Literature DB >> 14961588

Initial results from a randomized trial of cervical visual screening in rural south India.

Rengaswamy Sankaranarayanan1, Rajamanickam Rajkumar, Rajapandian Theresa, Pulikattil Okkaru Esmy, Cedric Mahe, Karur R Bagyalakshmi, Somanathan Thara, Lucien Frappart, Eric Lucas, Richard Muwonge, S Shanthakumari, D Jeevan, T M Subbarao, Donald Maxwell Parkin, Jacob Cherian.   

Abstract

The impact of a single round of screening of visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) on cervical cancer incidence and mortality was investigated in a cluster randomized trial in south India. Women 30-59 years of age in 113 clusters in Dindigul District were randomized to VIA screening (57 clusters, 48,225 women) by nurses and to a control group (56 clusters, 30,167 women). 30,577 eligible women were screened between May 2000 and April 2003; 2,939 (9.6%) screen-positive women were investigated with colposcopy by nurses and 2,777 (9.1%) women had biopsy. CIN 1 was diagnosed in 1,778 women, CIN 2-3 lesions were found in 222, and there were 69 screen detected invasive cervical cancers. The detection rates of lesions per 1,000 screened women were 58.2 for CIN 1, 7.3 for CIN 2-3, and 2.3 for invasive cancer. The detection rate of high-grade lesions in our study was 2-3-fold higher than those observed in repeatedly screened populations in developed countries. 71% of women with CIN 1 and 80% of those with CIN 2-3 lesions accepted cryotherapy provided by nurses and surgical treatment by mid-level clinicians. Overall, 97 and 34 incident cervical cancer cases were observed in the intervention and control arms, respectively. The intervention arm accrued 124,144 person years and the control arm accrued 90,172 during the study period. The age standardized cervical cancer incidence rates were 92.4/100,000 person-years in the intervention and 43.1/100,000 in the control arms. In the screened arm, 35.0% of cases were in Stage I as opposed to none in the control arm. The preliminary findings from our study indicate that not only is a VIA-based screening programme feasible, safe and acceptable to a population in rural settings, it also results in early detection of cervical neoplasia. Copyright 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14961588     DOI: 10.1002/ijc.11726

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cancer        ISSN: 0020-7136            Impact factor:   7.396


  16 in total

1.  Cervical cancer screening in Kolkata, India: beliefs and predictors of cervical cancer screening among women attending a women's health clinic in Kolkata, India.

Authors:  Brita Roy; Tricia S Tang
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.037

2.  The Global Burden of Cancer 2013.

Authors:  Christina Fitzmaurice; Daniel Dicker; Amanda Pain; Hannah Hamavid; Maziar Moradi-Lakeh; Michael F MacIntyre; Christine Allen; Gillian Hansen; Rachel Woodbrook; Charles Wolfe; Randah R Hamadeh; Ami Moore; Andrea Werdecker; Bradford D Gessner; Braden Te Ao; Brian McMahon; Chante Karimkhani; Chuanhua Yu; Graham S Cooke; David C Schwebel; David O Carpenter; David M Pereira; Denis Nash; Dhruv S Kazi; Diego De Leo; Dietrich Plass; Kingsley N Ukwaja; George D Thurston; Kim Yun Jin; Edgar P Simard; Edward Mills; Eun-Kee Park; Ferrán Catalá-López; Gabrielle deVeber; Carolyn Gotay; Gulfaraz Khan; H Dean Hosgood; Itamar S Santos; Janet L Leasher; Jasvinder Singh; James Leigh; Jost B Jonas; Jost Jonas; Juan Sanabria; Justin Beardsley; Kathryn H Jacobsen; Ken Takahashi; Richard C Franklin; Luca Ronfani; Marcella Montico; Luigi Naldi; Marcello Tonelli; Johanna Geleijnse; Max Petzold; Mark G Shrime; Mustafa Younis; Naohiro Yonemoto; Nicholas Breitborde; Paul Yip; Farshad Pourmalek; Paulo A Lotufo; Alireza Esteghamati; Graeme J Hankey; Raghib Ali; Raimundas Lunevicius; Reza Malekzadeh; Robert Dellavalle; Robert Weintraub; Robyn Lucas; Roderick Hay; David Rojas-Rueda; Ronny Westerman; Sadaf G Sepanlou; Sandra Nolte; Scott Patten; Scott Weichenthal; Semaw Ferede Abera; Seyed-Mohammad Fereshtehnejad; Ivy Shiue; Tim Driscoll; Tommi Vasankari; Ubai Alsharif; Vafa Rahimi-Movaghar; Vasiliy V Vlassov; W S Marcenes; Wubegzier Mekonnen; Yohannes Adama Melaku; Yuichiro Yano; Al Artaman; Ismael Campos; Jennifer MacLachlan; Ulrich Mueller; Daniel Kim; Matias Trillini; Babak Eshrati; Hywel C Williams; Kenji Shibuya; Rakhi Dandona; Kinnari Murthy; Benjamin Cowie; Azmeraw T Amare; Carl Abelardo Antonio; Carlos Castañeda-Orjuela; Coen H van Gool; Francesco Violante; In-Hwan Oh; Kedede Deribe; Kjetil Soreide; Luke Knibbs; Maia Kereselidze; Mark Green; Rosario Cardenas; Nobhojit Roy; Taavi Tillmann; Taavi Tillman; Yongmei Li; Hans Krueger; Lorenzo Monasta; Subhojit Dey; Sara Sheikhbahaei; Nima Hafezi-Nejad; G Anil Kumar; Chandrashekhar T Sreeramareddy; Lalit Dandona; Haidong Wang; Stein Emil Vollset; Ali Mokdad; Joshua A Salomon; Rafael Lozano; Theo Vos; Mohammad Forouzanfar; Alan Lopez; Christopher Murray; Mohsen Naghavi
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 31.777

Review 3.  Advancing cervical cancer prevention in India: implementation science priorities.

Authors:  Suneeta Krishnan; Emily Madsen; Deborah Porterfield; Beena Varghese
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2013-11-11

Review 4.  Are treatments for cervical precancerous lesions in less-developed countries safe enough to promote scaling-up of cervical screening programs? A systematic review.

Authors:  Eric Chamot; Sibylle Kristensen; Jeffrey S A Stringer; Mulindi H Mwanahamuntu
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2010-04-01       Impact factor: 2.809

Review 5.  Implementation science in cancer prevention and control: a framework for research and programs in low- and middle-income countries.

Authors:  Sudha Sivaram; Michael A Sanchez; Barbara K Rimer; Jonathan M Samet; Russell E Glasgow
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2014-09-01       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 6.  Interventions targeted at women to encourage the uptake of cervical screening.

Authors:  Thomas Everett; Andrew Bryant; Michelle F Griffin; Pierre Pl Martin-Hirsch; Carol A Forbes; Ruth G Jepson
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2011-05-11

7.  The costs of reducing loss to follow-up in South African cervical cancer screening.

Authors:  Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert; Lynette E Denny; Michelle De Souza; Thomas C Wright; Louise Kuhn; Sue J Goldie
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2005-11-15

8.  Single-visit approach of cervical cancer screening: see and treat in Indonesia.

Authors:  J N I Vet; J L Kooijman; F C Henderson; F M Aziz; G Purwoto; H Susanto; I G D Surya; S Budiningsih; S Cornain; G J Fleuren; J B Trimbos; A A W Peters
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2012-07-31       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  Influences on uptake of reproductive health services in Nsangi community of Uganda and their implications for cervical cancer screening.

Authors:  Twaha Mutyaba; Elisabeth Faxelid; Florence Mirembe; Elisabete Weiderpass
Journal:  Reprod Health       Date:  2007-06-26       Impact factor: 3.223

10.  Visual inspection with acetic acid as a cervical cancer test: accuracy validated using latent class analysis.

Authors:  Lynne Gaffikin; John A McGrath; Marc Arbyn; Paul D Blumenthal
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2007-07-31       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.