Differences in screening history, tumour characteristics and survival between women with screen-detected versus not screen-detected cervical cancer in the east of The Netherlands, 1992–2001

Aa, Maaike A. van der; Schutter, Eltjo M.J.; Looijen-Salamon, Monika; Martens, Jolise E.; Siesling, Sabine

doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2007.10.017

Cited by 28 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, screen detected cancers are found at a lower stage than clinically diagnosed ones, so their survival rate is probably better. 41 Therefore, the suggested negative effect of using ThinPrep is probably less pronounced for cervical cancer mortality than it is for incidence. The opposite is true for the positive effect of SurePath, as we found that SurePath was primarily protective for clinically detected cancers.…”

Section: Explanation Of Main Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cervical cancer incidence after normal cytological sample in routine screening using SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology: population based study

Rozemeijer

Naber

Penning

et al. 2017

BMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To compare the cumulative incidence of cervical cancer diagnosed within 72 months after a normal screening sample between conventional cytology and liquid based cytology tests SurePath and ThinPrep. Design Retrospective population based cohort study. Setting Nationwide network and registry of histo- and cytopathology in the Netherlands (PALGA), January 2000 to March 2013. Population Women with 5 924 474 normal screening samples (23 833 123 person years). Exposure Use of SurePath or ThinPrep versus conventional cytology as screening test. Main outcome measure 72 month cumulative incidence of invasive cervical cancer after a normal screening sample for each screening test. Cox regression analyses assessed the hazard ratios, adjusted for calendar time, age, screening history, and socioeconomic status and including laboratories as random effects. Results The 72 month cumulative cancer incidence was 58.5 (95% confidence interval 54.6 to 62.7) per 100 000 normal conventional cytology samples, compared with 66.8 (56.7 to 78.7) for ThinPrep and 44.6 (37.8 to 52.6) for SurePath. Compared with conventional cytology, the hazard of invasive cancer was 19% lower (hazard ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.66 to 0.99) for SurePath, mainly caused by a 27% lower hazard (0.73, 0.57 to 0.93) of a clinically detected cancer. For ThinPrep, the hazard was on average 15% higher (hazard ratio 1.15, 0.95 to 1.38), mainly caused by a 56% higher hazard of a screen detected cancer (1.56, 1.17 to 2.08). Conclusions These findings should provoke reconsideration of the assumed similarity in sensitivity to detect progressive cervical intraepithelial neoplasia between different types of liquid based cytology and conventional cytology.

show abstract

Section: Explanation Of Main Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cervical cancer incidence after normal cytological sample in routine screening using SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology: population based study

Rozemeijer

Naber

Penning

et al. 2017

BMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The amount of reported under-screening among CC cases ranged from 28% to 82%—with lower rates of under-screening associated with organized screening programmes [8–15]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Poor Cervical Cancer Screening Attendance and False Negatives. A Call for Organized Screening

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to describe prior negative screening history and symptoms around the time of diagnosis of incident cervical cancer (CC) cases diagnosed between 2000 and 2010 within the Asturias public health system.MethodsRecords from 374 women diagnosed with CC between 2000 and 2010 from all public hospitals in Asturias were retrieved. Clinical information, FIGO stage and all previous cytological data were extracted from clinical and histopathological records. Proportional differences were assessed using chi-square tests. Logistic regression analysis was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Inter-observer agreement in cytology was checked by comparing concordance values using k-statistics.ResultsNo prior screening history was recorded in 60.7% of CC cases and its absence increased with age and advanced stage. Advanced stage (e.g., ≥ II) at diagnosis was associated with age (>50 years) and adenocarcinoma (ADC) compared to younger women and those with a squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). False negative smears were identified in 27.1% of women with CC (ADC 52.6% vs. SCC 16.2%, p<0.05).ConclusionsAbsence of prior screening history was common among CC cases. Organized actions to reduce “under screening” and the use of highly sensitive HPV-based tests could be useful strategies in reducing the burden of CC in Asturias.

show abstract

“…Through a well-organized cytological screening, the incidence of cervical cancer can be reduced to a small residual level (IARC, 2005), as was demonstrated two decades ago in four Nordic countries (Laara et al, 1987) and more recently in the United Kingdom (Quinn et al, 1999;Peto et al, 2004), Norway (Nygard et al, 2002), and the Netherlands (van der Aa et al, 2007). In Belgium, screening is essentially opportunistic, which means that Pap smears are taken at the spontaneous initiative of the woman, her gynecologist or her general practitioner (Arbyn and Van Oyen, 2004;Arbyn et al, in press-a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of 13 million individual patient records pertaining to Pap smears, colposcopies, biopsies and surgery on the uterine cervix (Belgium, 1996–2000)

Arbyn

Simoens

Oyen

et al. 2009

Preventive Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c t a r t i c l e i n f oObjective. Cervical cancer screening by surveys overestimate coverage because of selection and reporting biases.Methods. The prepared Inter-Mutualistic Agency dataset has about 13 million records from Pap smears, colposcopies, cervical biopsies and surgery, performed in Belgium between 1996 and 2000. Cervical cancer screening coverage was defined as the proportion of the target population (women of 25-64 years) that has had a Pap smear taken within the last 3 years. Proportions and incidence rates were computed using official population data of the corresponding age group, area and calendar year.Results. Cervical cancer screening coverage, in the period 1998-2000, was 59% at national level, for the target age group 25-64 years. Differences were small between the 3 regions. Variation ranged from 39% to 71%. Coverage was 64% for 25-29 year old women, 67% for those aged 30-39 years, 56% for those aged 50-54. The modal screening interval was 1 year. In the 3-year period 1998-2000, 3 million smears were taken from the 2.7 million women in the age group 25-64. Only 1.6 million women of the target group got one or more smears in that period and 1.1 million women had no smears, corresponding to an average of 1.88 smears per woman.Conclusion. Coverage reached only 59%, but the number of smears used was sufficient to cover more than 100% of the target population. Structural reduction of overuse and extension of coverage is warranted.

show abstract

Differences in screening history, tumour characteristics and survival between women with screen-detected versus not screen-detected cervical cancer in the east of The Netherlands, 1992–2001

Cited by 28 publications

References 22 publications

Cervical cancer incidence after normal cytological sample in routine screening using SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology: population based study

Cervical cancer incidence after normal cytological sample in routine screening using SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology: population based study

Poor Cervical Cancer Screening Attendance and False Negatives. A Call for Organized Screening

Analysis of 13 million individual patient records pertaining to Pap smears, colposcopies, biopsies and surgery on the uterine cervix (Belgium, 1996–2000)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About