The cervical cancer epidemic that screening has prevented in the UK

Lancet

Volumn 364, Issue 9430, 2004, Pages 249-256

  Peto, Prof Julian ^a,b   Gilham, Prof Clare ^b   Fletcher, Olivia ^a   Matthews, Fiona E ^c  

^a LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

^b INSTITUTE OF CANCER RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER PREVENTION; CANCER SCREENING; DEATH; EPIDEMIC; FEMALE; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TIME SERIES ANALYSIS; UNITED KINGDOM; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER;

EID: 3242723235     PISSN: 01406736     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)16674-9     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Levi F, Lucchini F, Negri E, Franceschi S, la Vecchia C. Cervical cancer mortality in young women in Europe: patterns and trends. Eur J Cancer. 36:2000;2266-2271
2. Parkin DM, Nguyen-Dinh X, Day NE. The impact of screening on the incidence of cervical cancer in England and Wales. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 92:1985;150-157
3. Walboomers JMM, Jacobs MV, Manos MM, et al. Human papillomavirus is a necessary cause of invasive cervical cancer worldwide. J Pathol. 189:1999;12-19
4. Simms I, Fairley CK. Epidemiology of genital warts in England and Wales: 1971 to 1994. Genitourin Med. 73:1997;365-367
5. Dillner J. Trends over time in the incidence of cervical neoplasia in comparison to trends over time in human papillomavirus infection. J Clin Virol. 1-2:2000;7-23
6. Nobbenhuis MAE, Helmerhorst TJM, van den Brule AJC, et al. Cytological regression and clearance of high-risk human papillomavirus in women with abnormal cervical smear. Lancet. 358:2001;1782-1783
7. Kitchener HC, Wheeler P, Desai M, et al. The ARTISTIC Trial: A Randomised Trial In Screening To Improve Cytology. 21st International Papillomavirus Conference 2004, Feb 20-26, 2004; Mexico City, Mexico: abstr 268.
8. Deacon JM, Evans CD, Yule R, et al. Sexual behaviour and smoking as determinants of cervical HPV infection and of CIN3 among those infected: a case-control study nested within the Manchester cohort. Br J Cancer. 83:2000;1565-1572
9. Peto J, Gilham C, Deacon J, et al. Cervical HPV infection and neoplasia in a large population based prospective study: the Manchester cohort. Br J Cancer (in press).
10. Peyton CL, Schiffman M, Lorincz AT, et al. Comparison of PCR- and hybrid capture-based human papillomavirus detection systems using multiple cervical specimen collection strategies. J Clin Microbiol. 36:1998;3248-3254
11. Smith JS, Green J, Berrington de Gonzalez A, et al. Cervical cancer and use of hormonal contraceptives: a systematic review. Lancet. 361:2003;1159-1167
12. Castellsague X, Bosch FX, Munoz N. Environmental co-factors in HPV carcinogenesis. Virus Res. 89:2002;191-199
13. Office for National Statistics. Social trends, no 14. London: HMSO, 1984.
14. Department of Health. Cervical cytology 1992-93: summary information from form KC53, England. London: Department of Health, 1994.
15. Office of National Statistics. Cervical screening programme, England 2000-01: statistical bulletin 2001/22. London: Department of Health, 2001.
16. Sasieni P, Adams J. Effect of screening on cervical cancer mortality in England and Wales: analysis of trends with an age period cohort model. BMJ. 318:1999;1244-1245
17. WHO. WHO statistical information system (WHOSIS). http://www3.who.int/ whosis/menu.cfm (accessed Oct 17, 2003).
18. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical methods in cancer research, vol II: the design and analysis of cohort studies - IARC scientific publications no 82. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 1987.
19. van Ballegooijen M, van den Akker-van Marle E, Patnick J, et al. Overview of important cervical cancer screening process values in European Union (EU) countries, and tentative predictions of the corresponding effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Eur J Cancer. 36:2000;2177-2188
20. Parkin DM, Whelan SL, Ferlay J, Raymond L, Young J, eds. Cancer incidence in five continents, vol VII: IARC scientific publications no 143. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2000.
21. Botting B, Dunnell K. Trends in fertility and contraception in the last quarter of the 20th century. Popul Trends. 100:2000;32-39
22. Johnson AM, Wadsworth J, Wellings K, Field J. Sexual attitudes and lifestyles. 1994;Blackwell Scientific Press, Oxford
23. Swerdlow A, dos Santos Silva I, Doll R. Cancer incidence and mortality in England and Wales: trends and risk factors. 2001;Oxford University Press, Oxford
24. PHLS, DHSS&PS, and the Scottish ISD(D)5 Collaborative Group. Sexually transmitted infections in the UK: new episodes seen at genitourinary medicine clinics, 1995-2000. London: Public Health Laboratory Service, 2001. Available at: http://www.hpa.org.uk/infections/topics_az/hiv_and_sti/publications/ sti_report2001.pdf (accessed March 9, 2004).
25. Office for National Statistics. Social trends, no 32. London: Stationery Office, 2002. Available at http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_social/ Social_Trends32/Social_Trends32.pdf (accessed March 9, 2004).
26. Redburn JC, Murphy MFG. Hysterectomy prevalence and adjusted cervical and uterine cancer rates in England and Wales. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 108:2001;388-395
27. Green J, Berrington de Gonzalez A, Sweetland S, et al. Risk factors for adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix in women aged 20-44 years: the UK national case-control study of cervical cancer. Br J Cancer. 89:2003;2078-2086
28. Green JA, Kirwan JM, Tierney JF, et al. Survival and recurrence after concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy for cancer of the uterine cervix: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 358:2001;781-786
29. Koss LG, Stewart FW, Foote FW, Jordan MJ, Bader GM, Day E. Some histological aspects of behavior of epidermoid carcinoma in situ and related lesions of the uterine cervix. Cancer. 16:1963;1160-1211
30. Elfgren K, Jacobs M, Walboomers JM, Meijer CJ, Dillner J. Rate of human papillomavirus clearance after treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Obstet Gynecol. 100:2002;965-971
31. McIndoe WA, McLean MR, Jones RW, Mullins PR. The invasive potential of carcinoma in situ of the cervix. Obstet Gynecol. 64:1984;451-458
32. Kinlen LJ, Spriggs AI. Women with positive cervical smears but without surgical intervention: a follow-up study. Lancet. 2:1978;463-465
33. Sasieni P, Adams J, Cuzick J. Benefit of cervical screening at different ages: evidence from the UK audit of screening histories. Br J Cancer. 89:2003;88-93
34. Anttila A, Pukkala E, Soderman B, Kallio M, Nieminen P, Hakama M. Effect of organised screening on cervical cancer incidence and mortality in Finland, 1963-1995: Recent increase in cervical cancer incidence. Int J Cancer. 83:1999;59-65
35. Miller AB. The (in)efficiency of cervical screening in Europe. Eur J Cancer. 38:2002;321-326
36. Sasieni P, Adams J. Changing rates of adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinoma of the cervix in England. Lancet. 357:2001;1490-1493
37. Quinn M, Babb P, Jones J, Allen E, on behalf of the UK Association of Cancer Registries. Effect of screening on incidence of and mortality from cancer of cervix in England: evaluation based on routinely collected statistics. BMJ 1999; 318: 904-08.
38. Lea R. Healthcare in the UK: the need for reform. 2000;Institute of Directors, London
39. Raffle AE, Alden B, Mackenzie EFD. Detection rates for abnormal cervical smears: what are we screening for? Lancet. 345:1995;1469-1473
40. Raffle AE, Alden B, Quinn M, Babb PJ, Brett MT. Outcomes of screening to prevent cancer: analysis of cumulative incidence of cervical abnormality and modelling of cases and deaths prevented. BMJ. 326:2003;901
41. van den Akker-van Marle ME, van Ballegooijen M, Habbema JDF. Low risk of cervical cancer during a long period after negative screening in the Netherlands. Br J Cancer. 88:2003;1054-1057
42. IARC Working Group on 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. 293:1986;659-664