Dataset Information

Cervical screening at age 50-64 years and the risk of cervical cancer at age 65 years and older: population-based case control study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There is little consensus, and minimal evidence, regarding the age at which to stop cervical screening. We studied the association between screening at age 50-64 y and cervical cancer at age 65-83 y.

Methods and findings

Cases were women (n?=?1,341) diagnosed with cervical cancer at age 65-83 y between 1 April 2007 and 31 March 2012 in England and Wales; age-matched controls (n?=?2,646) were randomly selected from population registers. Screening details from 1988 onwards were extracted from national databases. We calculated the odds ratios (OR) for different screening histories and subsequent cervical cancer. Women with adequate negative screening at age 65 y (288 cases, 1,395 controls) were at lowest risk of cervical cancer (20-y risk: 8 cancers per 10,000 women) compared with those (532 cases, 429 controls) not screened at age 50-64 y (20-y risk: 49 cancers per 10,000 women, with OR?=?0.16, 95% CI 0.13-0.19). ORs depended on the age mix of women because of the weakening association with time since last screen: OR?=?0.11, 95% CI 0.08-0.14 at 2.5 to 7.5 y since last screen; OR?=?0.27, 95% CI 0.20-0.36 at 12.5 to 17.5 y since last screen. Screening at least every 5.5 y between the ages 50 and 64 y was associated with a 75% lower risk of cervical cancer between the ages 65 and 79 y (OR?=?0.25, 95% CI 0.21-0.30), and the attributable risk was such that in the absence of screening, cervical cancer rates in women aged 65+ would have been 2.4 (95% CI 2.1-2.7) times higher. In women aged 80-83 y the association was weaker (OR?=?0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.83) than in those aged 65-69 y (OR?=?0.12, 95% CI 0.09-0.17). This study was limited by an absence of data on confounding factors; additionally, findings based on cytology may not generalise to human papillomavirus testing.

Conclusions

Women with adequate negative screening at age 50-64 y had one-sixth of the risk of cervical cancer at age 65-83 y compared with women who were not screened. Stopping screening between ages 60 and 69 y in women with adequate negative screening seems sensible, but further screening may be justifiable as life expectancy increases.

SUBMITTER: Castanon A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3891624 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cervical screening at age 50-64 years and the risk of cervical cancer at age 65 years and older: population-based case control study.

Castañón Alejandra A Landy Rebecca R Cuzick Jack J Sasieni Peter P

PLoS medicine 20140114 1

<h4>Background</h4>There is little consensus, and minimal evidence, regarding the age at which to stop cervical screening. We studied the association between screening at age 50-64 y and cervical cancer at age 65-83 y.<h4>Methods and findings</h4>Cases were women (n = 1,341) diagnosed with cervical cancer at age 65-83 y between 1 April 2007 and 31 March 2012 in England and Wales; age-matched controls (n = 2,646) were randomly selected from population registers. Screening details from 1988 onward ...[more]

PMID: 24453946

Similar Datasets

Project description:As life expectancy increases, the effectiveness of cervical cancer screening programs needs to be reassessed for the older population. We addressed the effect of test history in and outside organized screening at age 50-64 years on later cervical cancer risk. A case-control study was conducted by deriving 229 cases of 65-79 years old women with invasive cervical cancer in 2010-2019 from the Finnish Cancer Registry. Ten controls were matched for each case by birth year and hospital district. The effect of test uptake and abnormal results in 50-64 year olds on cancer risk was investigated using conditional logistic regression and adjusted for self-selection. Test uptake within the 50-64 years age group showed 75% lower odds of cervical cancer [adjusted OR (aOR) = 0.25; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.18-0.35]. Untested women had 4.9 times higher odds than those tested with normal results (aOR = 4.86; 95% CI, 3.42-6.92). Having at least one abnormal test result increased the odds by 2.5 when compared with only normal results but showed lower odds when compared with untested women. The importance of testing is exhibited by the result showing a reduction of odds of cancer to one-fourth for those tested compared with untested. Similarly, receiving abnormal results was protective of cancer compared with having no tests highlighting the importance of proper follow-up. Therefore, screening history should be considered when further developing cervical cancer screening programs with special interest in non-attenders and those receiving abnormal results at older ages.SignificanceTo our knowledge, this is the first study from Finnish data describing the effect of test history on later cervical cancer at older ages. Focusing on the cervical tests taken within the Finnish national screening program and outside it highlights the overall importance of having cervical tests and adds this study into the slowly increasing number of studies considering all cervical testing in Finland.

Project description:To conduct post-hoc analysis of National CT Colonography Trial data and compare the sensitivity and specificity of computed tomographic (CT) colonography in participants younger than 65 years with those in participants aged 65 years and older.Of 2600 asymptomatic participants recruited at 15 centers for the trial, 497 were 65 years of age or older. Approval of this HIPAA-compliant study was obtained from the institutional review board of each site, and informed consent was obtained from each subject. Radiologists certified in CT colonography reported lesions 5 mm in diameter or larger. Screening detection of large (≥10-mm) histologically confirmed colorectal neoplasia was the primary end point; screening detection of smaller (6-9-mm) colorectal neoplasia was a secondary end point. The differences in sensitivity and specificity of CT colonography in the two age cohorts (age < 65 years and age ≥ 65 years) were estimated with bootstrap confidence intervals (CIs).Complete data were available for 477 participants 65 years of age or older (among 2531 evaluable participants). Prevalence of adenomas 1 cm or larger for the older participants versus the younger participants was 6.9% (33 of 477) versus 3.7% (76 of 2054) (P < .004). For large neoplasms, mean estimates for CT colonography sensitivity and specificity among the older cohort were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.644, 0.944) and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.779, 0.883), respectively. For large neoplasms in the younger group, CT colonography sensitivity and specificity were 0.92 (95% CI: 0.837, 0.967) and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.816, 0.899), respectively. Per-polyp sensitivity for large neoplasms for the older and younger populations was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.578, 0.869) and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.717, 0.924), respectively. For the older and younger groups, per-participant sensitivity was 0.72 (95% CI: 0.565, 0.854) and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.745, 0.882) for detecting adenomas 6 mm in diameter or larger.For most measures of diagnostic performance and in most subsets, the difference between senior-aged participants and those younger than 65 years was not statistically significant.

Dataset Information

Cervical screening at age 50-64 years and the risk of cervical cancer at age 65 years and older: population-based case control study.

Background

Methods and findings

Conclusions

Publications

Cervical screening at age 50-64 years and the risk of cervical cancer at age 65 years and older: population-based case control study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets