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:
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.
Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary
Vyšlo v časopise:
Cervical Screening at Age 50–64 Years and the Risk of Cervical Cancer at Age 65 Years and Older: Population-Based Case Control Study. PLoS Med 11(1): e32767. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001585
Kategorie:
Research Article
prolekare.web.journal.doi_sk:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001585
Souhrn
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.
Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary
Zdroje
1. IsideanSD, FrancoEL (2013) Counterpoint: cervical cancer screening guidelines—approaching the golden age. Am J Epidemiol 178: 1023–1026.
2. RustagiAS, KamineniA, WeissNS (2013) Point: cervical cancer screening guidelines should consider observational data on screening efficacy in older women. Am J Epidemiol 178: 1020–1022.
3. SirovichB, WelchG (2004) The frequency of pap smear screening in the United States. J Gen Intern Med 19: 243–250.
4. SirovichB, GottliebDJ, FisherES (2003) The burden of prevention: downstream consequences of PAP smear testing in the elderly. J Med Screen 10: 189–195.
5. SaslowD, SolomonD, LawsonHW, KillackeyM, KulasingamSL, et al. (2012) American Cancer Society, American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and American Society for Clinical Pathology screening guidelines for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 62: 147–172.
6. Committee on Practice Bulletins–Gynecology (2012) ACOG practice bulletin number 131: screening for cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol 120: 1222–1238.
7. Van WijngaardenWJ, DuncanID (1993) Rationale for stopping cervical screening in women over 50. BMJ 306: 967–971.
8. ReboljM, van BallegooijenM, LyngeE, LoomanC, Essink-BotML, et al. (2009) Incidence of cervical cancer after several negative smear results by age 50: prospective observational study. BMJ 338: b1354.
9. DowlingEC, KlabundeC, PatnickJ, Ballard-BarbashR (2010) Breast and cervical cancer screening programme implementation in 16 countries. J Med Screen 17: 139–146.
10. Health Research Authority (2009, rev April 2013) Defining research. Available: http://www.hra.nhs.uk/documents/2013/09/defining-research.pdf. Accessed 11 December 2013.
11. SasieniP, AdamsJ, CuzickJ (2003) Benefit of cervical screening at different ages: evidence from the UK audit of screening histories. Br J Cancer 89: 88–93.
12. SasieniP, CastanonA, CuzickJ (2009) Effectiveness of cervical screening with age: population based case-control study of prospectively recorded data. BMJ 339: b2968.
13. NHS Cervical Screening Programme (2006) Audit of invasive cervical cancers. Available: http://cancerscreening.org.uk/cervical/publications/nhscsp28.html. Accessed 15 July 2013.
14. Sasieni P, Castanon A, editors (2012) NHSCSP Audit of invasive cervical cancer: national report 2007–2011. Available: http://www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/cervical/publications/nhscsp-audit-invasive-cervical-cancer.html. Accessed 15 July 2013.
15. NHS Cervical Screening Programme (2000) Achievable standards, benchmarks for reporting, and criteria for evaluating cervical cytopathology. Available: http://www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/cervical/publications/cc-02.html. Accessed 4 December 2013.
16. Office for National Statistics (2013) Cancer statistics registrations, England (series MB1). Available: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/search/index.html?newquery=seriesmb1. Accessed 27 July 2013.
17. Welsh Cancer Intelligence and Surveillance Unit (2012) Cancer incidence in Wales, 2006–2010. Available: http://www.wales.nhs.uk/sites3/page.cfm?orgid=242&pid=59080. Accessed 4 December 2013.
18. International Collaboration of Epidemiological Studies of Cervical Cancer (2007) Comparison of risk factors for invasive squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the cervix: collaborative reanalysis of individual data on 8,097 women with squamous cell carcinoma and 1,374 women with adenocarcinoma from 12 epidemiological studies. Int J Cancer 120: 885–891.
19. Office for National Statistics (2013) Cancer statistics registrations. Registrations of cancer diagnosed in 2011, England. Available: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/vsob1/cancer-statistics-registrations-england-series-mb1-/no-42-2011/stb-cancer-statistics-registrations-2011.html. Accessed 27 July 2013.
20. Health and Social Care Information Centre (2010) Cervical Screening Programme—England: 2009–2010. Available: https://catalogue.ic.nhs.uk/publications/screening/cervical/cerv-scre-prog-eng-2009-10/cerv_scre_prog_eng_2009-10_rep_v3.pdf. Accessed 4 December 2013.
21. Health and Social Care Information Centre (2012) Cervical screening programme, England—2011–12. Available: http://www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/cervical/statistics-bulletin.html. Accessed 15 July 2013.
22. KamineniA, WeinmannS, ShyKK, GlassAG, WeissNS (2013) Efficacy of screening in preventing cervical cancer among older women. Cancer Causes Control 24: 1653–1660.
23. LarsenLP, OlesenF (1996) Characteristics of subgroups of attenders and non-attenders in an organised screening programme for cervical cancer. J Med Screen 3: 133–139.
24. DinkelspielH, FettermanB, PoitrasN, KinneyW, CoxJT, et al. (2012) Screening history preceding a diagnosis of cervical cancer in women age 65 and older. Gynecol Oncol 126: 203–206.
25. DattaSD, KoutskyLA, RatelleS, UngerER, ShlayJ, et al. (2008) Human papillomavirus infection and cervical cytology in women screened for cervical cancer in the United States, 2003–2005. Ann Intern Med 148: 493–500.
26. PetoJ, GilhamC, FletcherO, MatthewsFE, PetoJ, et al. (2004) The cervical cancer epidemic that screening has prevented in the UK. Lancet 364: 249–256.
27. SasieniP, AdamsJ (1999) Effect of screening on cervical cancer mortality in England and Wales: analysis of trends with an age period cohort model. BMJ 318: 1244–1245.
28. BeralV (1974) Cancer of the cervix: a sexually transmitted infection? Lancet 1: 1037–1040.
29. International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization (2005) Cervix cancer screening. IARC Handbooks of Cancer Prevention. Lyon (France): IARC Press. 302 p.
30. MurphyS, XuJ, KochanekK (2012) Division of Vital Statistics (2012) Deaths: preliminary data for 2010. Natl Vital Stat Rep 60: 1–52 Available: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_04.pdf. Accessed 27 July 2013.
Štítky
Interné lekárstvoČlánok vyšiel v časopise
PLOS Medicine
2014 Číslo 1
- Pleiotropní účinky statinů na kardiovaskulární systém
- Role praktického lékaře v péči o pacienta s familiární hypercholesterolémií
- Hydroresponzivní krytí v epitelizační fázi hojení rány
- Očkování proti virové hemoragické horečce Ebola experimentální vakcínou rVSVDG-ZEBOV-GP
- Parazitičtí červi v terapii Crohnovy choroby a dalších zánětlivých autoimunitních onemocnění
Najčítanejšie v tomto čísle
- Associations between Intimate Partner Violence and Termination of Pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- Risk Stratification by Self-Measured Home Blood Pressure across Categories of Conventional Blood Pressure: A Participant-Level Meta-Analysis
- A Risk Prediction Model for the Assessment and Triage of Women with Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy in Low-Resourced Settings: The miniPIERS (Pre-eclampsia Integrated Estimate of RiSk) Multi-country Prospective Cohort Study
- Scale-up of Malaria Rapid Diagnostic Tests and Artemisinin-Based Combination Therapy: Challenges and Perspectives in Sub-Saharan Africa