M Saraiya1, M Steben, M Watson, L Markowitz. 1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Epidemiology and Applied Research Branch, Atlanta, GA, USA. Electronic address: yzs2@cdc.gov.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Declines in cervical cancer incidence and mortality in Canada and in the United States have been widely attributed to the introduction of the Papanicolaou (Pap) test. This article reviews changes in screening and introduction of HPV vaccination. METHOD: Sentinel events in cervical cancer screening and primary prevention through HPV vaccination in the US and Canada are described. RESULTS: Despite commonalities, cervical cancer screening and prevention differ between the two countries. Canada has a combination of opportunistic and organized programs at the provincial and territorial level, while the US has opportunistic screening and vaccination systems. In the US, the HPV test along with the Pap test (co-testing) is part of national recommendations for routine cervical cancer screening for women age 30 and older. Co-testing is not being considered anywhere in Canada, but primary HPV testing is currently recommended (but not implemented) in one province in Canada. CONCLUSION: Many prevention strategies are available for cervical cancer. Continued public health efforts should focus on increasing vaccine coverage in the target age groups and cervical cancer screening for women at appropriate intervals. Ongoing evaluation will be needed to ensure appropriate use of health resources, as vaccinated women become eligible for screening. Published by Elsevier Inc.
OBJECTIVE: Declines in cervical cancer incidence and mortality in Canada and in the United States have been widely attributed to the introduction of the Papanicolaou (Pap) test. This article reviews changes in screening and introduction of HPV vaccination. METHOD: Sentinel events in cervical cancer screening and primary prevention through HPV vaccination in the US and Canada are described. RESULTS: Despite commonalities, cervical cancer screening and prevention differ between the two countries. Canada has a combination of opportunistic and organized programs at the provincial and territorial level, while the US has opportunistic screening and vaccination systems. In the US, the HPV test along with the Pap test (co-testing) is part of national recommendations for routine cervical cancer screening for women age 30 and older. Co-testing is not being considered anywhere in Canada, but primary HPV testing is currently recommended (but not implemented) in one province in Canada. CONCLUSION: Many prevention strategies are available for cervical cancer. Continued public health efforts should focus on increasing vaccine coverage in the target age groups and cervical cancer screening for women at appropriate intervals. Ongoing evaluation will be needed to ensure appropriate use of health resources, as vaccinated women become eligible for screening. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Entities:
Keywords:
HPV; North America; Screening; US and Canada; Vaccination
Authors: Joan Murphy; Erin B Kennedy; Sheila Dunn; C Meg McLachlin; Michael Fung Kee Fung; Danusia Gzik; Michael Shier; Lawrence Paszat Journal: J Obstet Gynaecol Can Date: 2012-05
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
Authors: Joan Murphy; Erin B Kennedy; Sheila Dunn; C Meg McLachlin; Michael Fung Kee Fung; Danusia Gzik; Michael Shier; Lawrence Paszat Journal: J Obstet Gynaecol Can Date: 2012-05
Authors: Armanda D Tatsas; Darcy F Phelan; Patti E Gravitt; John K Boitnott; Douglas P Clark Journal: Am J Clin Pathol Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 2.493
Authors: Ana Cecilia Rodríguez; Mark Schiffman; Rolando Herrero; Sholom Wacholder; Allan Hildesheim; Philip E Castle; Diane Solomon; Robert Burk Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2008-03-25 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Harrell W Chesson; Donatus U Ekwueme; Mona Saraiya; Meg Watson; Douglas R Lowy; Lauri E Markowitz Journal: Vaccine Date: 2012-08-04 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Elizabeth A Camp; Angela W Prehn; Ji Shen; Arthur L Herbst; William C Strohsnitter; Christopher D Hobday; Stanley J Robboy; Ervin Adam Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2015-03-13 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Meg Watson; Ashwini Soman; Elaine W Flagg; Elizabeth Unger; Dennis Deapen; Vivien W Chen; Lauren C Peres; Glenn Copeland; Thomas C Tucker; Erin Garnett; Mona Saraiya Journal: Prev Med Date: 2017-07-29 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Jacqueline M Mix; Elizabeth A Van Dyne; Mona Saraiya; Benjamin D Hallowell; Cheryll C Thomas Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2020-10-20 Impact factor: 4.090