Michelle I Silver1,2, Anne F Rositch3, Darcy F Phelan-Emrick3, Patti E Gravitt3,4. 1. Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. michelle.silver@nih.gov. 2. Clinical Genetics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, 6E584, Rockville, MD, 20850, USA. michelle.silver@nih.gov. 3. Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. 4. Department Global Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the adoption of HPV testing and recommended extended cervical cancer screening intervals in clinical practice, we described yearly uptake of Pap/HPV cotesting and estimated length of time between normal screens by patient characteristics. METHODS: We examined 55,575 Pap/HPV records from 27,035 women aged 30-65 years from the Johns Hopkins Hospital Pathology Data System between 2006 and 2013. Cotest uptake and median times to next screening test for cotests and cytology only were calculated. Adjusted hazard ratios were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models, with random effects adjustment for clustering within clinic. RESULTS: Cotest usage increased from < 10% in 2006 to 78% in 2013. The median time to next screening test following normal cytology alone remained constant around 1.5 years. Screening intervals following a dual-negative cotest increased from 1.5 years in 2006/2007 to 2.5 years in 2010, coincident with increases in the proportion of women cotested. Intervals following a dual negative cotest were longer among Medicare patients (3 years) compared with privately insured women (2.5 years), and shorter among black (2 years) compared with white women (2.8 years). CONCLUSION: By mid-2013 we observed broad adoption of Pap/HPV cotesting in routine screening in a large academic medical center. Increased screening intervals were observed only among cotested women, while those screened by cytology alone continued to be screened almost annually. The influence of different combinations of race and insurance on screening intervals should be further evaluated to ensure balance of screening risks and benefits in the U.S.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the adoption of HPV testing and recommended extended cervical cancer screening intervals in clinical practice, we described yearly uptake of Pap/HPV cotesting and estimated length of time between normal screens by patient characteristics. METHODS: We examined 55,575 Pap/HPV records from 27,035 women aged 30-65 years from the Johns Hopkins Hospital Pathology Data System between 2006 and 2013. Cotest uptake and median times to next screening test for cotests and cytology only were calculated. Adjusted hazard ratios were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models, with random effects adjustment for clustering within clinic. RESULTS: Cotest usage increased from < 10% in 2006 to 78% in 2013. The median time to next screening test following normal cytology alone remained constant around 1.5 years. Screening intervals following a dual-negative cotest increased from 1.5 years in 2006/2007 to 2.5 years in 2010, coincident with increases in the proportion of women cotested. Intervals following a dual negative cotest were longer among Medicare patients (3 years) compared with privately insured women (2.5 years), and shorter among black (2 years) compared with white women (2.8 years). CONCLUSION: By mid-2013 we observed broad adoption of Pap/HPV cotesting in routine screening in a large academic medical center. Increased screening intervals were observed only among cotested women, while those screened by cytology alone continued to be screened almost annually. The influence of different combinations of race and insurance on screening intervals should be further evaluated to ensure balance of screening risks and benefits in the U.S.
Authors: Candace S Sheppard; Mariam El-Zein; Agnihotram V Ramanakumar; Alex Ferenczy; Eduardo L Franco Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2016-01-29 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Sheila Weinmann; Andrew E Williams; Aruna Kamineni; Diana S M Buist; Erin E Masterson; Natasha K Stout; Azadeh Stark; Tyler R Ross; Christopher L Owens; Terry S Field; Chyke A Doubeni Journal: Cancer Date: 2015-05-18 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Armanda D Tatsas; Darcy F Phelan; Patti E Gravitt; John K Boitnott; Douglas P Clark Journal: Am J Clin Pathol Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 2.493
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: Thomas C Wright; Mark Schiffman; Diane Solomon; J Thomas Cox; Francisco Garcia; Sue Goldie; Kenneth Hatch; Kenneth L Noller; Nancy Roach; Carolyn Runowicz; Debbie Saslow Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Chengquan Zhao; Zaibo Li; Ritu Nayar; Angelique W Levi; Barbara A Winkler; Ann T Moriarty; Güliz A Barkan; Jianyu Rao; Fern Miller; Fang Fan; Zhongren Zhou; Qiusheng Si; Andrew H Fischer; Charles D Sturgis; Xin Jing; Carrie B Marshall; Benjamin L Witt; George G Birdsong; Barbara A Crothers Journal: Arch Pathol Lab Med Date: 2014-04-02 Impact factor: 5.534
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: Kathy L MacLaughlin; Robert M Jacobson; Carmen Radecki Breitkopf; Patrick M Wilson; Debra J Jacobson; Chun Fan; Jennifer L St Sauver; Lila J Finney Rutten Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2019-01-07 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Jennifer S Haas; David Cheng; Liyang Yu; Steven J Atlas; Cheryl Clark; Sarah Feldman; Michelle I Silver; Aruna Kamineni; Jessica Chubak; Gaia Pocobelli; Jasmin A Tiro; Sarah C Kobrin Journal: Prev Med Date: 2021-11-08 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Michelle I Silver; Melissa L Anderson; Elisabeth F Beaber; Jennifer S Haas; Sarah Kobrin; Gaia Pocobelli; Celette Sugg Skinner; Jasmin A Tiro; Aruna Kamineni Journal: Prev Med Date: 2021-09-29 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Nancy M McClung; Julia W Gargano; Ina U Park; Erin Whitney; Nasreen Abdullah; Sara Ehlers; Nancy M Bennett; Mary Scahill; Linda M Niccolai; Monica Brackney; Marie R Griffin; Manideepthi Pemmaraju; Troy D Querec; Angela A Cleveland; Elizabeth R Unger; Lauri E Markowitz Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2019-04-19 Impact factor: 17.586
Authors: Johannes Horn; Agnieszka Denecke; Alexander Luyten; Beate Rothe; Axel Reinecke-Lüthge; Rafael Mikolajczyk; Karl Ulrich Petry Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2019-04-16 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Jack Cuzick; Ruofei Du; Rachael Adcock; Walter Kinney; Nancy Joste; Ruth M McDonald; Kevin English; Salina M Torres; Debbie Saslow; Cosette M Wheeler Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2021-07-10 Impact factor: 5.304
Authors: Adana A M Llanos; Jennifer Tsui; David Rotter; Lindsey Toler; Antoinette M Stroup Journal: BMC Womens Health Date: 2018-10-03 Impact factor: 2.809