Risk of invasive cervical cancer after three consecutive negative Pap smears

Journal of Medical Screening

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 196-200

  Coldman, A ^a   Phillips, N ^a   Kan, L ^a   Matisic, J ^a   Benedet, L ^a   Towers, L ^a  

^a BRITISH COLUMBIA CANCER AGENCY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER CYTODIAGNOSIS; CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER INVASION; CANCER REGISTRY; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER SURVIVAL; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HAZARD ASSESSMENT; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; RISK FACTOR; SAMPLE SIZE; SCREENING TEST; SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

ADULT; AGED; CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; CERVIX UTERI; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK ASSESSMENT; TIME FACTORS; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 0346495967     PISSN: 09691413     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/096914103771773302     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Schiffman M, Brinton L. The epidemiology of cervical carcinogenesis. Cancer 1995;76:1888-1901.
2. Franco EE, Duarte-Franco, Ferenczy A. Cervical Cancer: Epidemiology, prevention and role of human Papilloma virus infection. Can Med Assoc J 2001;164:1017-1025.
3. Koutsky L, et al. A controlled trial of human Papillomavirus type 16 vaccine. NEJM 2002; 347(21): 1645-51.
4. Miller A, et al. Report on consensus conference on cervical cancer screening and management. Int J Cancer 2000;86:440-447.
5. Hakama M, Louhivuori K. A screening program for cervical cancer that worked. Cancer Surveillance 1988;7:403-416.
6. Cervical Cancer Screening Program. 2001 Annual Report. Vancouver: BC Cancer Agency, 2001:7.
7. Ontario Cervical Cancer Screening Program. Program report 1997-2000. Toronto: Cancer Care Ontario, 2002:24.
8. Miller A, Anderson G, Brisson J et al. Report of a National Workshop on Screening for Cancer of the Cervix. Can Med Assoc J 1991;145:1301-1325.
9. Saslow D, Runowicz C D, Solomon D, et al. American Cancer Society Guideline for the early detection of cervical neoplasia and cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 2002;52:342-362.
10. Anderson G, Benedet J L, Le Riche J C, et al. Invasive cancer of the cervix in British Columbia: a review of the demography and screening histories of 437 cases seen from 1985-1988. Obstet Gynecol 1992;80:1-4.
11. Therneau T, Grambsch P. Modelling Survival Data: Extending the Cox Model. New York: Springer, 2002.
12. Andersen P, Borgon O, Gill R D, Keiding N. Statistical Models Based on Counting Processes. 1991, New York: Springer Verlag.
13. Statistics Canada. Life Tables, Canada and Provinces 1990-1992. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 1995:38-39.
14. Davison A C, Hinkley D V. Bootstrap Methods and their Application. (Cambridge Series on Statistical and Probabilistic Mathematics) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
15. IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Cervical Cancer Screening Programmes. Screening for squamous cervical cancer: duration of low risk after negative results of cervical cytology and its implication for screening policies. BMJ 1986;293:659-64.
16. Sasieni P, Cuzick J, Lynch-Farmery E. Estimating the efficacy of screening by auditing histories of women with and without cervical cancer. Br J Cancer 1996;73:1001-5.
17. Miller M G, Sung H Y, Sawaya G F, et al. Screening interval and risk of invasive squamous cell cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol 2003;101:29-37.
18. Mitchell H, Medley G, Gordon I, Giles G. Cervical cytology reported as negative and risk of adenocarcinoma of the cervix: no strong evidence of benefits. Br J Cancer 1995;71:894-7.
19. Parboosingh E, Anderson G, Clarke E A, et al. Cervical Cancer Screening: Are the 1989 recommendations still valid? CMAJ 1996;154:1847-53.
20. Stuart G C, McGregor S E, Duggan MA, Nation J G. Review of the screening history of Alberta women with invasive cervical cancer. CMAJ 1997;157:513-19.
21. Ferenczy A, Franco E. Persistent human Papillomavirus infection and cervical neoplasia. Lancet Oncol 2002;3:11-16.
22. Sasieni P. Use of routine data to monitor and evaluate cervical screening. In: Duffy S, Hill C, Esteve J, eds. Quantitative methods for the evaluation of cancer screening. London: Arnold, 2001: 115-26.
23. Morrison B, Coldman A J, Boyes D A, Anderson G H. Forty years of repeated screening: the significence of carcinoma in situ. Br J Cancer 1996;74:814-19.
24. Weiss N. Case-control studies of the efficacy of screening tests designed to prevent the incidence of cancer. Am J Epidemiol 1999;149(1):1-4.
25. Hosek R, W Flanders, A Sasco. Bias in case-control studies of screening effectiveness. Am J Epidemiol 1996;143(2):193-201.
26. Etzioni R, N Weiss. Analysis of case-control studies of screening: impact of mispecifying the duration of detectable preclinical pathologic changes. AM J Epidemiol 1998;148(3):292-7.
27. Sasco A, N Day, S Walter. Case-control studies for the evaluation of screening. J Chronic Dis 1986;39(5):399-405.