Literature DB >> 28120382

A 3-year interval is too short for re-screening women testing negative for human papillomavirus: a population-based cohort study.

M Zorzi1, H Frayle2, M Rizzi2, C Fedato3, M Rugge1,4, M G Penon5, A Bertazzo5, S Callegaro6, M Campagnolo6, F Ortu6, A Del Mistro2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the results from an initial negative human papillomavirus (HPV) test with re-screening after 3 years in women attending two HPV-based screening programmes.
DESIGN: Population-based cohort study.
SETTING: Two cervical service screening programmes in Italy. POPULATION: Women aged 25-64 years invited to screening from April 2009 to October 2015.
METHODS: Eligible women were invited to undergo an HPV test. Those with a negative HPV test went on to the next screening round 3 years later. Cytology triage was performed for HPV+ (HPV by Hybrid Capture 2) samples, with immediate colposcopy (if abnormal) and HPV re-testing 1 year later (if negative). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participation rate, positivity at HPV and at triage, referral rate to colposcopy, positive predictive value for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN2+) at colposcopy, and detection rate for CIN2+.
RESULTS: We present the results from 48 751 women at the first screening and 22 000 women at re-screening 3 years later. The response rate was slightly higher at the second screening (74.5 versus 72.1% at the first screening; referral rate, RR 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 95% CI, 1.07-1.14). Compared with the first screening, we observed a significant reduction at the second screening in terms of HPV positivity (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.51-0.60), referral rate to colposcopy (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.41-0.53), CIN2+ detection rate (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.13-0.39), and positive predictive value (PPV) for CIN2+ at colposcopy (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.29-0.87).
CONCLUSIONS: The very low frequency of disease and inadequate PPV at colposcopy indicate that a 3-year interval after a negative HPV test is too short. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Three years after a negative HPV the frequency of cervical disease is so low that re-screening is inefficient.
© 2017 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CIN2+; Cervical cancer; HPV DNA test; screening interval

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28120382     DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.14575

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJOG        ISSN: 1470-0328            Impact factor:   6.531


  6 in total

1.  Role of Screening History in Clinical Meaning and Optimal Management of Positive Cervical Screening Results.

Authors:  Philip E Castle; Walter K Kinney; Xiaonan Xue; Li C Cheung; Julia C Gage; Nancy E Poitras; Thomas S Lorey; Hormuzd A Katki; Nicolas Wentzensen; Mark Schiffman
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Extension of cervical screening intervals with primary human papillomavirus testing: observational study of English screening pilot data.

Authors:  Matejka Rebolj; Kate Cuschieri; Christopher S Mathews; Francesca Pesola; Karin Denton; Henry Kitchener
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2022-05-31

3.  Primary cervical screening with high risk human papillomavirus testing: observational study.

Authors:  Matejka Rebolj; Janet Rimmer; Karin Denton; John Tidy; Christopher Mathews; Kay Ellis; John Smith; Chris Evans; Thomas Giles; Viki Frew; Xenia Tyler; Alexandra Sargent; Janet Parker; Miles Holbrook; Katherine Hunt; Penny Tidbury; Tanya Levine; David Smith; Julietta Patnick; Ruth Stubbs; Sue Moss; Henry Kitchener
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2019-02-06

4.  HPV testing for cervical cancer screening: technical improvement of laboratory logistics and good clinical performance of the cobas 6800 in comparison to the 4800 system.

Authors:  Helena Frayle; Silvia Gori; Martina Rizzi; Bianca Nives Graziani; Elisa Vian; Paolo Giorgi Rossi; Annarosa Del Mistro
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2019-03-25       Impact factor: 2.809

5.  Human papillomavirus-based screening at extended intervals missed fewer cervical precancers than cytology in the HPV For Cervical Cancer (HPV FOCAL) trial.

Authors:  Anna Gottschlich; Lovedeep Gondara; Laurie W Smith; Darrel Cook; Ruth Elwood Martin; Marette Lee; Stuart Peacock; Lily Proctor; Gavin Stuart; Mel Krajden; Eduardo L Franco; Dirk van Niekerk; Gina Ogilvie
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2022-05-10       Impact factor: 7.316

6.  Clinical Performance of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Testing versus Cytology for Cervical Cancer Screening: Results of a Large Danish Implementation Study.

Authors:  Louise T Thomsen; Susanne K Kjær; Christian Munk; Kirsten Frederiksen; Dorthe Ørnskov; Marianne Waldstrøm
Journal:  Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2020-02-21       Impact factor: 4.790

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.