Assessing the gain in diagnostic performance when two visual inspection methods are combined for cervical cancer prevention

Journal of Medical Screening

Volumn 14, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 144-150

  Muwonge, Richard ^a   Walter, Stephen D ^b   Wesley, Ramani S ^c   Basu, Partha ^d   Shastri, Surendra S ^e   Thara, Somanathan ^c   Mbalawa, Charles Gombe ^f   Sankaranarayanan, Rengaswamy ^a  

^a INTERNATIONAL AGENCY FOR RESEARCH ON CANCER   (France)

^b MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c REGIONAL CANCER CENTRE   (India)

^d CHITTARANJAN NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (India)

^e TATA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL   (India)

^f University Hospital Marien Ngouabi   (Congo)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACETIC ACID; LUGOL;

ADULT; AGED; ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; BURKINA FASO; CANCER PREVENTION; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONGO; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; GUINEA; HUMAN; INDIA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALI; MULTICENTER STUDY; NIGER; PREVALENCE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; VISION;

ACETIC ACID; ADULT; AGED; BURKINA FASO; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; COLPOSCOPY; CONGO; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; GUINEA; HUMANS; INDIA; IODIDES; MALI; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; NIGER; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 34848889947     PISSN: 09691413     EISSN: 14755793     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/096914107782066158     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, et al. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin 2005;55:74-108
2. Sankaranarayanan R, Basu P, Wesley RS, et al. Accuracy of visual screening for cervical neoplasia: results from an IARC multicentre study in India and Africa. Int J Cancer 2004;110:907-13
3. Bhatla N, Mukhopadhyay A, Joshi S, et al. Visual inspection for cervical cancer screening: evaluation by doctor versus paramedical worker. Indian J Cancer 2004;41:32-6
4. Sankaranarayanan R, Wesley R, Thara S, et al. Test characteristics of visual inspection with 4% acetic acid (VIA) and Lugol's iodine (VILI) in cervical cancer screening in Kerala, India. Int J Cancer 2003;106:404-8
5. Doh AS, Nkele NN, Achu P, et al. Visual inspection with acetic acid and cytology as screening methods for cervical lesions in Cameroon. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2005;89:167-73
6. Sankaranarayanan R, Nene BM, Dinshaw KA, et al. A cluster randomized controlled trial of visual, cytology and human papillomavirus screening for cancer of the cervix in rural India. Int J Cancer 2005;116:617-23
7. Jeronimo J, Morales O, Horna J, et al. Visual inspection with acetic acid for cervical cancer screening outside of low-resource settings. Rev Panam Salud Publica 2005;17:1-5
8. Visual inspection with acetic acid for cervical-cancer screening: test qualities in a primary-care setting. University of Zimbabwe/JHPIEGO Cervical Cancer Project. Lancet 1999;353:869-73
9. Belinson JL, Pretorius RG, Zhang WH, et al. Cervical cancer screening by simple visual inspection after acetic acid. Obstet Gynecol 2001;98:441-4
10. Belinson J, Qiao YL, Pretorius R, et al. Shanxi Province Cervical Cancer Screening Study: a cross-sectional comparative trial of multiple techniques to detect cervical neoplasia. Gynecol Oncol 2001;83:439-44
11. Wright Jr TC, Denny L, Kuhn L, et al. Use of visual screening methods for cervical cancer screening. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 2002;29:701-34
12. Denny L, Kuhn L, Pollack A, et al. Direct visual inspection for cervical cancer screening: an analysis of factors influencing test performance. Cancer 2002;94:1699-707
13. Denny L, Kuhn L, Pollack A, et al. Evaluation of alternative methods of cervical cancer screening for resource-poor settings. Cancer 2000;89:826-33
14. De Vuyst H, Claeys P, Njiru S, et al. Comparison of pap smear, visual inspection with acetic acid, human papillomavirus DNA-PCR testing and cervicography. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2005;89:120-6
15. Shastri SS, Dinshaw K, Amin G, et al. Concurrent evaluation of visual, cytological and HPV testing as screening methods for the early detection of cervical neoplasia in Mumbai, India. Bull World Health Organ 2005;83:186-94
16. Macaskill P, Walter SD, Irwig L, et al. Assessing the gain in diagnostic performance when combining two diagnostic tests. Stat Med 2002;21:2527-46
17. Sankaranarayanan R, Wesley R. A Practical Manual on Visual Screening for Cervical Neoplasia (41). Lyon, France: IARCPress, IARC Technical Publication, 2003
18. Singer A, Monaghan JM. Lower Genital Tract Precancer: Colposcopy, Pathology and Treatment. 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell Science Ltd, 2000
19. Legood R, Gray AM, Mahe C, et al. Screening for cervical cancer in India: how much will it cost? A trial based analysis of the cost per case detected. Int J Cancer 2005;117:981-7
20. Sarian LO, Derchain SF, Naud P, et al. Evaluation of visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), Lugol's iodine (VILI), cervical cytology and HPV testing as cervical screening tools in Latin America. This report refers to partial results from the LAMS (Latin AMerican Screening) study. J Med Screen 2005;12:142-9
21. Sankaranarayanan R, Rajkumar R, Theresa R, et al. Initial results from a randomized trial of cervical visual screening in rural south India. Int J Cancer 2004;109:461-7