Cervical screening and cervical cancer death among older women: A population-based, case-control study

American Journal of Epidemiology

Volumn 179, Issue 9, 2014, Pages 1107-1114

  Rustagi, Alison S ^a   Kamineni, Aruna ^a   Weinmann, Sheila ^a   Reed, Susan D ^a   Newcomb, Polly ^a   Weiss, Noel S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

case control studies; Papanicolaou smear; screening; uterine cervical neoplasms; women's health

Indexed keywords

AGE CLASS; CANCER; CYTOLOGY; DISEASE CONTROL; DISEASE INCIDENCE; ELDERLY POPULATION; HEALTH POLICY; HEALTH RISK; MORTALITY; REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH; TUMOR; WOMENS HEALTH;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SCREENING; CASE CONTROL STUDY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; ETHNICITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MARRIAGE; MIDDLE AGED; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; RACE DIFFERENCE; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SMOKING; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

UNITED STATES;

HUMAN PAPILLOMAVIRUS;

CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; PAPANICOLAOU SMEAR; SCREENING; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; WOMEN'S HEALTH;

AGE FACTORS; AGED; BODY MASS INDEX; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; DNA, VIRAL; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PAPILLOMAVIRIDAE; SMOKING; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS; UNITED STATES; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84899571210     PISSN: 00029262     EISSN: 14766256     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwu035     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Day NE. Screening for cancer of the cervix. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1989;43(2):103-106.
2. Gustafsson L, Pontén J, Zack M, et al. International incidence rates of invasive cervical cancer after introduction of cytological screening. Cancer Causes Control. 1997;8(5): 755-763.
3. Sasieni P, Castanon A, Cuzick J. Effectiveness of cervical screening with age: population based case-control study of prospectively recorded data. BMJ. 2009;339:b2968.
4. Andrae B, Kemetli L, Sparén P, et al. Screening-preventable cervical cancer risks: evidence from a nationwide audit in Sweden. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100(9):622-629.
5. Lönnberg S, Anttila A, Luostarinen T, et al. Age-specific effectiveness of the Finnish cervical cancer screening programme. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2012;21(8): 1354-1361.
6. Kamineni A,Weinmann S, Shy KK, et al. Efficacy of screening in preventing cervical cancer among older women. Cancer Causes Control. 2013;24(9):1653-1660.
7. Morrison AS. Screening in Chronic Disease. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1992.
8. Andrae B, Andersson TM, Lambert PC, et al. Screening and cervical cancer cure: population based cohort study. BMJ. 2012; 344:e900.
9. Lönnberg S, Nieminen P, Luostarinen T, et al. Mortality audit of the Finnish cervical cancer screening program. Int J Cancer. 2013;132(9):2134-2140.
10. Weiss NS, McKnight B, Stevens NG. Approaches to the analysis of case-control studies of the efficacy of screening for cancer. Am J Epidemiol. 1992;135(7):817-823.
11. Weiss NS, Lazovich D. Case-control studies of screening efficacy: the use of persons newly diagnosed with cancer who later sustain an unfavorable outcome. Am J Epidemiol. 1996; 143(4):319-322.
12. Etzioni RD, Weiss NS. Analysis of case-control studies of screening: impact of misspecifying the duration of detectable preclinical pathologic changes. Am J Epidemiol. 1998;148(3): 292-297.
13. IARC Working Group on Cervical Cancer Screening. Screening for squamous cervical cancer-the duration of low risk following negative results in cervical cytology test: introduction. IARC Sci Publ. 1986;(76):15-24.
14. Sasieni P, Adams J, Cuzick J. Benefit of cervical screening at different ages: evidence from the UK audit of screening histories. Br J Cancer. 2003;89(1):88-93.
15. McCredie MR, Sharples KJ, Paul C, et al. Natural history of cervical neoplasia and risk of invasive cancer in women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2008;9(5):425-434.
16. Prentice R. Use of the logistic model in retrospective studies. Biometrics. 1976;32(3):599-606.
17. Lynn HS, McCulloch CE. When does it pay to break the matches for analysis of a matched-pairs design? Biometrics. 1992;48(2):397-409.
18. Saslow D, Solomon D, Lawson HW, et al. 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. 2012;62(3):147-172.
19. Moyer VA; U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for cervical cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156(12): 880-891.
20. Committee on Practice Bulletins-Gynecology. ACOG practice bulletin no. 131: screening for cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120(5):1222-1238.
21. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG practice bulletin. Diagnosis and treatment of cervical carcinomas. Number 35, May 2002. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2002; 78(1):79-91.
22. Sasieni P, Castanon A, Cuzick J. Screening and adenocarcinoma of the cervix. Int J Cancer. 2009;125(3): 525-529.
23. Walter SD, Clarke EA, Hatcher J, et al. A comparison of physician and patient reports of Pap smear histories. J Clin Epidemiol. 1988;41(4):401-410.
24. McKenna MT, Speers M, Mallin K, et al. Agreement between patient self-reports and medical records for Pap smear histories. Am J Prev Med. 1992;8(5):287-291.
25. Gordon NP, Hiatt RA, Lampert DI. Concordance of self-reported data and medical record audit for six cancer screening procedures. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85(7): 566-570.
26. Rauscher GH, Johnson TP, Cho YI, et al. Accuracy of self-reported cancer-screening histories: a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008;17(4):748-757.
27. International Collaboration of Epidemiological Studies of Cervical Cancer. 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. 2007;120(4):885-891.
28. International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans, Vol.
29. Human Papillomaviruses. Lyon, France: IARC Press; 2007.
30. International Collaboration of Epidemiological Studies of Cervical CancerAppleby P, Beral V, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix and tobacco smoking: collaborative reanalysis of individual data on 13,541 women with carcinoma of the cervix and 23,017 women without carcinoma of the cervix from 23 epidemiological studies. Int J Cancer. 2006;118(6): 1481-1495.
31. Schiffman M, Wheeler CM, Castle PE, et al. Human papillomavirus DNA remains detectable longer than related cervical cytologic abnormalities. J Infect Dis. 2002;186(8): 1169-1172.
32. Khan MJ, Castle PE, Lorincz AT, et al. The elevated 10-year risk of cervical precancer and cancer in women with human papillomavirus (HPV) type 16 or 18 and the possible utility of type-specific HPV testing in clinical practice. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97(14):1072-1079.
33. Mayrand MH, Duarte-Franco E, Rodrigues I, et al. Human papillomavirus DNA versus Papanicolaou screening tests for cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(16):1579-1588.
34. Ronco G, Giorgi-Rossi P, Carozzi F, et al. Efficacy of human papillomavirus testing for the detection of invasive cervical cancers and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(3):249-257.
35. Saint M, Gildengorin G, Sawaya GF. Current cervical neoplasia screening practices of obstetrician/gynecologists in the US. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192(2):414-421.
36. National Center for Health Statistics. Deaths: Final Data for 2010. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; 2013. (National vital statistics reports, volume 61, issue 4) (DHHS publication no. (PHS) 2013-1120).