| Literature DB >> 26180804 |
Raquel Ibáñez1, María Alejo2, Neus Combalia3, Xavier Tarroch4, Josefina Autonell5, Laia Codina6, Montserrat Culubret7, Francesc Xavier Bosch1, Silvia de Sanjosé8.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Audit of women with invasive cervical cancer (CC) is critical for quality control within screening activities. We analysed the screening history in the 10 years preceding the study entry in women with and without CC during 2000-2011.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26180804 PMCID: PMC4477117 DOI: 10.1155/2015/605375
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Age and history of previous screening cytology in women with cervical cancer and women with a normal cytology.
| Control women | Women with cervical cancer |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| % column |
| % column | ||
| Age | |||||
| <30 years | 5.224 | 22,0% | 12 | 3,9% | <0,0001 |
| 30–39 years | 5.879 | 24,7% | 56 | 18,0% | |
| 40–49 years | 5.426 | 22,8% | 84 | 27,0% | |
| 50–59 years | 4.277 | 18,0% | 47 | 15,1% | |
| 60–69 years | 2.378 | 10,0% | 41 | 13,2% | |
| ≥70 years | 598 | 2,5% | 71 | 22,8% | |
| With at least one cytology in the last 10 years | |||||
| With cytology | 18.733 | 78,8% | 82 | 26,2% | <0,0001 |
| Without cytology | 5.049 | 21,2% | 231 | 73,8% | |
|
| |||||
| Age-standardized coverage ratio | 0,3 | ||||
There are 2 ages missing.
10 women with cervical cancer had a prior cytology performed over 10 years ago and they were excluded for the analysis.
General characteristics of the study population by histological types.
| General characteristics | Total | % | Histological type | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Squamous carcinoma | Adenocarcinoma |
| |||||
|
| % column |
| % column | ||||
| Age | |||||||
| <30 years | 12 | 3,7% | 8 | 3,3% | 4 | 5,3% | 0,62 |
| 30–39 years | 56 | 17,4% | 43 | 17,5% | 13 | 17,3% | 0,54 |
| 40–49 years | 84 | 26,2% | 65 | 26,4% | 19 | 25,3% | 0,54 |
| 50–59 years | 51 | 15,9% | 43 | 17,5% | 8 | 10,7% | 0,11 |
| 60–69 years | 41 | 12,8% | 31 | 12,6% | 10 | 13,3% | 0,75 |
| ≥70 years | 77 | 24,0% | 56 | 22,8% | 21 | 28,0% | 0,64 |
| Year of diagnosis | |||||||
| 2000–2003 | 119 | 36,8% | 92 | 37,1% | 27 | 36,0% | 0,44 |
| 2004–2007 | 73 | 22,6% | 60 | 24,2% | 13 | 17,3% | 0,17 |
| 2008–2011 | 131 | 40,6% | 96 | 38,7% | 35 | 46,7% | 0,37 |
| FIGO stages | |||||||
| Unknown stage | 132 | 40,9% | 101 | 40,7% | 31 | 41,3% | 0,70 |
| I | 85 | 26,3% | 63 | 25,4% | 22 | 29,3% | 0,78 |
| II | 40 | 12,4% | 31 | 12,5% | 9 | 12,0% | 0,49 |
| III | 48 | 14,9% | 37 | 14,9% | 11 | 14,7% | 0,56 |
| IV | 18 | 5,6% | 16 | 6,5% | 2 | 2,7% | 0,17 |
There are 2 ages missing.
All the variables are adjusted by area and groups of age.
FIGO: International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.
Screening history of the study population by histological type.
| Screening history | Total | % | Histological type | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Squamous carcinoma | Adenocarcinoma |
| OR | CI 95% | ||||||
|
| % column |
| % column | |||||||
| Previous cytologies to cancer diagnosis | ||||||||||
| Without prior cytology | 231 | 71,5% | 187 | 75,4% | 44 | 58,4% | 0,01 | Reference | ||
| With prior cytology | 92 | 28,5% | 61 | 24,6% | 31 | 41,3% | 2,1 | 1,2 | 3,8 | |
| Number of previous cytologies | ||||||||||
| Without prior cytology | 231 | 71,5% | 187 | 75,4% | 44 | 58,7% | 0,01 | Reference | ||
| 1 previous cytology | 50 | 15,5% | 37 | 14,9% | 13 | 17,3% | 0,31 | 1,5 | 0,7 | 3,1 |
| >1 previous cytologies | 42 | 13,0% | 24 | 9,7% | 18 | 24,0% | 0,00 | 3,2 | 1,5 | 6,5 |
| Time between previous cytology and cancer diagnosis | ||||||||||
| Without prior cytology | 231 | 71,5% | 187 | 75,4% | 44 | 58,7% | 0,03 | Reference | ||
| Prior cytology ≤3 years before cancer diagnostic | 58 | 18,0% | 40 | 16,1% | 18 | 24,0% | 0,07 | 1,9 | 0,9 | 3,7 |
| Prior cytology >3 years before cancer diagnostic | 34 | 10,5% | 21 | 8,5% | 13 | 17,3% | 0,02 | 2,6 | 1,2 | 5,6 |
| General results of previous cytologies | ||||||||||
| Without prior cytology | 231 | 72,0% | 187 | 76,0% | 44 | 58,7% | 0,02 | Reference | ||
| Normal | 60 | 18,7% | 38 | 15,4% | 22 | 29,3% | 0,01 | 2,4 | 1,2 | 4,5 |
| Abnormal | 30 | 9,3% | 21 | 8,5% | 9 | 12,0% | 0,18 | 1,8 | 0,8 | 4,4 |
| ASC-US-AGC-Ha | 18 | 60,0% | 11 | 52,4% | 7 | 77,8% | ||||
| LSILa | 7 | 23,3% | 6 | 28,6% | 1 | 11,1% | ||||
| HSILa | 5 | 16,7% | 4 | 19,0% | 1 | 11,1% | ||||
Cytologies taken within the previous 6 months to the cancer diagnosis were excluded for the analysis because they were considered as part of the diagnostic process. There are 2 women with a nonevaluable previous cytology. These cases were excluded for the analysis in which result of previous cytology is involved.
aPercentages of specific cytological abnormalities are among the abnormal cytologies.
All the variables are adjusted by area and groups of age.
ASC-US: atypical squamous cell of undetermined significance, ASC-H: atypical squamous cells which cannot exclude a high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, AGC: atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance, LSIL: low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, and HSIL: high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion.
Screening history of the study population by groups of age.
| Screening history | Age | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| <30 years | 30–39 years | 40–49 years | 50–59 years | 60–69 years | >70 years |
| |||||||
|
| % column |
| % column |
| % column |
| % column |
| % column |
| % column | ||
| FIGO stage | |||||||||||||
| Unknown | 4 | 33,3% | 20 | 35,7% | 39 | 46,4% | 19 | 37,3% | 19 | 46,3% | 30 | 39,0% | 0,02 |
| I | 7 | 58,3% | 24 | 42,9% | 27 | 32,1% | 10 | 19,6% | 7 | 17,1% | 10 | 13,0% | |
| II | 0 | 0,0% | 2 | 3,6% | 7 | 8,3% | 11 | 21,6% | 4 | 9,8% | 16 | 20,8% | |
| III | 1 | 8,3% | 7 | 12,5% | 9 | 10,7% | 6 | 11,8% | 8 | 19,5% | 16 | 20,8% | |
| IV | 0 | 0,0% | 3 | 5,4% | 2 | 2,4% | 5 | 9,8% | 3 | 7,3% | 5 | 6,5% | |
| Cancer diagnosis | |||||||||||||
| Squamous carcinoma | 8 | 66,7% | 43 | 76,8% | 65 | 77,4% | 43 | 84,3% | 31 | 75,6% | 56 | 72,7% | 0,69 |
| Adenocarcinoma | 4 | 33,3% | 13 | 23,2% | 19 | 22,6% | 8 | 15,7% | 10 | 24,4% | 21 | 27,3% | |
| Previous cytologies to cancer diagnosis | |||||||||||||
| Without prior cytology | 8 | 66,7% | 36 | 64,3% | 59 | 70,2% | 31 | 60,8% | 34 | 82,9% | 61 | 79,2% | 0,10 |
| With prior cytology | 4 | 33,3% | 20 | 35,7% | 25 | 29,8% | 20 | 39,2% | 7 | 17,1% | 16 | 20,8% | |
| Within those with previous cytology | |||||||||||||
| Number of previous cytologies | |||||||||||||
| 1 previous cytology | 1 | 25,0% | 10 | 50,0% | 14 | 56,0% | 12 | 66,7% | 2 | 28,6% | 9 | 56,3% | 0,48 |
| >1 previous cytologies | 3 | 75,0% | 10 | 50,0% | 11 | 44,0% | 6 | 33,3% | 5 | 71,4% | 7 | 43,8% | |
| Time between previous cytology and cancer diagnosis | |||||||||||||
| Prior cytology ≤3 years before cancer diagnostic | 3 | 75,0% | 17 | 85,0% | 18 | 72,0% | 12 | 66,7% | 4 | 57,1% | 4 | 25,0% | 0,01 |
| Prior cytology >3 years before cancer diagnostic | 1 | 25,0% | 3 | 15,0% | 7 | 28,0% | 6 | 33,3% | 3 | 42,9% | 12 | 75,0% | |
| Results of previous cytologies | |||||||||||||
| Normal | 1 | 25,0% | 10 | 50,0% | 17 | 68,0% | 12 | 66,7% | 5 | 71,4% | 15 | 93,8% | 0,05 |
| Abnormal | 3 | 75,0% | 10 | 50,0% | 8 | 32,0% | 6 | 33,3% | 2 | 28,6% | 1 | 6,3% | |
| ASC-US-AGC-Ha | 1 | 33,3% | 4 | 40,0% | 6 | 75,0% | 4 | 66,7% | 2 | 100,0% | 1 | 100,0% | |
| LSILa | 2 | 66,7% | 4 | 40,0% | 0 | 0,0% | 1 | 16,7% | 0 | 0,0% | 0 | 0,0% | |
| HSILa | 0 | 0,0% | 2 | 20,0% | 2 | 25,0% | 1 | 16,7% | 0 | 0,0% | 0 | 0,0% | |
There are 2 ages missing.
Cytologies taken within the previous 6 months to the cancer diagnosis were excluded for the analysis because they were considered as part of the diagnostic process. There are 2 women with a nonevaluable previous cytology. These cases were excluded for the analysis in which result of previous cytology is involved.
aPercentages of specific cytological abnormalities are among the abnormal cytologies.
FIGO: International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics, ASC-US: atypical squamous cell of undetermined significance, ASC-H: atypical squamous cells cannot exclude a high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, AGC: atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance, LSIL: low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, and HSIL: high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion.
Figure 1Distribution of FIGO stages by time since prior cytology.