Literature DB >> 19808843

Does screening history explain the ethnic differences in stage at diagnosis of cervical cancer in New Zealand?

Naomi Brewer1, Neil Pearce, Mona Jeffreys, Barry Borman, Lis Ellison-Loschmann.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There are ethnic disparities in cervical cancer survival in New Zealand. The objectives of this study were to assess the associations of screening history, ethnicity, socio-economic status (SES) and rural residence with stage at diagnosis in women diagnosed with cervical cancer in New Zealand during 1994-2005.
METHODS: The 2323 cases were categorized as 'ever screened' if they had had at least one smear prior to 6 months before diagnosis, and as 'regular screening' if they had had no more than 36 months between any two smears in the period 6-114 months before diagnosis. Logistic regression was used to estimate the associations of screening history, ethnicity, SES and urban/rural residence with stage at diagnosis.
RESULTS: The percentages 'ever screened' were 43.3% overall, 24.8% in Pacific, 30.5% in Asian, 40.6% in Māori and 46.1% in 'Other' women. The corresponding estimates for 'regular screening' were 14.0, 5.7, 7.8, 12.5 and 15.3%. Women with 'regular screening' had a lower risk of late stage diagnosis [odds ratio (OR) 0.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10-0.26], and the effect was greater for squamous cell carcinoma (OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.07-0.23) than for adenocarcinoma (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.13-0.82). The increased risk of late-stage diagnosis (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.99-3.72) in Māori (compared with 'Other') women decreased only slightly when adjusted for screening history (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.77-3.39).
CONCLUSIONS: Over half of cases had not been 'ever screened'. Regular screening substantially lowered the risk of being diagnosed at a late stage. However, screening history does not appear to explain the ethnic differences in stage at diagnosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19808843     DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyp303

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0300-5771            Impact factor:   7.196


  4 in total

1.  Does comorbidity explain the ethnic inequalities in cervical cancer survival in New Zealand? A retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Naomi Brewer; Barry Borman; Diana Sarfati; Mona Jeffreys; Steven T Fleming; Soo Cheng; Neil Pearce
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2011-04-12       Impact factor: 4.430

2.  Data sharing: not as simple as it seems.

Authors:  Neil Pearce; Allan H Smith
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2011-12-21       Impact factor: 5.984

3.  The effect of Pap smear screening on cervical cancer stage among southern Thai women.

Authors:  Li Niu; Shama Virani; Surichai Bilheem; Hutcha Sriplung
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-11-15       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with late stage cervical cancer diagnosis in Botswana.

Authors:  Anne Marie McCarthy; Surbhi Grover; Tara M Friebel-Klingner; Rebecca Luckett; Lisa Bazzett-Matabele; Tlotlo B Ralefala; Barati Monare; Mercy Nkuba Nassali; Doreen Ramogola-Masire; Memory Bvochora; Nandita Mitra; Douglas Wiebe; Timothy R Rebbeck
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2021-07-06       Impact factor: 2.809

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.