Literature DB >> 11119395

The positive predictive value of cervical smears in previously screened postmenopausal women: the Heart and Estrogen/progestin Replacement Study (HERS).

G F Sawaya1, D Grady, K Kerlikowske, J L Valleur, V M Barnabei, K Bass, T E Snyder, J H Pickar, S K Agarwal, J Mandelblatt.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The benefits and risks of performing annual cervical smears on postmenopausal women are not well defined. The independent effect of hormone replacement therapy on development of cytologic abnormalities is unknown.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the positive predictive value of cervical smears in previously screened postmenopausal women and to determine the effect of oral estrogen plus progestin on incident cervical cytologic abnormalities.
DESIGN: Prospective cohort study (incidence) and randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (hormone therapy).
SETTING: 20 U.S. outpatient and community clinical centers. PARTICIPANTS: 2561 women with a uterus and normal cytologic characteristics at baseline.
INTERVENTIONS: Annual smears; oral conjugated equine estrogens, 0. 625 mg/d, plus medroxyprogesterone acetate, 2.5 mg/d, or identical placebo. MEASUREMENTS: Incident cytologic abnormalities (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance, atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance, low-grade squamous epithelial lesion, and high-grade squamous epithelial lesion) and final histologic diagnoses.
RESULTS: The incidence of new cytologic abnormalities in the 2 years following a normal smear was 110 per 4895 person-years (23 per 1000 person-years [95% CI, 18 to 27 per 1000 person-years]). Among the 103 women with known histologic diagnoses, one had mild to moderate dysplasia. The positive predictive value of any smear abnormality identified 1 year after a normal smear, therefore, was 0% (CI, 0% to 5.0%) (0 of 78 women); the positive predictive value of abnormalities found within 2 years was 0.9% (CI, 0.0% to 3.0%) (1 of 110 women). In hormone-treated compared with non-hormone-treated women, the incidence of cytologic abnormalities was nonsignificantly higher (relative hazard, 1.36 [CI, 0.93 to 1.99]), largely because of a nonsignificant 58% greater incidence of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (relative hazard, 1.58 [CI, 0.99 to 2.52]).
CONCLUSIONS: Because of a poor positive predictive value, cervical smears should not be performed within 2 years of normal cytologic results in postmenopausal women. Therapy with oral estrogen plus progestin does not significantly affect the incidence of cytologic abnormalities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11119395     DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-133-12-200012190-00009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  10 in total

Review 1.  Estrogen and ERalpha: culprits in cervical cancer?

Authors:  Sang-Hyuk Chung; Silvia Franceschi; Paul F Lambert
Journal:  Trends Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2010-04-22       Impact factor: 12.015

Review 2.  How can we develop a cost-effective quality cervical screening programme?

Authors:  Sue Wilson; Helen Lester
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 5.386

3.  The frequency of Pap smear screening in the United States.

Authors:  Brenda E Sirovich; H Gilbert Welch
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  The effects of tibolone in older postmenopausal women.

Authors:  Steven R Cummings; Bruce Ettinger; Pierre D Delmas; Peter Kenemans; Victoria Stathopoulos; Pierre Verweij; Mirjam Mol-Arts; Lenus Kloosterboer; Lori Mosca; Claus Christiansen; John Bilezikian; Eduardo Mario Kerzberg; Susan Johnson; Jose Zanchetta; Diederich E Grobbee; Wilfried Seifert; Richard Eastell
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2008-08-14       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Ending cervical cancer screening: attitudes and beliefs from ethnically diverse older women.

Authors:  George F Sawaya; A Yuri Iwaoka-Scott; Sue Kim; Sabrina T Wong; Alison J Huang; A Eugene Washington; Eliseo J Pérez-Stable
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-10-30       Impact factor: 8.661

6.  Cervical cancer screening among women ≥70 years of age in the United States-A referral problem or patient choice.

Authors:  Fangjian Guo; Jacqueline M Hirth; Abbey B Berenson
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2015-10-21       Impact factor: 4.018

Review 7.  Hormonal Therapy for Gynecological Cancers: How Far Has Science Progressed toward Clinical Applications?

Authors:  Saikat Mitra; Mashia Subha Lami; Avoy Ghosh; Rajib Das; Trina Ekawati Tallei; Fahadul Islam; Kuldeep Dhama; M Yasmin Begum; Afaf Aldahish; Kumarappan Chidambaram; Talha Bin Emran
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 6.639

8.  Cervical Cancer Screening Outcomes Among a Sample of Low-Income Uninsured Women: A Program-Based Study.

Authors:  Samson Olowolaju; Morgan Kassabian; Marvellous A Akinlotan; Anna Lichorad; Robert Pope; Brandon Williamson; Scott Horel; Jane N Bolin
Journal:  Womens Health Rep (New Rochelle)       Date:  2022-01-31

9.  Functional roles of female sex hormones and their nuclear receptors in cervical cancer.

Authors:  Seoung-Ae Lee; Seunghan Baik; Sang-Hyuk Chung
Journal:  Essays Biochem       Date:  2021-12-17       Impact factor: 8.000

Review 10.  Current recommendations for cervical cancer screening: do they render the annual pelvic examination obsolete?

Authors:  Robert P Kauffman; Stephen J Griffin; Jon D Lund; Paul E Tullar
Journal:  Med Princ Pract       Date:  2013-01-15       Impact factor: 1.927

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.