| Literature DB >> 25885821 |
Groesbeck P Parham1, Mulindi H Mwanahamuntu2, Sharon Kapambwe2, Richard Muwonge3, Allen C Bateman4, Meridith Blevins5, Carla J Chibwesha4, Krista S Pfaendler6, Victor Mudenda7, Aaron L Shibemba7, Samson Chisele7, Gracilia Mkumba7, Bellington Vwalika7, Michael L Hicks8, Sten H Vermund5, Benjamin H Chi4, Jeffrey S A Stringer4, Rengaswamy Sankaranarayanan3, Vikrant V Sahasrabuddhe9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Very few efforts have been undertaken to scale-up low-cost approaches to cervical cancer prevention in low-resource countries.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25885821 PMCID: PMC4401717 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122169
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Socio-demographic and sexual and reproductive characteristics of participants in the Cervical Cancer Prevention Program in Zambia (CCPPZ) during 2006–2013.
| Characteristics | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Women attending screening clinics | 108,330 | |
| Women that received screening | 102,942 | 95.0 |
| Age (years) | ||
| <25 | 19,240 | 19.8 |
| 25–29 | 20,452 | 21.0 |
| 30–34 | 19,237 | 19.8 |
| 35–39 | 14,831 | 15.2 |
| 40–44 | 9,393 | 9.6 |
| 45–49 | 5,922 | 6.1 |
| 50+ | 8,274 | 8.5 |
| Education | ||
| No formal education | 3,998 | 4.8 |
| Some primary education | 14,215 | 17.0 |
| Primary school completed | 14,743 | 17.6 |
| Some high school completed | 23,275 | 27.8 |
| High school completed | 11,343 | 13.5 |
| College/University | 16,199 | 19.3 |
| Occupation | ||
| Housewife | 27,932 | 35.3 |
| Formal sector | 16,969 | 21.4 |
| Informal sector | 23,623 | 29.8 |
| Others | 10,649 | 13.5 |
| Monthly household income (Kwacha) | ||
| <50,000 | 1,550 | 1.9 |
| 50,000–99,999 | 2,279 | 2.8 |
| 100,000–199,999 | 8,174 | 10.1 |
| 200,000–499,999 | 24,968 | 31.0 |
| 500,000+ | 43,671 | 54.2 |
| Marital status | ||
| Never married | 10,534 | 15.9 |
| Currently married | 42,814 | 64.8 |
| Separated | 1,453 | 2.2 |
| Divorced | 5,141 | 7.8 |
| Widowed | 6,153 | 9.3 |
| Age at first sexual intercourse | ||
| <15 | 7,136 | 7.4 |
| 15–17 | 38,464 | 39.8 |
| 18+ | 51,162 | 52.9 |
| Number of lifetime sexual partners | ||
| 0–1 | 25,384 | 26.3 |
| 2–4 | 57,121 | 59.1 |
| 5+ | 14,097 | 14.6 |
| Number of pregnancies | ||
| 0–1 | 17,585 | 20.0 |
| 2–4 | 43,557 | 49.5 |
| 5+ | 26,777 | 30.5 |
| Ever had Pap smear | ||
| No | 94,690 | 98.2 |
| Yes | 1,755 | 1.8 |
* 1 US dollar = 6,430 Zambian Kwacha (ZMK; using pre-2013 currency base)
Programmatic process measures (screening and treatment uptake by HIV status) in the Cervical Cancer Prevention Program in Zambia (CCPPZ).
| HIV-positive | HIV-negative | HIV-unknown | Total | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n (%) | n (%) | n (%) | n (%) | ||||||
| Women screened | 28,529 | 49,483 | 24,930 | 102,942 | |||||
| Women with uncertain screening results | 368 | (1.3) | 415 | (0.8) | 292 | (1.2) | 1,075 | (1.0) | |
| Women with satisfactory screening results | 28,161 | 49,068 | 24,638 | 101,867 | |||||
| Screen-positives | 8,961 | (31.8) | 6,840 | (13.9) | 4,618 | (18.7) | 20,419 | (20.0) | |
| Screen-positives treated with cryotherapy at clinics | 4,289 | (47.9) | 4,463 | (65.2) | 2,756 | (59.7) | 11,508 | (56.4) | |
| Screen-positives referred to UTH | 4,672 | (52.1) | 2,377 | (34.8) | 1,862 | (40.3) | 8,911 | (43.6) | |
| Screen-positives that attended UTH for referral | 2,851 | (61.0) | 1,238 | (52.1) | 730 | (39.2) | 4,819 | (54.1) | |
| Screen-positives that received LEEP | 2,208 | (24.6) | 798 | (11.7) | 462 | (10.0) | 3,468 | (17.0) | |
| Screen-positives that received any form of treatment (cryotherapy/LEEP) | 6,126 | (68.4) | 5,080 | (74.3) | 3,152 | (68.3) | 14,358 | (70.3) | |
| Time interval between screening and cryotherapy | |||||||||
| Screen-positives treated with cryotherapy | 2,810 | 2,951 | 1,766 | 7,527 | |||||
| Cryotherapy on same day as screening | 1,835 | (65.3) | 1,903 | (64.5) | 1,115 | (63.1) | 4,853 | (64.5) | |
| Cryotherapy ≤ one week after screening | 349 | (12.4) | 423 | (14.3) | 288 | (16.3) | 1,060 | (14.1) | |
| Cryotherapy > one ≤ four weeks after screening | 210 | (7.5) | 197 | (6.7) | 130 | (7.4) | 537 | (7.1) | |
| Cryotherapy > four weeks after screening | 416 | (14.8) | 428 | (14.5) | 233 | (13.2) | 1,077 | (14.3) | |
HIV: HIV: human immunodeficiency virus; UTH: University of Zambia;
* Proportion out of women screened;
** Proportion out of women with satisfactory screening results;
$ Proportion out of screen-positives;
¥ Proportion out of screen-positives referred to UTH;
§ Proportion out of screen-positive women treated with cryotherapy that had complete data on screening and/or treatment dates;
† Some women received both LEEP and cryotherapy; hence these categories are not mutually exclusive.
Programmatic outcome measures (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and invasive cancers detected among screen-positives by HIV status) in the Cervical Cancer Prevention Program in Zambia (CCPPZ).
| HIV-Positive | HIV-Negative | HIV-Unknown | Total | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (n = 28,529) | (n = 49,483) | (n = 24,930) | (n = 102,942) | |||||
| CIN and ICC cases detected among women with histopathology results | ||||||||
| ≤CIN 1, n (% of all ≤CIN 1) | 1,237 | (56.2) | 616 | (28.0) | 350 | (15.9) | 2,203 | (100) |
| CIN 2/3, n (% of all CIN 2/3) | 724 | (70.6) | 187 | (18.2) | 114 | (11.1) | 1,025 | (100) |
| ICC, n (% of all ICC) | 376 | (53.0) | 189 | (26.6) | 145 | (20.4) | 710 | (100) |
| CIN2+, n (% of all CIN2+) | 1100 | (63.4) | 376 | (21.7) | 259 | (14.9) | 1735 | (100) |
| CIN and ICC cases diagnosed from women undergoing LEEP | ||||||||
| ≤CIN 1, n (% of all ≤CIN 1) | 1,005 | (57.7) | 478 | (27.4) | 260 | (14.9) | 1,743 | (100) |
| CIN 2/3, n (% of all CIN 2/3) | 658 | (72.1) | 156 | (17.1) | 98 | (10.7) | 912 | (100) |
| ICC, n (% of all ICC) | 235 | (65.8) | 70 | (19.6) | 52 | (14.6) | 357 | (100) |
| CIN2+, n (% of all CIN2+) | 893 | (70.4) | 226 | (17.8) | 150 | (11.8) | 1,269 | (100) |
| No. of CIN and ICC cases detected per 1000 women screened | ||||||||
| ≤CIN 1, n (95%CI) | 43.4 | (41.1–45.8) | 12 | (11.5–13.5) | 14 | (12.7–15.6) | 21 | (20.5–22.3) |
| CIN 2/3, n (95%CI) | 25.4 | (23.6–27.3) | 3.8 | (3.3–4.4) | 4.6 | (3.8–5.5) | 10 | (9.4–10.6) |
| ICC, n (95%CI) | 13.4 | (12.1–14.8) | 3.8 | (3.3–4.4) | 5.8 | (4.9–6.8) | 6.9 | (6.5–7.5) |
| CIN2+, n (95%CI) | 38.6 | (36.4–40.9) | 7.6 | (6.9–8.4) | 10.4 | (9.2–11.7) | 16.9 | (16.1–17.7) |
| No. of women screened to detect one case of CIN and ICC | ||||||||
| ≤CIN 1, n (95%CI) | 23.1 | (16.1–33.0) | 80.3 | (61.4–104.5) | 71.2 | (48.7–103.1) | 46.7 | (38.7–56.4) |
| CIN 2/3, n (95%CI) | 39.4 | (27.5–56.2) | 264.6 | (206.6–332.1) | 218.7 | (152.7–303) | 100.4 | (83.5–120.4) |
| ICC, n (95%CI) | 75.9 | (53.2–107.1) | 261.8 | (204.3–328.8) | 171.9 | (119.2–241.6) | 145 | (121–172.8) |
| CIN2+, n (95%CI) | 25.9 | (18.1–37.1) | 131.6 | (101.1–169.5) | 96.3 | (66.0–138.3) | 59.3 | (51.7–77.0) |
HIV: human immunodeficiency virus; CIN: cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; LEEP: loop electrosurgical excision procedure, ICC: invasive cervical cancer;
^Histopathology results were available among 3,938 women,
* Histopathology results were available from 3,012 LEEP specimens
Critical Problems and Practical Local Solutions in the Cervical Cancer Prevention Program in Zambia (CCPPZ) (list not exhaustive, for illustrative purposes only).
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Weak opportunistic cytology-based cervical cancer screening infrastructure in the pubic system; no source of independent funding for cervical cancer prevention | Horizontal integration of a cervical cancer prevention intervention into a pre-existing HIV care and treatment infrastructure; VIA as the main approach | Facilitated population-level implementation and scale-up of intervention |
| High cost of colposcopy; no quality assurance for VIA | Introduction of innovation: “electronic cervical cancer control”—eC3 | Reduction in over and under treatment |
| Shortage of gynecologists to provide expert opinion | Web consultation: Immediate access to physician opinion through telemedicine | Access to clinical expert for decision making |
| Low level of community awareness; myths and misconceptions about cervical cancer | Used peer educators and traditional social, political and medical infrastructures for health promotion | Increased patient uptake |
| Paper records not managed well | Point-of-care electronic data collection | More efficient and secure data system |
| Pathology bottleneck (delays in results reporting due to unavailability of pathology services) | Liaison with UTH pathology department; “one off” supplementation of supplies; use of private sector pathology services | Efficiency of pathology services significantly improved |
| Chemoradiation unavailability/ referral challenges | Formal Organizational Linkages with the National Cancer Centre in Lusaka | More efficient referrals |
| Bottleneck of early stage cervical cancer cases requiring radical surgery | Established gynecologic oncology surgical service in public and private sector | Slight relief of bottleneck |
| Complex acetowhite lesions ineligible for cryotherapy | Developed capacity for loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) | Ability to evaluate and treat cryotherapy-ineligible lesions |
| Deficit of cervical cancer prevention clinicians | Local training program for nurses and doctors | Increased supply of clinical personnel |
| Reluctance of women undergoing screening, with unknown HIV status, to be tested in nearby HIV care and treatment clinics | Implemented HIV counseling and testing within “screen and treat” clinics, by screening nurses | Marked increase in HIV testing rates |
| Management of microinvasive cancers in young women desirous of fertility potential | Developed algorithm for conservative management of women with microinvasive cancer | Avoidance of unnecessary loss of fertility |
| Unreliable and insecure procurement, storage and distribution of equipment and supplies | Hiring of Procurement Officer and procurement system | Efficient and secure procurement system |
| Lack of local ownership | Persistent mentoring of Zambians at all levels of leadership; Integration of “screen and treat” service platforms in government-operated clinics; Limiting role of CIDRZ to “technical assistance” | Increased ownership by Ministry of Health, Ministry of Community Development, Mother and Child Health |
| Increased demand for services, particularly in rural areas | Implementation of outreach program in the form of village-based screening camps; Training of a cadre of trainers, i.e., TOTs | Rapid expansion of services into rural areas |
| High cost and unreliable supply of compressed gas leading to frequent interruptions of services | Use of alternative local ablation strategies, i.e., cold coagulation and Cryopen | Uninterrupted “screen and treat services |
| Lack of available local leadership to champion the cause of cervical cancer prevention | CIDRZ supported full-time, on-the-ground support for U.S. gynecologic oncologist | Program initiated |
| Inefficient management | Creation of management infrastructure and stratification of organization into separate units: administrative, health promotions, clinical, information communication technology (ICT) and quality improvement. | Improved efficiency |
| Limited funding for programmatic innovations | Participation in international student intern and fellowship programs, e.g., Fogarty, Global Health Corp | Support for innovative developments |
| Evaluation of programmatic outcomes | Development of an all-electronic database of screening results, key sociodemographic and sexual and reproductive history covariates; linked to histologically-confirmed results | Improved assessment of programmatic impact |