Alan G Waxman1, Lee E Buenconsejo-Lum, Miriam Cremer, Sarah Feldman, Kevin A Ault, Joanna M Cain, Maria Lina Diaz. 1. 1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Albuquerque, NM; 2Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Pacific Regional Cancer Programs, John A. Burns School of Medicine, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI; 3Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland OH; 4Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA; 5Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS; 6Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, UMass Memorial Medical Center, Worcester, MA; and 7Molina Healthcare of Florida, Doral, FL.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Successful cervical cancer screening in the United States-Affiliated Pacific Islands (USAPI) is limited by geographic, political, economic, and logistic factors. An expert panel convened to examine screening in each of the 6 island jurisdictions and to explore options beyond cytology-based screening. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-one representatives of American Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecology, American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, government agencies, the World Health Organization, Pan American Health Organization, health representatives of the 6 Pacific island jurisdictions, Puerto Rico, and several academic institutions met in a 2-day meeting to explore options to improve access and coverage of cervical cancer screening in the USAPI. RESULTS: Cytology-based screening is less widely accessed and less successful in the USAPI than in the United States in general. Barriers include geographic isolation, cultural factors, and lack of resources. Cytology-based screening requires multiple visits to complete the process from screening to treatment. Screen-and-treat regimens based on visual inspection with acetic acid or human papillomavirus requiring 1 or 2 visits have the potential to improve cervical cancer prevention in the USAPI. CONCLUSIONS: The standard US algorithm of cytology screening followed by colposcopy and treatment is less effective in geographically and culturally isolated regions such as the USAPI. Alternate technologies, both high tech, such as primary human papillomavirus screening, and low tech, such as visual inspection with acetic acid, have shown promise in resource-poor countries and may have applicability in these US jurisdictions.
OBJECTIVE: Successful cervical cancer screening in the United States-Affiliated Pacific Islands (USAPI) is limited by geographic, political, economic, and logistic factors. An expert panel convened to examine screening in each of the 6 island jurisdictions and to explore options beyond cytology-based screening. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-one representatives of American Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecology, American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, government agencies, the World Health Organization, Pan American Health Organization, health representatives of the 6 Pacific island jurisdictions, Puerto Rico, and several academic institutions met in a 2-day meeting to explore options to improve access and coverage of cervical cancer screening in the USAPI. RESULTS: Cytology-based screening is less widely accessed and less successful in the USAPI than in the United States in general. Barriers include geographic isolation, cultural factors, and lack of resources. Cytology-based screening requires multiple visits to complete the process from screening to treatment. Screen-and-treat regimens based on visual inspection with acetic acid or human papillomavirus requiring 1 or 2 visits have the potential to improve cervical cancer prevention in the USAPI. CONCLUSIONS: The standard US algorithm of cytology screening followed by colposcopy and treatment is less effective in geographically and culturally isolated regions such as the USAPI. Alternate technologies, both high tech, such as primary human papillomavirus screening, and low tech, such as visual inspection with acetic acid, have shown promise in resource-poor countries and may have applicability in these US jurisdictions.
Authors: Debbie Saslow; Diane Solomon; Herschel W Lawson; Maureen Killackey; Shalini L Kulasingam; Joanna Cain; Francisco A R Garcia; Ann T Moriarty; Alan G Waxman; David C Wilbur; Nicolas Wentzensen; Levi S Downs; Mark Spitzer; Anna-Barbara Moscicki; Eduardo L Franco; Mark H Stoler; Mark Schiffman; Philip E Castle; Evan R Myers Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2012-03-14 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Lynette Denny; Louise Kuhn; Michelle De Souza; Amy E Pollack; William Dupree; Thomas C Wright Journal: JAMA Date: 2005-11-02 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Jack Cuzick; Christine Clavel; Karl-Ulrich Petry; Chris J L M Meijer; Heike Hoyer; Samuel Ratnam; Anne Szarewski; Philippe Birembaut; Shalini Kulasingam; Peter Sasieni; Thomas Iftner Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2006-09-01 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Julia C Gage; Mark Schiffman; Hormuzd A Katki; Philip E Castle; Barbara Fetterman; Nicolas Wentzensen; Nancy E Poitras; Thomas Lorey; Li C Cheung; Walter K Kinney Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2014-07-18 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Julie S Townsend; Analía Romina Stormo; Katherine B Roland; Lee Buenconsejo-Lum; Susan White; Mona Saraiya Journal: Oncologist Date: 2014-03-25
Authors: Joakim Dillner; Matejka Rebolj; Philippe Birembaut; Karl-Ulrich Petry; Anne Szarewski; Christian Munk; Silvia de Sanjose; Pontus Naucler; Belen Lloveras; Susanne Kjaer; Jack Cuzick; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Christine Clavel; Thomas Iftner Journal: BMJ Date: 2008-10-13
Authors: Guglielmo Ronco; Joakim Dillner; K Miriam Elfström; Sara Tunesi; Peter J F Snijders; Marc Arbyn; Henry Kitchener; Nereo Segnan; Clare Gilham; Paolo Giorgi-Rossi; Johannes Berkhof; Julian Peto; Chris J L M Meijer Journal: Lancet Date: 2013-11-03 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Virginia Senkomago; Janet Royalty; Jacqueline W Miller; Lee E Buenconsejo-Lum; Vicki B Benard; Mona Saraiya Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 2.984
Authors: Elizabeth A Van Dyne; Mona Saraiya; Arica White; Daniel Novinson; Virginia Senkomago; Lee Buenconsejo-Lum Journal: Hawaii J Health Soc Welf Date: 2020-06-01