Differences in screening history, tumour characteristics and survival between women with screen-detected versus not screen-detected cervical cancer in the east of The Netherlands, 1992-2001

European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology

Volumn 139, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 204-209

  van der Aa, Maaike A ^a   Schutter, Eltjo M J ^b   Looijen Salamon, Monika ^c   Martens, Jolise E ^d   Siesling, Sabine ^a  

^a Integraal Kankercentrum Stedendriehoek Twente   (Netherlands)

^b MEDISCH SPECTRUM TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^c Laboratory of Pathology Apeldoorn   (Netherlands)

^d DEVENTER HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Cervical cancer; Pap smear history; Screening programme; Treatment of patients with suspicious smears and follow up suboptimal

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER REGISTRY; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURVIVAL; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NETHERLANDS; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER;

EID: 47849124618     PISSN: 03012115     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2007.10.017     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Gustafsson L., Ponten J., Zack M., and Adami H.O. International incidence rates of invasive cervical cancer after introduction of cytological screening. Cancer Causes Control 8 5 (1997 Sep) 755-763
2. Hanselaar A.G. Criteria for organized cervical screening programs. Special emphasis on The Netherlands program. Acta Cytol 46 4 (2002 Jul) 619-629
3. Gatta G., Capocaccia R., Hakulinen T., Sant M., Verdecchia A., De A.G., et al. Variations in survival for invasive cervical cancer among European women, 1978-89. EUROCARE Working Group. Cancer Causes Control 10 6 (1999 Dec) 575-581
4. Signaleringscommissie Kanker van K.W.F.K. Kanker in Nederland; trends, prognoses en implicaties voor zorgvraag [in Dutch] (2004), Drukkerij van den Boogaard, Oisterwijk
5. van Ballegooijen M., and Hermens R. Cervical cancer screening in The Netherlands. Eur J Cancer 36 17 (2000 Nov) 2244-2246
6. Visser O., Coebergh J.W.W., Dijck van J.A.A.M., and Siesling S. Incidence of cancer in The Netherlands, 1998 (2002), Vereniging van Integrale Kankercentra, Utrecht
7. Stichting Bevolkingsonderzoek Baarmoederhalskanker Stedendriehoek (SBBS). Yearly report of the cervical screening agency in the region of the Stedendriehoek [in Dutch]. Apeldoorn: SBBS; 2001.
8. Stichting Bevolkingsonderzoek Baarmoederhalskanker Twente (SBBT). Yearly report of the cervical screening agency in the region of Twente [in Dutch]. Enschede: SBBT; 2001.
9. Fritz A., Percy C., Jack A., Shanmugaratnam K., Sobin L., Parkin D.M., et al. International classification of diseases for oncology. third ed. (2000), WHO, Geneva
10. In: Hermanek P., Hutter R., Sobin L., Wagner G., and Wittekind C. (Eds). TNM Atlas. fourth ed. (1997), UICC; Springer-Verlag, Berlin
11. Classes in oncology: George Nicholas Papanicolaou's new cancer diagnosis presented at the Third Race Betterment Conference, Battle Creek, Michigan, January 2-6, 1928, and published in the Proceedings of the Conference. CA Cancer J Clin 1973 May;23(3):174-9.
12. van Ballegooijen M., van den Akker-van M., Patnick J., Lynge E., Arbyn M., Anttila A., 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 17 (2000 Nov) 2177-2188
13. Ederer F., and Heise H. Instructions to IBM 6500 programmers in processing survival computations. Methodological note no. 10, End Results Evaluation Section. (1959), Nat Cancer Inst, Bethesda MD
14. Dickman P.W., Sloggett A., Hills M., and Hakulinen T. Regression models for relative survival. Stat Med 23 1 (2004 Jan 15) 51-64
15. Bielska-Lasota M., Inghelmann R., van de Poll-Franse L.V., and Capocaccia R. Trends in cervical cancer survival in Europe, 1983-1994: a population-based study. Gynecol Oncol (2007 Mar 29)
16. Sparen P., Gustafsson L., Friberg L.G., Ponten J., Bergstrom R., and Adami H.O. Improved control of invasive cervical cancer in Sweden over six decades by earlier clinical detection and better treatment. J Clin Oncol 13 3 (1995 Mar) 715-725
17. Smith H.O., Tiffany M.F., Qualls C.R., and Key C.R. The rising incidence of adenocarcinoma relative to squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix in the United States-a 24-year population-based study. Gynecol Oncol 78 2 (2000 Aug) 97-105
18. Bulk S., Visser O., Rozendaal L., Verheijen R.H., and Meijer C.J. Cervical cancer in The Netherlands 1989-1998: decrease of squamous cell carcinoma in older women, increase of adenocarcinoma in younger women. Int J Cancer 113 6 (2005 Mar 1) 1005-1009
19. Sasieni P., and Adams J. Changing rates of adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinoma of the cervix in England. Lancet 357 9267 (2001 May 12) 1490-1493
20. Nieminen P., Kallio M., and Hakama M. The effect of mass screening on incidence and mortality of squamous and adenocarcinoma of cervix uteri. Obstet Gynecol 85 6 (1995 Jun) 1017-1021
21. Sigurdsson K. Effect of organized screening on the risk of cervical cancer. Evaluation of screening activity in Iceland, 1964-1991. Int J Cancer 54 4 (1993 Jun 19) 563-570
22. Kreuger F.A., and Beerman H. The screening history of women with cervical cancer in the Rotterdam area. Eur J Epidemiol 16 7 (2000) 641-645
23. Bearman D.M., MacMillan J.P., and Creasman W.T. Papanicolaou smear history of patients developing cervical cancer: an assessment of screening protocols. Obstet Gynecol 69 2 (1987 Feb) 151-155
24. Janerich D.T., Hadjimichael O., Schwartz P.E., Lowell D.M., Meigs J.W., Merino M.J., et al. The screening histories of women with invasive cervical cancer, Connecticut. Am J Public Health 85 6 (1995 Jun) 791-794
25. Minge L., Fleming M., VanGeem T., and Bishop J.W. AutoCyte Prep system vs. conventional cervical cytology. Comparison based on 2156 cases. J Reprod Med 45 3 (2000 Mar) 179-184
26. Ferenczy A., Robitaille J., Franco E., Arseneau J., Richart R.M., and Wright T.C. Conventional cervical cytologic smears vs. ThinPrep smears. A paired comparison study on cervical cytology. Acta Cytol 40 6 (1996 Nov) 1136-1142
27. Klinkhamer P.J., Meerding W.J., Rosier P.F., and Hanselaar A.G. Liquid-based cervical cytology. Cancer 99 5 (2003 Oct 25) 263-271
28. Voordijk-van der Ben M., and Buntinx F. Cervical smears taken by physicians' assistants are of lesser quality than smears taken by family physicians, but almost as good as the national average. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 144 2 (2000 Jan 8) 74-77
29. Rebolj M., van B.M., Berkers L.M., and Habbema D. Monitoring a national cancer prevention program: successful changes in cervical cancer screening in The Netherlands. Int J Cancer 120 4 (2007 Feb 15) 806-812
30. Lawson H.W., Lee N.C., Thames S.F., Henson R., and Miller D.S. Cervical cancer screening among low-income women: results of a national screening program, 1991-1995. Obstet Gynecol 92 5 (1998 Nov) 745-752
31. van Leeuwen A.W., de Nooijer P., and Hop W.C. Screening for cervical carcinoma. Cancer 105 October (5) (2005) 270-276
32. Solomon D., Davey D., Kurman R., Moriarty A., O'Connor D., Prey M., et al. The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 287 16 (2002 Apr 24) 2114-2119