Latest news with #cervicalCancer
The Sun
2 days ago
- Entertainment
- The Sun
Robbie Williams shares devastating update on parents' health battle in emotional post
ROBBIE Williams has shared a heartbreaking update on his family's health battles – with his mum, dad and mother-in-law all currently battling illnesses. As the Something Beautiful icon, 51, continues his Britpop stadium tour, he has also been checking in and helping look after the family alongside wife, Ayda Field, 46. 7 7 7 7 His beloved mum, Janet, has dementia which has deteriorated her memory to the point that she struggles to recognise him, while his dad Pete – who he credits in his movie for his love of music and performance – has Parkinson's disease which leaves him unable to leave the house. On top of it all, Ayda's mother, Gwen, is battling cervical cancer, Lupus and Parkinson's at the same time. In a new post on Instagram, Robbie posted a long Q+A about himself and his family's situation - noting there were parts of the tour that he loved – crediting his band and support act Lottery Winners for bringing 'energy' he enjoys, as well as some of his more notable concerts so far. But then he added that he's been fighting off a bug across the past two weeks, and that life at home is incredibly tough. 'Things at home with my parents? VERY precarious right now,' he then wrote. 'It's real world stuff that deeply affects me and my wife. And if my wife is affected, you can bet I am. So the maths are: Virus + ill parents + stadium tour.' 'Every single moment of every single day is in preparation for those 2+ hours on stage. Outside of that? I have nothing',' he said. 'There is nothing to offer. I don't mind stating to those around me, I need protecting. And in return I protect them'. Despite this, he added a promise that he would be 'on top of his game' during the shows, though noted: 'Outside of that - I have nothing to offer or give, for the time being.' His brutally honest post comes after Robbie paid tribute to his family on stage during his tour, admitting on stage that his mum no longer knows who he is and he 'isn't ready for it'. He told the crowd: 'My mother has dementia and she doesn't know who I am anymore. She doesn't know where she is anymore. My dad has Parkinson's and he can't leave the house. 'He used to sing with me every night on stage, he would come out, steal the show and be charming and then wander backstage for a glass of red wine. Now he can't leave the house. 'My mother-in-law, who I absolutely worship and adore, has three illnesses. She's for lupus, Parkinson's and cancer. She is the most courageous lady and she is fighting, fighting, fighting.' He added: "It's a strange place to be, this place we find ourselves, 51 years old, it's very strange to be the grown up. "I'm not ready for it." 7 7
Medscape
03-07-2025
- Health
- Medscape
Cervical Cancer Risk Overlooked After Age 65
TOPLINE: Analysis of over 2.1 million women in China revealed that those aged 65 years or older vs those younger than 65 years had significantly higher rates of high-risk human papillomavirus (hr-HPV) infection (13.67% vs 8.08%) and cervical cancer (0.092% vs 0.01%) although most guidelines recommend discontinuing screening for women aged 65 years or older with a normal screening history. METHODOLOGY: Researchers conducted a retrospective analysis of cervical cancer screening data from Shenzhen, China (2017-2023), to assess hr-HPV distribution and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) prevalence in women aged 65 years or older vs those younger than 65 years. Data collection encompassed 628 healthcare facilities, including 496 community health centers, 94 hospitals, 11 maternal and child health hospitals, and 27 other medical facilities. Clinical records included demographic information, cytology results, HPV testing covering 14 hr-HPV genotypes (16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, 66, and 68), and colposcopy/biopsy outcomes. Analysis included 2,152,766 complete records from an initial collection of 2,580,829, yielding an 83.4% data validity rate. TAKEAWAY: Analysis of 2,152,766 records revealed that women aged 65 years or older (n = 17,420; 0.81%) vs those younger than 65 years showed higher hr-HPV prevalence (13.67% vs 8.08%), CIN2+ detection rate (0.333% vs 0.155%), and cancer rate (0.092% vs 0.01%; P for all < .001). Single, double, and triple hr-HPV infections were found in 10.56%, 2.32%, and 0.57% of women aged 65 years or older, with CIN2+ detection rates of 2.01%, 2.73%, and 4.04%, respectively, all exceeding rates in those younger than 65 years (P < .001). A significant dose-response relationship emerged between hr-HPV infections and CIN2+ risk in women aged 65 years or older (P for trend < .001), with odds ratios being 55.86 (95% CI, 21.81-143.07), 65.95 (95% CI, 22.63-192.18), and 85.45 (95% CI, 24.15-302.35) for single, double, and triple infections, respectively. IN PRACTICE: 'Currently, there is a significant global gap in cervical cancer prevention for older women, and urgent action is needed. First, screening and early diagnosis for women aged ≥ 65 should be strengthened, including affordable screening services and age-appropriate technologies to detect and treat precancerous lesions. Additionally, community engagement, health education, and media campaigns can raise awareness of cervical cancer risks and prevention among older women, encouraging active participation in screening programs,' authors of the study wrote. SOURCE: The study was led by Zichen Ye, He Wang, and Yingyu Zhong, who served as joint first authors. It was published online in Gynecology and Obstetrics Clinical Medicine. LIMITATIONS: The study faced several limitations despite using high-quality, large-sample, real-world cervical cancer screening data collected over 7 years in Shenzhen. Because women aged 65 years or older were not included in the national target screening population, participants may have had symptoms or concerns, introducing potential selection bias. The low number of hr-HPV infections in this age group led to some results trending toward extremes, affecting result stability. Additionally, data from a single region in China limited generalizability to other populations. The researchers could not obtain specific information about the types of cytologic detection products and HPV genotyping products used, which may have affected result precision and comparability. DISCLOSURES: The study was supported by the Sanming Project of Medicine in Shenzhen (SZSM202211032). The authors reported having no relevant conflicts of interest. This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
Telegraph
25-06-2025
- Health
- Telegraph
Britain slashes global vaccine budget, putting millions of women and girls at risk
Britain has slashed its funding for the Gavi global vaccine partnership by 40 per cent in real terms, putting millions of women and girls at risk from cervical cancer and other diseases. The government will now contribute £1.25 billion to Gavi – which facilitates the vaccination of nearly half of the world's children – for the next five years, down from the £1.6 billion pledge given in 2020. It comes as Britain and other western powers have dramatically cut their aid budgets in recent months as they prepare to ramp up spending on defence. Speaking exclusively to The Telegraph, Baroness Chapman, the Minister of International Development said: 'We've had to make some really tough choices. But we've decided as a government that we want to invest in defence, because that's the world we are in. 'When we cut the aid budget, we knew we'd have to cut things that are globally good. Gavi would be something it would be great to put more money into in future and I hope we can, but for today this is a good pledge from the UK,' she said. Britain's funding cut represents a 40 per cent reduction in real terms after accounting for inflation. It will threaten funding for 23 million child vaccinations over the next five years, potentially causing an additional 350,000 deaths, according to estimates by the ONE campaign. Andrew Mitchell, former Conservative International Development Secretary, condemned the government's 'brutal' cut to Gavi, warning it will 'leave Britain less safe and more vulnerable to disease.' In another major blow, the US announced at Gavi's pledge summit in Brussels today that it would cut its support entirely for the organisation. It had given $1.13 billion in the organisation's last funding round. In an inflammatory video message delivered to the summit, US health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Junior accused Gavi of neglecting vaccine safety, and criticised its decision making around Covid-19 immunisation recommendations and the use of the diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTPw) vaccine in low-income countries. Global vaccine experts rejected the jibe, saying they had 'full confidence' in the DTPw vaccine. Gavi is relying on raising at least $9 billion to support its work between 2026-2030. Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, is a public-private partnership that procures and distributes vaccines at significantly reduced prices to the world's poorest countries. It targets diseases such as HPV, malaria, yellow fever, COVID-19, Ebola, measles, and typhoid. It was founded by the World Health Organization (WHO), UNICEF, the World Bank and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in 2000. It has immunised over a billion children worldwide and is estimated to have saved more than 18 million lives. The UK has historically been the organisation's largest sovereign donor. Baroness Chapman, appointed Minister for International Development earlier this year shortly after the UK government cut its aid budget from 0.5 to 0.3 per cent of gross national income – the lowest level in 25 years – said foreign assistance should not just be about 'doing good' but about helping countries to 'stand on [their] own two feet.' However, experts argue that Gavi is one of the best ways to achieve that goal. The International Finance Facility for Immunisation (IFFIm), Gavi's innovative funding mechanism which former Chancellor Gordon Brown helped design, is widely regarded as one of the most effective and sustainable aid projects in history. Every dollar invested in Gavi is estimated to generate a $54 return on investment – far outperforming traditional markets like the Dow Jones, which returned $2.26 per dollar over the past decade. Over the past 25 years, 19 countries, including Indonesia and India, have successfully transitioned out of Gavi support and are now donors themselves. The UK government has been a key champion of Gavi's accelerated rollout of the HPV vaccine to adolescent girls in developing countries, aiming to eradicate cervical cancer, which kills around 300,000 women annually. During Gavi's 2026–2030 strategic period, it plans to vaccinate an additional 120 million girls with the HPV vaccine. However, these plans may be scaled back due to the funding shortfall. 'The HPV vaccine is a real game changer in the fight against cervical cancer [...] But again, we have had to make a decision about putting more money into defense. Therefore there's less money to spend on overseas aid,' Baroness Chapman said. The organisation's work does not just benefit its recipients, say experts, but protects all countries from the risk of future pandemics. 'We've learned through Covid that if you have a pandemic, or if you have viruses emerging from other parts of the world, no matter how far away they might be, that none of us are safe, it is a global challenge and Gavi is huge part of that answer,' said Baroness Chapman. Gavi's CEO Sania Nishtar told The Telegraph: 'The UK relationship for GAVI is super important. The UK is where GAVI was born. We've had bipartisan support from both sides of the aisle in the last 25 years. We're very grateful for the pledge at this very difficult moment.'
Medscape
24-06-2025
- Health
- Medscape
PD-L1 Did Not Predict Immunotherapy Benefit in CC
Findings of the BEATcc trial suggest PD-L1 status is not a reliable biomarker for guiding immunotherapy selection in patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer, potentially simplifying treatment decisions for clinicians managing this patient population. A post-hoc analysis of the phase 3 trial demonstrated that the addition of atezolizumab to chemotherapy plus bevacizumab provided clinical benefit regardless of PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) status. This was among the results of the trial that Kristina Lindemann, MD, head of the Gynecological Oncology Center at Oslo University Hospital, Norway, presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology Gynecological Cancers Congress 2025. Current Treatment Landscape The treatment landscape for recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer has evolved significantly in recent years, according to Lindemann. Since the publication of GOG-240, platinum-based chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab has served as the standard of care for chemotherapy-naive patients. She noted, during her presentation, that the Keynote 826 study further established pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy and bevacizumab as a treatment option, but only for biomarker-positive patients with a CPS of at least 1. The question that remains now is 'can we further improve the efficacy' of chemotherapy by adding immunotherapy in the biomarker-negative population, that is in those with a CPS of less than 1 or an unknown PD-L1 status? BEATcc Trial Design and First Results The BEATcc trial was an open-label, multicenter randomized phase 3 study in an all-comer population of 410 patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer who had received no prior systemic anticancer therapy. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and platinum-based chemotherapy or the control arm of bevacizumab and platinum-based chemotherapy alone. The trial met its dual primary endpoints of progression-free survival (PFS) and interim overall survival (OS). Lindemann reported that the addition of atezolizumab to the backbone of chemotherapy and bevacizumab significantly increased both PFS and interim OS, with an increase in median PFS from 10.4 months to 13.7 months (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.49-0.78). Median OS was 32.1 and 22.8 months, respectively (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52-0.88). Biomarker Analysis The post hoc analysis presented by Lindemann examined treatment efficacy according to PD-L1 status in 313 patients (76% of the randomized population) who had available CPS scores. The analysis showed that the addition of atezolizumab to chemotherapy and bevacizumab provided benefit across all CPS subgroups. In the CPS-negative group (CPS < 1), PFS improved from 10.2 months in the control group to 13.6 months with atezolizumab (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.28-0.82). Similarly, in the CPS-positive group (CPS ≥ 1), the median PFS increased from 10.5 months to 16.6 months (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.39-0.74). Interaction tests showed no predictive effect of CPS for PFS ( P = .73), PFS2 ( P = .53), or OS ( P = .12). Commenting on these data, Lindemann emphasized that 'atezolizumab demonstrates efficacy in terms of providing a significant beneficial effect on PFS as well as interim OS, both in the intention-to-treat population, but also in the biomarker-evaluable population, and this efficacy was seen across all CPS cut-offs.' Stéphanie Lheureux, of Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, who served as the external discussant, provided context regarding the interpretation of these biomarker analyses. She highlighted critical differences between the BEATcc and Keynote 826 trials in their approach to biomarker assessment. 'It's important to note that for both trials, the primary endpoint was a dual primary endpoint with both OS and PFS, which was powered for the trial design. They both used the same specific CPS core biomarker, but the way they analyzed the biomarker was very different in the two trials,' Lheureux noted. She explained that, in Keynote 826, CPS score was prospectively assessed as a stratification factor and was well-balanced between groups, with CPS < 1 representing about 10% of the population. In contrast, the BEATcc biomarker analysis was conducted as a post hoc analysis, with 24% of patients lacking CPS scores and some imbalance between treatment groups. 'We need to be very careful when we look at subgroup analysis. The clinical trial design matters very much when we analyze the results,' Lheureux cautioned. 'If the subgroup analysis is not powered, it could just be hypothesis generating, and we need to be very careful of how we interpret this.' Clinical Implications and Future Perspectives The findings of BEATcc have already influenced clinical practice guidelines. 'The BEAT regimen is now listed as a preferred first-line regimen in these patients' in the updated National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, reflecting the potential for broader application of atezolizumab regardless of biomarker status, Lindemann explained. Looking ahead, Lheureux emphasized that more sophisticated approaches to personalized treatment selection using biomarkers are needed. "We need to make sure biomarkers are context specific and appropriately validated with the right rigorous trials, and we need to assess the potential evolution of this biomarker with the tumor evolution and heterogeneity,' she said. Lindemann said the final OS analysis from the BEATcc trial is expected in 2026, which may provide additional insights into the long-term benefits of the atezolizumab combination across different biomarker subgroups. 'In the BEATcc trial, PD-L1 status does not seem to be a robust biomarker guiding patient selection for immunotherapy in this setting.' The findings suggest that atezolizumab, in combination with bevacizumab and chemotherapy, 'represents an effective first-line treatment option for patients with recurrent [or] metastatic cervical cancer and should actually be offered irrespective of CPS,' she concluded. Lindemann reports financial relationships with GSK, MSD, AstraZeneca, Karyopharm, Eisai, and Genmab. Lheureux reports financial relationships with AstraZeneca, Repare Therapeutics, GSK, Schrodinger, Merck, Roche, Seagen, AbbVie, Zai Lab, Gilead, and Eisai.
Associated Press
12-06-2025
- Health
- Associated Press
More at-home health tests are now available. How to know what's right for you
The doctor is in — the mailbox, that is. You can now do self-administered tests for everything from thyroid function to HIV in the privacy of your own home — and that list continues to grow, as the Food and Drug Administration recently approved the first at-home cervical cancer test. While the tests can make it easier for people to access health care and can be helpful for those who have extreme anxiety about sensitive or invasive medical exams, experts warn that most of the tests cannot replace an actual in-person visit. Here's what doctors say you can test for at home, and when you should make the trek to your physician's office. What kinds of at-home tests are available? There are two kinds at 'at-home tests.' In one type, the patient collects the sample and sends it off to a lab; the new cervical cancer test is like this. The other gives an instant result — think COVID-19 and pregnancy tests. What are the benefits of at-home tests? HIV home-testing kits can improve rates of diagnosing sexually transmitted infections in rural communities and help people who are nervous about going to the doctor to seek a sensitive test, said Dr. Joseph Cherabie, an infectious diseases specialist in St. Louis. 'You really want to get people to care as quickly as possible, but some people could be very anxious about that results as well,' Cherabie said. 'And they have very negative reactions.' Labs are required to report a positive HIV test, instead of putting the onus on the patient who took the test, Cherabie said, and and, often, the patient is matched up with HIV support services. 'If you are part of a sexual and gender minority community, going to a doctor's office can be full of a lot of historical trauma, and you may prefer to just do testing at home without anyone judging you or asking you invasive questions about your sex life,' Cherabie said. The new cervical cancer test — which tests for strains of human papillomavirus, or HPV — involves a testing swab that's like a tampon, said Dr. Susan Modesitt, a gynecologic oncologist at Emory University in Atlanta. It is not, Modesitt said, a replacement for a Pap smear, the exam in which a metal speculum is inserted in the vagina to scrape cervix cells. A doctor's visit also involves a pelvic exam, a chance to talk about abnormal bleeding — a sign of endometrial cancer — and other symptoms and issues, like menopause or STIs. 'There are so many other reasons to see your doctor and get an exam outside of a cervical cancer screening,' she said. The at-home cervical cancer test from Teal Health requires a prescription, and the company said that results are not left for the patient to interpret. I live in a rural area — can I take an at-home test? Some at-home tests can replace a trip to the doctor's office. That's especially true in rural areas, where it can be difficult to get a colonoscopy. 'The colonoscopy requires a pre-op, and you have to drive maybe 70 miles for it,' said Dr. Steven Furr, board chair of the American Academy of Family Physicians who practices in rural Alabama. 'You get anesthesia. It's actually almost like a surgical procedure in many ways. 'So, for a lot of people, that's pretty arduous. That's where an at-home test can come in handy.' But, Furr said, if your test reveals issues, you need to go to your doctor. Plus, patients should always discuss test results with their physician instead of interpreting them on their own, he said. Who shouldn't do at-home tests? If you have symptoms of what you're testing for, go to the doctor. At-home colon cancer tests aren't the right option for people with a history of colon cancer or high-risk conditions, such as inflammatory bowel disease, said Dr. Zachariah Foda, a gastroenterologist at Johns Hopkins. He added that they're also not recommended for people who are having GI symptoms. While there are tests for many things — running anywhere from $15 to $400, depending on what is being evaluated — Furr said it's essential to make sure that your test is FDA-approved so you can better trust the results. 'Anytime we get people involved in their own health care and help them understand what's going on, I think that's a good thing and it gives us a chance to talk,' he said. 'Any kind of screening is better than no screening.' ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
