Sarah Feldman1, Erin Cook2, Michelle Davis1, Susan T Gershman2, Amresh Hanchate3, Jennifer S Haas4, Rebecca B Perkins5. 1. Division Gynecologic Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. 2. Department of Public Health, Harvard School of Public Health, Massachusetts Cancer Registry, Boston, MA. 3. Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA. 4. Division of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. 5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Current cancer screening guidelines recommend cessation of cervical cancer screening at the age of 65 years for most women. To examine residual risk among elderly women, we compared cervical cancer incidence rates (IRs) in Massachusetts from 2004 to 2015 among women younger than 65 years versus 65 years and older. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Massachusetts Cancer Registry was used to identify all women diagnosed with cervical cancer between January 01, 2004, to December 31, 2015. Cancer incidence was calculated based on age of diagnosis (<65 years vs ≥65 years). RESULTS: In Massachusetts, 2,418 incident cases of cervical cancer were diagnosed from 2004 to 2014, of which 571 (23.6%) were diagnosed among women 65 years and older. When compared with women diagnosed younger than 65 years, women diagnosed at the age of 65 years and older were more likely to be diagnosed with stage II or higher (71.8% vs 43.8%, p < .001). Cervical cancer IRs decreased annually for women younger than 65 years from 2004 to 2015. Among women 65 years and older, cancer IRs decreased by 3.9% annually from 2004 to 2013 (p = .0009), but 2013 to 2015 showed an increasing trend (annual percent change + 14.1%, p = .12). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Women 65 years and older account for one quarter of cervical cancer diagnoses in Massachusetts and present with higher-stage disease than younger women. Upcoming planned revisions in screening and prevention guidelines should address the continued risk of cervical cancer for older women.
IMPORTANCE: Current cancer screening guidelines recommend cessation of cervical cancer screening at the age of 65 years for most women. To examine residual risk among elderly women, we compared cervical cancer incidence rates (IRs) in Massachusetts from 2004 to 2015 among women younger than 65 years versus 65 years and older. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Massachusetts Cancer Registry was used to identify all women diagnosed with cervical cancer between January 01, 2004, to December 31, 2015. Cancer incidence was calculated based on age of diagnosis (<65 years vs ≥65 years). RESULTS: In Massachusetts, 2,418 incident cases of cervical cancer were diagnosed from 2004 to 2014, of which 571 (23.6%) were diagnosed among women 65 years and older. When compared with women diagnosed younger than 65 years, women diagnosed at the age of 65 years and older were more likely to be diagnosed with stage II or higher (71.8% vs 43.8%, p < .001). Cervical cancer IRs decreased annually for women younger than 65 years from 2004 to 2015. Among women 65 years and older, cancer IRs decreased by 3.9% annually from 2004 to 2013 (p = .0009), but 2013 to 2015 showed an increasing trend (annual percent change + 14.1%, p = .12). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Women 65 years and older account for one quarter of cervical cancer diagnoses in Massachusetts and present with higher-stage disease than younger women. Upcoming planned revisions in screening and prevention guidelines should address the continued risk of cervical cancer for older women.
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: Am J Clin Pathol Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 2.493
Authors: David L Howard; Sarah Smith Hostetter; Jennifer Hunter; Nicole Johnson; Saladin Cooper; Gerard Malnar Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2015-07
Authors: Elisabeth J Diver; Emily M Hinchcliff; Allison A Gockley; Alexander Melamed; Leah Contrino; Sarah Feldman; Whitfield B Growdon Journal: J Geriatr Oncol Date: 2018-03-02 Impact factor: 3.599
Authors: Patti E Gravitt; Anne F Rositch; Michelle I Silver; Morgan A Marks; Kathryn Chang; Anne E Burke; Raphael P Viscidi Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2012-12-12 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Wonsuk Yoo; Sangmi Kim; Warner K Huh; Sarah Dilley; Steven S Coughlin; Edward E Partridge; Yunmi Chung; Vivian Dicks; Jae-Kwan Lee; Sejong Bae Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-02-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Katie E Lichter; Kimberly Levinson; Anne Hammer; Melissa H Lippitt; Anne F Rositch Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 5.482