Literature DB >> 16569305

What happens when organization of cervical cancer screening is delayed or stopped?

Elsebeth Lynge1, Lene Bjørk Clausen, Romain Guignard, Paul Poll.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Many countries rely on opportunistic screening, and data on its effectiveness are asked for. We assessed the impact on cervical cancer incidence and mortality of opportunistic screening compared with organized screening.
SETTING: Women aged 30-64 in Denmark, 1973-2002; 16 counties with different screening strategies.
METHODS: Cumulative incidence and mortality rates for women aged 30-64 by county. Poisson regression of incidence and mortality rates by age, calendar period and county. Interaction between type of county and calendar period measured the difference between counties with screening organized early versus late in time.
RESULTS: A statistically significant interaction was found between type of county and calendar period (P=0.0151) for cervical cancer incidence, but not for cervical cancer mortality (P=0.9593). The interaction terms were not statistically significant when a comparison was made between a single county in which an organized programme was interrupted for an 11-year period and other counties. There was, however, a statistically significant increased incidence and mortality rates at the restart of the organized programme.
CONCLUSION: Organization of cervical cancer screening accelerated the decline in cervical cancer incidence, compared with the trend in areas relying on opportunistic screening. No impact could be measured of the screening organization on cervical cancer mortality. A decade long stop of an organized screening programme was associated with a temporary increase in cervical cancer incidence and mortality. Coverage remains a key quality indicator in the ongoing modernization of screening technology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16569305     DOI: 10.1258/096914106776179773

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Screen        ISSN: 0969-1413            Impact factor:   2.136


  12 in total

1.  Recommendations on screening for cervical cancer.

Authors:  James Dickinson; Eva Tsakonas; Sarah Conner Gorber; Gabriela Lewin; Elizabeth Shaw; Harminder Singh; Michel Joffres; Richard Birtwhistle; Marcello Tonelli; Verna Mai; Meg McLachlin
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2013-01-07       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Performance of HPV E4 and p16INK4a biomarkers in predicting regression of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2): protocol for a historical cohort study.

Authors:  Rikke Kamp Damgaard; David Jenkins; Maurits Nc de Koning; Wim Gv Quint; Mark H Stoler; John Doorbar; Johnny Kahlert; Patti E Gravitt; Torben Steiniche; Lone Kjeld Petersen; Anne Hammer
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-07-06       Impact factor: 3.006

3.  High prevalence of HPV infection in the remote villages of French Guiana: an epidemiological study.

Authors:  A Adenis; V Dufit; M Douine; F Corlin; G Ayhan; F Najioullah; V Molinie; P Brousse; G Carles; V Lacoste; R Cesaire; M Nacher
Journal:  Epidemiol Infect       Date:  2017-01-16       Impact factor: 4.434

4.  Impact of opportunistic testing in a systematic cervical cancer screening program: a nationwide registry study.

Authors:  Mette Tranberg; Mette Bach Larsen; Ellen M Mikkelsen; Hans Svanholm; Berit Andersen
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2015-07-21       Impact factor: 3.295

5.  Study protocol of the CHOiCE trial: a three-armed, randomized, controlled trial of home-based HPV self-sampling for non-participants in an organized cervical cancer screening program.

Authors:  Mette Tranberg; Bodil Hammer Bech; Jan Blaakær; Jørgen Skov Jensen; Hans Svanholm; Berit Andersen
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2016-11-03       Impact factor: 4.430

6.  An adverse event in a well-established cervical cancer screening program: an observational study of 19,000 females unsubscribed to the program.

Authors:  Mette Bach Larsen; Hans Svanholm; Berit Andersen
Journal:  J Healthc Leadersh       Date:  2016-10-27

7.  The influence of total hysterectomy in a cervical cancer screening population: a register-based cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Mette Bach Larsen; Ellen M Mikkelsen; Ulla Jeppesen; Hans Svanholm; Berit Andersen
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-06-20       Impact factor: 2.655

8.  Good concordance of HPV detection between cervico-vaginal self-samples and general practitioner-collected samples using the Cobas 4800 HPV DNA test.

Authors:  Mette Tranberg; Jørgen Skov Jensen; Bodil Hammer Bech; Jan Blaakær; Hans Svanholm; Berit Andersen
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2018-07-27       Impact factor: 3.090

9.  Screening history of women with cervical cancer: a 6-year study in Aarhus, Denmark.

Authors:  O Ingemann-Hansen; M Lidang; I Niemann; J Dinesen; U Baandrup; H Svanholm; Lk Petersen
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2008-03-11       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Conization and healthcare use: a population-based register study.

Authors:  Maria E Frederiksen; Miguel Vázquez-Prada Baillet; Pernille T Jensen; Carsten Rygaard; Jesper Hallas; Elsebeth Lynge
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Prev       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 2.497

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.