Background and aim: Non-melanoma skin Cancers (NMSC) are one of the most prevalent malignancies of the human. Although the morality rate is not high for these Cancers, they may cause high morbility for the patients. In addition to the skin type, factors such as sun exposure, head and neck radiotherapy, inappropriate use of sunscreen and cultural changes may increase the incidence of these Cancers. The objective of this study was to determine NMSC in Isfahan.Materials and Methods: We used data of the Cancer resistery center for performing this study and the incidence of NMSC per 100,000 populations was determined. Results: Overall 1681 cases were registered. The incidence of NMSC was calculated to be 10.67/100,000population. The most common site for BCC and SCC was middle face. Conclusion: NMSC incidence in Isfahan is lower than west countries although this incidence is 10.67/100,000in a year. It means that 5-6 thousand cases of NMSC occur in Iran each year. We can prevent its morbidity and mortality by early correct diagnosis.

Background: Cervical Cancer is the second most common Cancer in women throughout the world and it is the leading cause of death due to Cancer among the women in underdeveloped countries.Regarding the known etiology, availability of the organ, the possibility of proper Screening test and the long latency period between the preCancerous lesion and the full clinical Cancer presentation, Screening programs have been able to drastically reduce the incidence and mortality rate of the disease. The extent of the reduction in mortality achievement is related directly to the proportion of the population that has been screened.In this article, we discuss about different Screening methods for cervical Cancer.

The sensitivity and specificity of mammography are limited in highly fibroglandular breasts (ACR density C and D). Digital mammography provides increased sensitivity in young women and those with moderately dense breasts, and digital three-dimensional mammography (Tomosynthesis) promises further improvement. For women with the densest breasts, however, radiography is unlikely to be theoptimumsolution. MRI, although not affected by breast density, is expensiveandaccess is often limited. Nevertheless, enthusiasm for the use of MRI as a Screening modality is growing because MRI demonstrated to be the most sensitive test and Cancer yield is significant higher in comparison to any other imaging technology. This has been demonstrated in women at high and average risk. In comparison to mammography the specificity is lower, but technical developments have given rise to sharper, more informative images. These improvements foster the use of MRI. Different trials have been preformed and promising results have been reported. This talk will focus on benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of supplemental MRI based breast Cancer Screening.

Introduction: Cervical Cancer is a significant public health concern and has caused numerous unfortunate deaths. The Pap smear (PS) test is a widely-recognized and affordable Screening technique used to detect cervical Cancer at an early stage. Objective: This study aimed to investigate the inequality in cervical Cancer Screening uptake. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional research was conducted on 774 married 30–37 women selected by multi-stage cluster sampling. They were living in Kermanshah City, Iran, in 2019. Their socioeconomic status was evaluated using the principal component analysis (PCA) and was shown by the index and curve of concentration of socioeconomic inequality in PS. The obtained data were analyzed using the chi-square, t-test, logistic regression, and compensation statistical tests. Results: The mean age of participants was 45.42±10.66 years. About 43.9% of women had education levels under a diploma. Also, 89.3% of women were married, and 58.1% had already done a PS test at least once. In addition, 26.5% of women had a regular PS test uptake. The concentration index for PS test uptake was 0.062 (P=0.115). Education level (OR=1.181, 95% CI; 1.022, 1.364, P=0.024) and a positive family history of cervical Cancer (OR=3.591, 95% CI; 1.811, 7.120, P=0.001) had significant impacts on regular PS uptake. Conclusion: A person’s level of education and family history of cervical Cancer were the most critical factors for getting regular PS test uptake. Furthermore, the concentration index showed that the frequency of PS test uptake was slightly higher in the rich group. Focusing interventions on less educated and disadvantaged women may provide useful insights to promote PS test uptake, thereby reducing inequalities. Moreover, using fear appeal strategies to promote PS test uptake may be beneficial.

Introduction Prostate Cancer is one of the most common Cancers in Iranian men. PSA(prostate specific antigen) Screening is a controversial issue because PSA Screening leads to diagnose of patients with low risk prostate Cancer who not only do not benefit from treatment but also suffer from complication caused by treatment. On the other hand, without prostate Cancer Screening, the rate of metastatic prostate Cancer will increase. This article is a narrative review article on PSA Screening, reviewing clinical trial articles in the PubMed. Methods We searched PubMed using keywords: “, PSA, Prostate Cancer and Screen”,and English as well as full text articles were included. Only clinical trial studies were included. Case studies, cohort studies and review articles were excluded. 301 articles were found. Our emphasis was on four questions on benefits and harms of PSA Screening and benefits and harms of prostate Cancer treatment for localized prostate Cancer were reviewed. Finally 15 articles were included. References from included studies were manually reviewed to identify additional studies of interest. Results PLCO AND CAP studies showed that PSA Screening does not lead to decreased prostate Cancer mortality but ERSPC study showed 21% decrease in prostate Cancer mortality among people who screen for prostate Cancer. The most problem in prostate Cancer Screening is over diagnosis. These studies revealed over diagnosis in 20. 7% to 50. 4% of patients who were screened with PSA. Pivot and PROTECT studies revealed radical prostatectomy for patients with localized prostate Cancer detected with PSA Screening, does not significantly increase the survival of prostate Cancer, however,SPCG-4 study showed that radical prostatectomy significantly increased survival of localized prostate Cancer. Conclusion Active surveillance of low-risk prostate Cancer or supplemental tests such as PHI (prostate health index) and Multiparametric MRI in cases where PSA is slightly higher than normal is recommended for PSA Screening.