Literature DB >> 16264158

Screen-and-treat approaches for cervical cancer prevention in low-resource settings: a randomized controlled trial.

Lynette Denny1, Louise Kuhn, Michelle De Souza, Amy E Pollack, William Dupree, Thomas C Wright.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Non-cytology-based screen-and-treat approaches for cervical cancer prevention have been developed for low-resource settings, but few have directly addressed efficacy.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and efficacy of 2 screen-and-treat approaches for cervical cancer prevention that were designed to be more resource-appropriate than conventional cytology-based screening programs. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Randomized clinical trial of 6555 nonpregnant women, aged 35 to 65 years, recruited through community outreach and conducted between June 2000 and December 2002 at ambulatory women's health clinics in Khayelitsha, South Africa.
INTERVENTIONS: All patients were screened using human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing and visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA). Women were subsequently randomized to 1 of 3 groups: cryotherapy if she had a positive HPV DNA test result; cryotherapy if she had a positive VIA test result; or to delayed evaluation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Biopsy-confirmed high-grade cervical cancer precursor lesions and cancer at 6 and 12 months in the HPV DNA and VIA groups compared with the delayed evaluation (control) group; complications after cryotherapy.
RESULTS: The prevalence of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cancer (CIN 2+) was significantly lower in the 2 screen-and-treat groups at 6 months after randomization than in the delayed evaluation group. At 6 months, CIN 2+ was diagnosed in 0.80% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40%-1.20%) of the women in the HPV DNA group and 2.23% (95% CI, 1.57%-2.89%) in the VIA group compared with 3.55% (95% CI, 2.71%-4.39%) in the delayed evaluation group (P<.001 and P = .02 for the HPV DNA and VIA groups, respectively). A subset of women underwent a second colposcopy 12 months after enrollment. At 12 months the cumulative detection of CIN 2+ among women in the HPV DNA group was 1.42% (95% CI, 0.88%-1.97%), 2.91% (95% CI, 2.12%-3.69%) in the VIA group, and 5.41% (95% CI, 4.32%-6.50%) in the delayed evaluation group. Although minor complaints, such as discharge and bleeding, were common after cryotherapy, major complications were rare.
CONCLUSION: Both screen-and-treat approaches are safe and result in a lower prevalence of high-grade cervical cancer precursor lesions compared with delayed evaluation at both 6 and 12 months. Trial Registration http://clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00233727.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16264158     DOI: 10.1001/jama.294.17.2173

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  113 in total

1.  Asian society of gynecologic oncology workshop 2010.

Authors:  Dong Hoon Suh; Jae Weon Kim; Mohamad Farid Aziz; Uma K Devi; Hextan Y S Ngan; Joo-Hyun Nam; Seung Cheol Kim; Tomoyasu Kato; Hee Sug Ryu; Shingo Fujii; Yoon Soon Lee; Jong Hyeok Kim; Tae-Joong Kim; Young Tae Kim; Kung-Liahng Wang; Taek Sang Lee; Kimio Ushijima; Sang-Goo Shin; Yin Nin Chia; Sarikapan Wilailak; Sang Yoon Park; Hidetaka Katabuchi; Toshiharu Kamura; Soon-Beom Kang
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2010-09-28       Impact factor: 4.401

2.  Report on a cryotherapy service for women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in a district hospital in western Kenya.

Authors:  K D C Lewis; J W Sellors; A Dawa; V D Tsu; N A Kidula
Journal:  Afr Health Sci       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 0.927

3.  Alliance for cervical cancer prevention: setting the record straight.

Authors:  Jacqueline Sherris; Thomas C Wright; Lynette Denny; Rengaswamy Sankaranarayanan; Amy E Pollack; Harshad Sanghvi; John W Sellors
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2006-12-28       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  When to test women for human papillomavirus.

Authors:  Mark Schiffman; Philip E Castle
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-01-14

5.  Trying to resolve a dispute over the best way to diagnose cervical neoplasia in a developing country.

Authors:  Lynne Gaffikin; Harshad Sanghvi; Ricky Lu; Paul D Blumenthal
Journal:  Medscape J Med       Date:  2008-01-10

6.  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

7.  Screen-and-treat approach to cervical cancer prevention using visual inspection with acetic acid and cryotherapy: experiences, perceptions, and beliefs from demonstration projects in Peru, Uganda, and Vietnam.

Authors:  Proma Paul; Jennifer L Winkler; Rosario M Bartolini; Mary E Penny; Trinh Thu Huong; Le Thi Nga; Edward Kumakech; Emmanuel Mugisha; Jose Jeronimo
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2013-11-11

8.  An Observational Study of Deep Learning and Automated Evaluation of Cervical Images for Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Liming Hu; David Bell; Sameer Antani; Zhiyun Xue; Kai Yu; Matthew P Horning; Noni Gachuhi; Benjamin Wilson; Mayoore S Jaiswal; Brian Befano; L Rodney Long; Rolando Herrero; Mark H Einstein; Robert D Burk; Maria Demarco; Julia C Gage; Ana Cecilia Rodriguez; Nicolas Wentzensen; Mark Schiffman
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2019-09-01       Impact factor: 13.506

9.  Prevalence and predictors of squamous intraepithelial lesions of the cervix in HIV-infected women in Lusaka, Zambia.

Authors:  Groesbeck P Parham; Vikrant V Sahasrabuddhe; Mulindi H Mwanahamuntu; Bryan E Shepherd; Michael L Hicks; Elizabeth M Stringer; Sten H Vermund
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2006-07-27       Impact factor: 5.482

10.  Prevalence, characteristics, and outcomes of HIV-positive women diagnosed with invasive cancer of the cervix in Kenya.

Authors:  Chemtai Mungo; Craig R Cohen; May Maloba; Elizabeth A Bukusi; Megan J Huchko
Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet       Date:  2013-09-10       Impact factor: 3.561

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.