Literature DB >> 19713100

Process performance of cervical screening programmes in Europe.

Guglielmo Ronco1, Marjolein van Ballegooijen, Nikolaus Becker, Arkadiusz Chil, Muriel Fender, Pamela Giubilato, Juozas Kurtinaitis, Lesz Lancucki, Elsebeth Lynge, Antonio Morais, Marian O'Reilly, Pär Sparen, Ofelia Suteu, Matejka Rebolj, Piret Veerus, Maja Primic Zakelj, Ahti Anttila.   

Abstract

Standardised tables of aggregated data were collected from 15 European national or regional cervical screening programmes and key performance indicators computed as reported in European Union (EU) Guidelines, 2nd edition. Cytological results varied widely between countries both for the total proportion of abnormal tests (from 1.2% in Germany (Mecklenburg-Vorpommern) to 11.7% in Ireland-Midwest Region) and for their distribution by grade. Referral rates for repeat cytology (ranging from 2.9% of screened women in the Netherlands to 16.6% in Slovenia) or for colposcopy (ranging from 0.8% in Finland to 4.4% in Romania-Cluj) and the Positive Predictive Value (PPV) of colposcopic attendance (ranging from 8% in Romania-Cluj to 52% in Lithuania) were strongly influenced by management protocols, in particular for atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) cytology. However, cytology-specific PPV also showed remarkable variability. The detection rate of CIN2+ histology ranged from <0.1% of screened women in Poland to >1% in England and Denmark. Low attendance for colposcopy after referral was observed in some east-European countries. These comparisons may be useful for improving the performance of cervical screening in general and more so if new screening technologies and vaccination for Human Papillomavirus are introduced. Overall, quality was better in countries that have operated organised programmes for a longer time, plausibly as a result of long-lasting monitoring and quality assurance activities. Therefore, the availability of these data, the first comparing European countries, and the increased number of countries that can provide such data (only five in 2004) represent progress. Nevertheless, there is a clear need to standardise the cytological and histological classifications used in screening, as well as data registration systems across Europe.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19713100     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2009.07.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer        ISSN: 0959-8049            Impact factor:   9.162


  7 in total

1.  Age-specific patterns of unsatisfactory results for conventional Pap smears and liquid-based cytology: data from two randomised clinical trials.

Authors:  P E Castle; J Bulten; M Confortini; P Klinkhamer; A Pellegrini; A G Siebers; G Ronco; M Arbyn
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 6.531

2.  Comparison of clinical and analytical performance of the Abbott Realtime High Risk HPV test to the performance of hybrid capture 2 in population-based cervical cancer screening.

Authors:  Mario Poljak; Anja Ostrbenk; Katja Seme; Veronika Ucakar; Peter Hillemanns; Eda Vrtacnik Bokal; Nina Jancar; Irena Klavs
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2011-03-23       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Primary screening for human papillomavirus compared with cytology screening for cervical cancer in European settings: cost effectiveness analysis based on a Dutch microsimulation model.

Authors:  Inge M C M de Kok; Joost van Rosmalen; Joakim Dillner; Marc Arbyn; Peter Sasieni; Thomas Iftner; Marjolein van Ballegooijen
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2012-03-05

4.  The impact of HPV vaccination on future cervical screening: a simulation study of two birth cohorts in Denmark.

Authors:  Mie Sara Hestbech; Elsebeth Lynge; Jakob Kragstrup; Volkert Siersma; Miguel Vazquez-Prada Baillet; John Brodersen
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2015-08-14       Impact factor: 2.692

5.  High lifetime probability of screen-detected cervical abnormalities.

Authors:  Maiju Pankakoski; Sirpa Heinävaara; Tytti Sarkeala; Ahti Anttila
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2017-01-10       Impact factor: 2.136

6.  Effects of numerical information on intention to participate in cervical screening among women offered HPV vaccination: a randomised study.

Authors:  Mie Sara Hestbech; Dorte Gyrd-Hansen; Jakob Kragstrup; Volkert Siersma; John Brodersen
Journal:  Scand J Prim Health Care       Date:  2016-11-15       Impact factor: 2.581

7.  Introduction of primary screening using high-risk HPV DNA detection in the Dutch cervical cancer screening programme: a population-based cohort study.

Authors:  Clare A Aitken; Heleen M E van Agt; Albert G Siebers; Folkert J van Kemenade; Hubert G M Niesters; Willem J G Melchers; Judith E M Vedder; Rob Schuurman; Adriaan J C van den Brule; Hans C van der Linden; John W J Hinrichs; Anco Molijn; Klaas J Hoogduin; Bettien M van Hemel; Inge M C M de Kok
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2019-12-11       Impact factor: 8.775

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.