Manuel Zorzi

Dr. Manuel Zorzi

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

25Years (2002-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 March 2010 in The Lancet Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
GRGuglielmo Ronco
Guglielmo Ronco
PRPaolo Giorgi Rossi
Paolo Giorgi Rossi
FCFrancesca Carozzi
Francesca Carozzi
MCMassimo Confortini
Massimo Confortini
PPPaolo Dalla Palma
Paolo Dalla Palma
JCJack Cuzick
Jack Cuzick

1 September 2014 in Gut
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MZManuel Zorzi
Manuel Zorzi
UFUgo Fedeli
Ugo Fedeli
ESElena Schievano
Elena Schievano
EBEmanuela Bovo
Emanuela Bovo
SGStefano Guzzinati
Stefano Guzzinati
ATAngelo Paolo Dei Tos
Angelo Paolo Dei Tos
Objective: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes based on the guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBT) reduce CRC-specific mortality. Several studies have shown higher sensitivity with the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) compared with gFOBT. We carried out an ecological study to evaluate the impact of FIT-based screening programmes on CRC mortality. Design: In the Veneto Region (Italy), biennial FIT-based screening programmes that invited 50–69-year-old residents were introduced in different areas between 2002 and 2009. We compared CRC mortality rates from 1995 to 2011 between the areas where screening started in 2002–2004 (early screening areas (ESA)) and areas that introduced the screening in 2008–2009 (late screening areas (LSA)) using Poisson regression models. We also compared available data on CRC incidence rates (1995–2007) and surgical resection rates (2001–2012). Results: Before the introduction of screening, CRC mortality and incidence rates in the two areas were similar. Compared with 1995–2000, 2006–2011 mortality rates were 22% lower in the ESA than in the LSA (rate ratio (RR)=0.78; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.89). The reduction was larger in women (RR=0.64; CI 0.51 to 0.80) than in men (RR=0.87; CI 0.73 to 1.04). In the ESA, incidence and surgery rates peaked during the introduction of the screening programme and then returned to the baseline (2006–2007 incidence) or dropped below initial values (surgery after 2007). Conclusions: FIT-based screening programmes were associated with a significant reduction in CRC mortality. This effect took place much earlier than reported by gFOBT-based trials and observational studies.

7 June 2006 in JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
GRGuglielmo Ronco
Guglielmo Ronco
NSNereo Segnan
Nereo Segnan
PRPaolo Giorgi Rossi
Paolo Giorgi Rossi
MZMarco Zappa
Marco Zappa
GCGian Piero Casadei
Gian Piero Casadei
JCJack Cuzick
Jack Cuzick
Background: Although testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) has higher sensitivity and lower specificity than cytology alone for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), studies comparing conventional and liquid-based cytology have had conflicting results. Methods: In the first phase of a two-phase multicenter randomized controlled trial, women aged 35–60 years in the conventional arm ( n = 16 658) were screened using conventional cytology, and women in the experimental arm ( n = 16 706) had liquid-based cytology and were tested for high-risk HPV types using the Hybrid Capture 2 assay. Women in the conventional arm were referred to colposcopy with atypical cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) or higher and those in the experimental arm were referred with ASCUS or higher cytology or with a positive (≥1 pg/mL) HPV test. Sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+) were calculated. Results: The screening methods and referral criterion applied in the experimental arm had higher sensitivity than that in the conventional arm (relative sensitivity = 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03 to 2.09) but a lower PPV (relative PPV = 0.40; 95% CI = 0.23 to 0.66). With HPV testing alone at ≥1 pg/mL and at ≥2 pg/mL, the gain in sensitivity compared with the conventional arm remained similar (relative sensitivity = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.00 to 2.04 and relative sensitivity = 1.41, 95% CI = 0.98 to 2.01, respectively) but PPV progressively improved (relative PPV = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.33 to 0.98 and relative PPV = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.45 and 1.27, respectively). Referral based on liquid-based cytology alone did not increase sensitivity compared with conventional cytology (relative sensitivity = 1.06; 95% CI = 0.72 to 1.55) but reduced PPV (relative PPV = 0.57; 95% CI = 0.39 to 0.82). Conclusions: HPV testing alone was more sensitive than conventional cytology among women 35–60 years old. Adding liquid-based cytology improved sensitivity only marginally but increased false-positives. HPV testing using Hybrid Capture 2 with a 2 pg/mL cutoff may be more appropriate than a 1 pg/mL cutoff for primary cervical cancer screening.

25 March 2008 in JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
GRGuglielmo Ronco
Guglielmo Ronco
PRPaolo Giorgi Rossi
Paolo Giorgi Rossi
FCFrancesca Carozzi
Francesca Carozzi
MCMassimo Confortini
Massimo Confortini
PPPaolo Dalla Palma
Paolo Dalla Palma
OGOn behalf of the New Technologies for Cervical Cancer Screening Working Group
On behalf of the New Technologies for Cervical Cancer Screening Working Group
In the first recruitment phase of a randomized trial of cervical cancer screening methods (New Technologies for Cervical Cancer Screening [NTCC] study), we compared screening with conventional cytology with screening by human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in combination with liquid-based cytology. HPV-positive women were directly referred to colposcopy if aged 35 or older; if younger, they were retested after 1 year. In the second recruitment phase of NTCC, we randomly assigned women to conventional cytology (n = 24661) with referral to colposcopy if cytology indicated atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or more severe abnormality or to testing for high-risk HPV DNA alone by Hybrid Capture 2 (n = 24535) with referral to colposcopy if the test was positive at a concentration of HPV DNA 1 pg/mL or greater. For the main endpoint of the study, histologic detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or more (CIN2+), we calculated and compared sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) of the two screening methods using HPV DNA cutoffs of 1 pg/mL and 2 pg/mL. All statistical tests were two-sided. For women aged 35–60 years, the relative sensitivity of HPV testing for detection of CIN2+ at a cutoff of 1 pg/mL vs conventional cytology was 1.92 (95% CI = 1.28 to 2.87) and the relative PPV was 0.80 (95% CI = 0.55 to 1.18). At a cutoff of 2 pg/mL HPV DNA, the relative sensitivity was 1.81 (95% CI = 1.20 to 2.72) and the relative PPV was 0.99 (95% CI = 0.67 to 1.46). In this age group, there was no evidence of heterogeneity between study phases. Among women aged 25–34 years, the relative sensitivity for detection of CIN2+ of HPV testing at a cutoff of 1 pg/mL vs cytology was 3.50 (95% CI = 2.11 to 5.82), statistically significantly larger ( P = .019) than that observed in phase 1 at this age (1.58; 95% CI = 1.03 to 2.44). For women aged 35–60 years, HPV testing with a cutoff of 2 pg/mL achieves a substantial gain in sensitivity over cytology with only a small reduction in PPV. Among women aged 25–34 years, the large relative sensitivity of HPV testing compared with conventional cytology and the difference between relative sensitivity during phases 1 and 2 suggests that there is frequent regression of CIN2+ that are detected by direct referral of younger HPV-positive women to colposcopy. Thus, triage test or repeat testing is needed if HPV is to be used for primary testing in this context.

21 May 2007 in BMJ
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
GRGuglielmo Ronco
Guglielmo Ronco
JCJack Cuzick
Jack Cuzick
PPPaola Pierotti
Paola Pierotti
MCMaria Paola Cariaggi
Maria Paola Cariaggi
PPPaolo Dalla Palma
Paolo Dalla Palma
MCMassimo Confortini
Massimo Confortini
Objective To compare the accuracy of conventional cytology with liquid based cytology for primary screening of cervical cancer. Design Randomised controlled trial. Setting Nine screening programmes in Italy. Participants Women aged 25-60 attending for a new screening round: 22 466 were assigned to the conventional arm and 22 708 were assigned to the experimental arm. Interventions Conventional cytology compared with liquid based cytology and testing for human papillomavirus. Main outcome measure Relative sensitivity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or more at blindly reviewed histology, with atypical cells of undetermined significance or more severe cytology considered a positive result. Results In an intention to screen analysis liquid based cytology showed no significant increase in sensitivity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or more (relative sensitivity 1.17, 95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.56) whereas the positive predictive value was reduced (relative positive predictive value v conventional cytology 0.58, 0.44 to 0.77). Liquid based cytology detected more lesions of grade 1 or more (relative sensitivity 1.68, 1.40 to 2.02), with a larger increase among women aged 25-34 (P for heterogeneity 0.0006), but did not detect more lesions of grade 3 or more (relative sensitivity 0.84, 0.56 to 1.25). Results were similar when only low grade intraepithelial lesions or more severe cytology were considered a positive result. No evidence was found of heterogeneity between centres or of improvement with increasing time from start of the study. The relative frequency of women with at least one unsatisfactory result was lower with liquid based cytology (0.62, 0.56 to 0.69). Conclusion Liquid based cytology showed no statistically significant difference in sensitivity to conventional cytology for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or more. More positive results were found, however, leading to a lower positive predictive value. A large reduction in unsatisfactory smears was evident. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN81678807.

1 July 2006 in The Lancet Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
GRGuglielmo Ronco
Guglielmo Ronco
PRPaolo Giorgi Rossi
Paolo Giorgi Rossi
FCFrancesca Carozzi
Francesca Carozzi
PPPaolo Dalla Palma
Paolo Dalla Palma
AMAnnarosa Del Mistro
Annarosa Del Mistro
JCJack Cuzick
Jack Cuzick