Literature DB >> 24288241

Mortality of non-participants in cervical screening: Register-based cohort study.

Pierre-Antoine Dugué1, Elsebeth Lynge, Matejka Rebolj.   

Abstract

The selective uptake of screening by healthy participants and its impact on the evaluation of screening effectiveness in non-randomized studies have been discussed, but hardly studied. We quantified excess mortality among cervical screening non-participants compared to participants. Based on Danish healthcare registers, we determined women's participation in cervical screening in 1990-1993 (one screening round) and 1990-1997 (two screening rounds). Women were followed until end of 2010. We computed hazard ratios (HR) comparing non-participants' and participants' risk of death, and analyzed the impact of age, calendar period of screening evaluation, screening intensity, length of follow-up and cause of death. After one screening round, the 17-year HR of death in non-participants was 1.61 (95% CI: 1.59-1.63), with an increasing trend over calendar time. After two rounds, regular non-participants had a HR of 2.09 (95% CI: 2.05-2.14) compared to regular participants. The HR for human papillomavirus (HPV)-related cancers other than cervical cancer was 3.80 (95% CI: 2.67-5.41). Younger women, whose coverage rates were higher, had higher all-cause mortality HRs. Women screened more frequently than recommended had the same mortality as those screened as recommended. Acute illness did not seem to be a major reason for non-participation, as the excess risk of death was not higher in the first years following screening evaluation. Non-participants in cervical screening had substantially higher all-cause mortality than participants, and a particularly increased risk of HPV-related causes of death. These results indicate that improper control for the selective uptake of cervical screening may result in overestimating its effectiveness.
© 2013 UICC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cervical cancer; cohort study; mortality; participation; screening; selection bias

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24288241     DOI: 10.1002/ijc.28586

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cancer        ISSN: 0020-7136            Impact factor:   7.396


  10 in total

1.  The value of improving failures within a cervical cancer screening program: an example from Norway.

Authors:  Emily A Burger; Jane J Kim
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2014-03-20       Impact factor: 7.396

2.  Impact of organised mammography screening on breast cancer mortality in a case-control and cohort study.

Authors:  Sirpa Heinävaara; Tytti Sarkeala; Ahti Anttila
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2016-03-24       Impact factor: 7.640

3.  Impact of cervical screening on cervical cancer mortality: estimation using stage-specific results from a nested case-control study.

Authors:  Rebecca Landy; Francesca Pesola; Alejandra Castañón; Peter Sasieni
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 7.640

4.  Screening for type 2 diabetes: do screen-detected cases fare better?

Authors:  Adina L Feldman; Simon J Griffin; Eva Fhärm; Margareta Norberg; Patrik Wennberg; Lars Weinehall; Olov Rolandsson
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2017-08-23       Impact factor: 10.122

5.  Randomised trial of HPV self-sampling among non-attenders in the Slovenian cervical screening programme ZORA: comparing three different screening approaches.

Authors:  Urska Ivanus; Tine Jerman; Alenka Repse Fokter; Iztok Takac; Veronika Kloboves Prevodnik; Mateja Marcec; Ursula Salobir Gajsek; Maja Pakiz; Jakob Koren; Simona Hutter Celik; Kristina Gornik Kramberger; Ulrika Klopcic; Rajko Kavalar; Simona Sramek Zatler; Biljana Grcar Kuzmanov; Mojca Florjancic; Natasa Nolde; Srdjan Novakovic; Mario Poljak; Maja Primic Zakelj
Journal:  Radiol Oncol       Date:  2018-09-14       Impact factor: 2.991

6.  Cervical cancer mortality among young women in Latin America and the Caribbean: trend analysis from 1997 to 2030.

Authors:  J Smith Torres-Roman; Luz Ronceros-Cardenas; Bryan Valcarcel; Janina Bazalar-Palacios; Jorge Ybaseta-Medina; Greta Carioli; Carlo La Vecchia; Christian S Alvarez
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2022-01-16       Impact factor: 3.295

7.  Estimation of savings of life-years and cost from early detection of cervical cancer: a follow-up study using nationwide databases for the period 2002-2009.

Authors:  Mei-Chuan Hung; Meng-Ting Liu; Ya-Min Cheng; Jung-Der Wang
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2014-07-10       Impact factor: 4.430

8.  Disparities in cervical screening participation: a comparison of Russian, Somali and Kurdish immigrants with the general Finnish population.

Authors:  Esther E Idehen; Päivikki Koponen; Tommi Härkänen; Mari Kangasniemi; Anna-Maija Pietilä; Tellervo Korhonen
Journal:  Int J Equity Health       Date:  2018-05-04

9.  The association between cervical cancer screening participation and the deprivation index of the location of the family doctor's office.

Authors:  Fanny Serman; Jonathan Favre; Valérie Deken; Lydia Guittet; Claire Collins; Michaël Rochoy; Nassir Messaadi; Alain Duhamel; Ludivine Launay; Christophe Berkhout; Thibaut Raginel
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-05-15       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Cervical Cancer Screening Participation among Women of Russian, Somali, and Kurdish Origin Compared with the General Finnish Population: A Register-Based Study.

Authors:  Esther E Idehen; Anni Virtanen; Eero Lilja; Tomi-Pekka Tuomainen; Tellervo Korhonen; Päivikki Koponen
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-10-28       Impact factor: 3.390

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.