My Saved Searches

You currently have no searches saved.

Close

My Saved Courses

You currently have no courses saved.

Close