Are women ready for the new cervical screening protocol in England? A systematic review and qualitative synthesis of views about human papillomavirus testing.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hendry M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3394982 | biostudies-other | 2012 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:Objective The replacement of cytology with human papillomavirus testing as the primary cervical screening test in England is imminent. In light of newly available evidence, we revised our previous estimates of the likely impact of primary human papillomavirus testing on incidence of cervical cancer. Method and results Using screening data on women aged 25-64 diagnosed with cervical cancer in England between 1988 and 2012, we previously reported that 38.8% had a negative test six months to six years prior to diagnosis. However, not all of these cancers would be prevented by human papillomavirus testing: for 1.0% the human papillomavirus positive test would come too late (within 18 months of diagnosis) to make a difference; 7.6% will have a negative human papillomavirus test (based on 79.9% sensitivity of human papillomavirus testing in cytology negative women); and 2.0% will develop cancer despite a positive human papillomavirus test. Additionally, we estimate that some women (equivalent to 4.3% of current incidence) whose cancers are currently prevented by cytology-based screening will have a false-negative human papillomavirus test. Conclusion Overall, we estimate that 23.9% (95% CI: 19.3-27.6%) of current cases in women invited for screening could be prevented. Based on 2013 cancer incidence statistics, absolute numbers could be reduced by 487 (95% CI 394 to 563) or 3.4 (95% CI 2.8 to 4.0) per 100,000 women per year.
| S-EPMC5490776 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is increasingly being used to determine the optimal cervical cancer screening interval in older women. Little is known about women's attitudes toward HPV testing or how these attitudes may influence medical discussions about cervical cancer screening.Preferences for HPV and concomitant Papanicolaou (Pap) testing were assessed through in-person interviews with diverse women aged 50 to 80 years recruited from community and university-based practices.Eight hundred and sixty-five women (257 White, 87 African American, 149 Latina, and 372 Asian) were interviewed. Approximately 60% of participants wanted to be tested for HPV and another 15% would undergo testing if recommended by their physician. Among those wanting HPV testing, 94% would want more frequent than annual Pap tests if they had a positive HPV test and a normal Pap test. Two thirds of those under age 65 would be willing to switch to triennial Pap testing, and half of those aged 65 and older would be willing to discontinue Pap testing, if they had a negative HPV test and normal Pap test. Preferences for testing varied by ethnicity, age, place of birth, and cancer history.The majority of older women were willing to use HPV testing to make decisions about frequency and duration of cervical cancer screening, but up to one third would want at least annual, ongoing screening regardless of HPV test results. Efforts should be made to ensure that HPV testing is used to reinforce appropriate utilization of screening tests.
| S-EPMC2518007 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND:Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer affecting women worldwide. In the 1980s, it was found that the sexually transmitted disease human papillomavirus causes over 90% of all cervical cancer cases. Since that discovery, diagnostic technologies have been developed for the detection of human papillomavirus DNA in cervical samples. However, significant sociocultural and structural barriers remain. Considerable strides have taken place in recent years to address these barriers, such as the self-collection for human papillomavirus-based cervical screening method. OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this review is to synthesize qualitative evidence around the self-collection method and identify strategies to increase acceptability and feasibility in different settings. This qualitative synthesis will be used to better understand how to conceptualize and implement more effective, accessible, and socially and culturally acceptable cervical screening programs and policies globally. METHODS:A systematic search will be conducted in Global Health, Cochrane, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), ProQuest, ScienceDirect, EMBASE, EMCARE, Medline (OVID), Scopus, and Web of Science. Published and peer-reviewed articles will be included. Two reviewers will independently screen and assess the studies. The data will be coded and analyzed using a thematic synthesis process. The socioecological model will be used to organize emergent themes at the micro and macro levels. The results will be presented in narrative and tabular form. RESULTS:The article search and data extraction were completed in May 2020. The data were analyzed in June 2020. The review will be submitted for publication in Fall 2020. CONCLUSIONS:This review will present the global evidence of the perspectives and experiences of various key stakeholders and how these perspectives and experiences impact their decision-making process to perform or accept self-collection for human papillomavirus-based cervical screening. The review will provide guidance to implementation researchers as well as implications for future research. TRIAL REGISTRATION:PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42019109073; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=109073. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID):DERR1-10.2196/21093.
| S-EPMC7644378 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo provide the first report on the main outcomes from the prevalence and incidence rounds of a large pilot of routine primary high risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing in England, compared with contemporaneous primary liquid based cytology screening.DesignObservational study.SettingThe English Cervical Screening Programme.Participants578 547 women undergoing cervical screening in primary care between May 2013 and December 2014, with follow-up until May 2017; 183 970 (32%) were screened with hrHPV testing.InterventionsRoutine cervical screening with hrHPV testing with liquid based cytology triage and two early recalls for women who were hrHPV positive and cytology negative, following the national screening age and interval recommendations.Main outcome measuresFrequency of referral for a colposcopy; adherence to early recall; and relative detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse from hrHPV testing compared with liquid based cytology in two consecutive screening rounds.ResultsBaseline hrHPV testing and early recall required approximately 80% more colposcopies, (adjusted odds ratio 1.77, 95% confidence interval 1.73 to 1.82), but detected substantially more cervical intraepithelial neoplasia than liquid based cytology (1.49 for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse, 1.43 to 1.55; 1.44 for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse, 1.36 to 1.51) and for cervical cancer (1.27, 0.99 to 1.63). Attendance at early recall and colposcopy referral were 80% and 95%, respectively. At the incidence screen, the 33 506 women screened with hrHPV testing had substantially less cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse than the 77 017 women screened with liquid based cytology (0.14, 0.09 to 0.23).ConclusionsIn England, routine primary hrHPV screening increased the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse and cervical cancer by approximately 40% and 30%, respectively, compared with liquid based cytology. The very low incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse after three years supports extending the screening interval.
| S-EPMC6364146 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Current US cervical cancer screening guidelines do not differentiate recommendations based on a woman's human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination status. Changes to cervical cancer screening policies in HPV-vaccinated women should be evaluated. We utilized an individual-based mathematical model of HPV and cervical cancer in US women to project the health benefits, costs, and harms associated with screening strategies in women vaccinated with the bivalent, quadrivalent, or nonavalent vaccine. Strategies varied by the primary screening test, including cytology, HPV, and combined cytology and HPV "cotesting"; age of screening initiation and/or switching to a new test; and interval between routine screens. Cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from the societal perspective to identify screening strategies that would be considered good value for money according to thresholds of $50 000 to $200 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Among women fully vaccinated with the bivalent or quadrivalent vaccine, optimal screening strategies involved either cytology or HPV testing alone every five years starting at age 25 or 30 years, with cost-effectiveness ratios ranging from $34 680 to $138 560 per QALY gained. Screening earlier or more frequently was either not cost-effective or associated with exceedingly high cost-effectiveness ratios. In women vaccinated with the nonavalent vaccine, only primary HPV testing was efficient, involving decreased frequency (ie, every 10 years) starting at either age 35 years ($40 210 per QALY) or age 30 years ($127 010 per QALY); with lower nonavalent vaccine efficacy, 10-year HPV testing starting at earlier ages of 25 or 30 years was optimal. Importantly, current US guidelines for screening were inefficient in HPV-vaccinated women. This model-based analysis suggests screening can be modified to start at later ages, occur at decreased frequency, and involve primary HPV testing in HPV-vaccinated women, providing more health benefit at lower harms and costs than current screening guidelines.
| S-EPMC5068562 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Women from Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) backgrounds are less likely to attend cervical screening than White British women. This study explored sociodemographic and attitudinal correlates of cervical screening non-attendance among BAME women.Women (30-60 years) were recruited from Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Caribbean, African and White British backgrounds (n=720). Participants completed structured interviews.BAME women were more likely to be non-attenders than white British women (44-71% vs 12%) and fell into two groups: the disengaged and the overdue. Migrating to the United Kingdom, speaking a language other than English and low education level were associated with being disengaged. Being overdue was associated with older age. Three attitudinal barriers were associated with being overdue for screening among BAME women: low perceived risk of cervical cancer due to sexual inactivity, belief that screening is unnecessary without symptoms and difficulty finding an appointment that fits in with other commitments.BAME non-attenders appear to fall into two groups, and interventions for these groups may need to be targeted and tailored accordingly. It is important to ensure that BAME women understand cancer screening is intended for asymptomatic women and those who have ceased sexual activity may still be at risk.
| S-EPMC4559824 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the most cost-effective screening programme for cervical cancer.DesignCost-effectiveness analysis from a societal perspective.SettingThe Netherlands.PopulationDutch women who have not been invited for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination.MethodsWe calibrated the microsimulation screening analysis (MISCAN) model to Dutch epidemiological data. We used this model to consider nine screening strategies that use: (i) cytological testing with cytology triage for borderline/mildly abnormal smears; (ii) HPV testing with cytology triage for HPV-positive smears; or (iii) cytological testing with HPV triage for borderline/mildly abnormal smears. For each strategy, we varied the number of screening rounds, the time interval, the age of the first screening, and the type of cytological testing (conventional or liquid-based cytology).Main outcome measuresQuality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained and costs from a societal perspective.ResultsUnder the base-case assumptions, primary HPV testing with cytology triage is the most cost-effective strategy. Using cost-effectiveness thresholds of € 20,000 and € 50,000 per QALY gained yields optimal screening programmes with three and seven screening rounds, respectively. The results are sensitive to several uncertain model inputs, most importantly the costs of the HPV test. For women aged 32 years or younger, primary cytology screening is more cost-effective than primary HPV testing.ConclusionsIncreasing the interval between screening rounds and changing the primary test from cytology to HPV testing can improve the effectiveness and decrease the costs of cervical cancer screening in the Netherlands.
| S-EPMC3489039 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionHuman papillomavirus (HPV) testing is replacing cytology in primary screening. Its limited specificity demands using a second (triage) test to better identify women at high-risk of cervical disease. Cytology represents the immediate triage but its low sensitivity might hamper HPV testing sensitivity, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), where cytology performance has been suboptimal. The ESTAMPA (EStudio multicéntrico de TAMizaje y triaje de cáncer de cuello uterino con pruebas del virus del PApiloma humano; Spanish acronym) study will: (1) evaluate the performance of different triage techniques to detect cervical precancer and (2) inform on how to implement HPV-based screening programmes in LMIC.Methods and analysisWomen aged 30-64 years are screened with HPV testing and Pap across 12 study centres in Latin America. Screened positives have colposcopy with biopsy and treatment of lesions. Women with no evident disease are recalled 18 months later for another HPV test; those HPV-positive undergo colposcopy with biopsy and treatment as needed. Biological specimens are collected in different visits for triage testing, which is not used for clinical management. The study outcome is histological high-grade squamous intraepithelial or worse lesions (HSIL+) under the lower anogenital squamous terminology. About 50 000 women will be screened and 500 HSIL+ cases detected (at initial and 18 months screening). Performance measures (sensitivity, specificity and predictive values) of triage techniques to detect HSIL+ will be estimated and compared with adjustment by age and study centre.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), of the Pan American Health Organisation (PAHO) and by those in each participating centre. A Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) has been established to monitor progress of the study, assure participant safety, advice on scientific conduct and analysis and suggest protocol improvements. Study findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific meetings.Trial registration numberNCT01881659.
| S-EPMC7252979 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNew screening technologies and vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV), the necessary cause of cervical cancer, may impact optimal approaches to prevent cervical cancer. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of alternative screening strategies to inform cervical cancer prevention guidelines in Norway.MethodsWe leveraged the primary epidemiologic and economic data from Norway to contextualise a simulation model of HPV-induced cervical cancer. The current cytology-only screening was compared with strategies involving cytology at younger ages and primary HPV-based screening at older ages (31/34+ years), an option being actively deliberated by the Norwegian government. We varied the switch-age, screening interval, and triage strategies for women with HPV-positive results. Uncertainty was evaluated in sensitivity analysis.ResultsCurrent cytology-only screening was less effective and more costly than strategies that involve switching to primary HPV testing in older ages. For unvaccinated women, switching at age 34 years to primary HPV testing every 4 years was optimal given the Norwegian cost-effectiveness threshold ($83,000 per year of life saved). For vaccinated women, a 6-year screening interval was cost-effective. When we considered a wider range of strategies, we found that an earlier switch to HPV testing (at age 31 years) may be preferred.ConclusionsStrategies involving a switch to HPV testing for primary screening in older women is expected to be cost-effective compared with current recommendations in Norway.
| S-EPMC3341862 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Mammographic screening has improved breast cancer survival in the screened age group. This improved survival has not been seen in older women (>70 years) where screening uptake is low. This study explores the views, knowledge and attitudes of older women towards screening.Women (>70 years) were interviewed about breast screening. Interview findings informed the development of a questionnaire that was sent to 1000 women (>70 years) to quantify their views regarding screening.Twenty-six women were interviewed and a questionnaire was designed. The questionnaire response rate was 48.3% (479 out of 992). Over half (52.9%, 241 out of 456) of the respondents were unaware that they could request a mammography by voluntary self-referral and were unaware how to arrange this. Most (81.5%, 383 out of 470) had not attended breast screening since turning 70 years. Most (75.6%, 343 out of 454) felt screening was beneficial and would attend if invited. Most (90.1%, 412 out of 457) felt screening should be offered to all women regardless of age or health.There is a lack of knowledge about screening in older women. The majority felt that invitation to screening should be extended to the older age group regardless of age or health. The current under-utilised system of voluntary self-referral is not supported by older women.
| S-EPMC2869163 | biostudies-other