Literature DB >> 22665576

Age-specific effectiveness of the Finnish cervical cancer screening programme.

Stefan Lönnberg1, Ahti Anttila, Tapio Luostarinen, Pekka Nieminen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is currently some uncertainty about the effectiveness of screening outside the established core ages of 30 to 60. We audited the screening histories of cervical cancers and conducted a case-control evaluation of the effectiveness of organized screening in different ages.
METHODS: Screening histories for 1,546 cervical cancer cases and 9,276 age-matched controls were derived by linkage to the screening register. ORs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association of participation in a program screen and cervical cancer diagnosis in the following screening interval were estimated using conditional logistic regression and corrected for self-selection bias.
RESULTS: Participation in a single screen was associated with a 47% decrease in cervical cancers, but this effect was age-dependent. Screening at 25 showed little or no impact on the risk of cervical cancer in the next interval, whereas screens at 40 to 65 showed protective effects of 51% to 66%.
CONCLUSIONS: Program screening at the age of 25 is not associated with a reduced risk of cervical cancer in the following screening interval. Additional analyses are needed that also take opportunistic screening of women during the first rounds of organized screening into consideration. In contrast, screening yields substantial risk reductions in older ages at least up to the age of 60. This study also provides moderate indication of a long-lasting risk reduction associated with screening at the age of 65. IMPACT: Cervical cancer screening effectiveness is for the first time evaluated at different ages up to 65 with correction for self-selection bias of participation in organized screening. ©2012 AACR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22665576     DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-12-0162

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  20 in total

1.  Cervical screening and cervical cancer death among older women: a population-based, case-control study.

Authors:  Alison S Rustagi; Aruna Kamineni; Sheila Weinmann; Susan D Reed; Polly Newcomb; Noel S Weiss
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2014-03-30       Impact factor: 4.897

2.  Cervical Cancer Screening: Defining the Need for Research.

Authors:  E Simoes; S Brucker; M W Beckmann; O Ortmann; C Albring; D Wallwiener
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 2.915

3.  Exposure Definition in Case-Control Studies of Cervical Cancer Screening: A Systematic Literature Review.

Authors:  Alejandra Castanon; Aruna Kamineni; K Miriam Elfström; Anita W W Lim; Peter Sasieni
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2021-09-14       Impact factor: 4.254

4.  Self-sampling to increase participation in cervical cancer screening: an RCT comparing home mailing, distribution in pharmacies, and recall letter.

Authors:  P Giorgi Rossi; C Fortunato; P Barbarino; S Boveri; S Caroli; A Del Mistro; A Ferro; C Giammaria; M Manfredi; T Moretto; A Pasquini; M Sideri; M C Tufi; C Cogo; E Altobelli
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2015-01-29       Impact factor: 7.640

5.  Impact of scheduled appointments on cervical screening participation in Norway: a randomised intervention.

Authors:  Stefan Lönnberg; Trude Andreassen; Birgit Engesæter; Rune Lilleng; Cecilia Kleven; Annelie Skare; Karin Johansson; Christina Stangeland Fredheim; Ameli Tropé
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-11-14       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Effectiveness of cervical screening after age 60 years according to screening history: Nationwide cohort study in Sweden.

Authors:  Jiangrong Wang; Bengt Andrae; Karin Sundström; Alexander Ploner; Peter Ström; K Miriam Elfström; Joakim Dillner; Pär Sparén
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 11.069

7.  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

8.  Factors associated with cervical cancer screening participation among immigrants of Russian, Somali and Kurdish origin: a population-based study in Finland.

Authors:  Esther E Idehen; Tellervo Korhonen; Anu Castaneda; Teppo Juntunen; Mari Kangasniemi; Anna-Maija Pietilä; Päivikki Koponen
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2017-03-11       Impact factor: 2.809

9.  The costs of offering HPV-testing on self-taken samples to non-attendees of cervical screening in Finland.

Authors:  Anni Virtanen; Ahti Anttila; Pekka Nieminen
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2015-11-05       Impact factor: 2.809

10.  Self-sampling in cervical cancer screening: comparison of a brush-based and a lavage-based cervicovaginal self-sampling device.

Authors:  Liisa Karjalainen; Ahti Anttila; Pekka Nieminen; Tapio Luostarinen; Anni Virtanen
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2016-03-15       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.