Trade-offs in cervical cancer prevention: balancing benefits and risks
- PMID: 18809815
- PMCID: PMC2746633
- DOI: 10.1001/archinte.168.17.1881
Trade-offs in cervical cancer prevention: balancing benefits and risks
Abstract
Background: New screening and vaccination technologies will provide women with more options for cervical cancer prevention. Because the risk of cervical cancer diminishes with effective routine screening, women may wish to consider additional attributes, such as the likelihood of false-positive results and diagnostic procedures for mild abnormalities likely to resolve without intervention in their screening choices.
Methods: We used an empirically calibrated simulation model of cervical cancer in the United States to assess the benefits and potential risks associated with prevention strategies differing by primary screening test, triage test for abnormal results (cytologic testing, human papillomavirus [HPV] DNA test), and screening frequency. Outcomes included colposcopy referrals, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) types 1 and 2 or 3, lifetime cancer risk, and quality-adjusted life expectancy.
Results: Across strategies, colposcopy referrals and diagnostic workups varied 3-fold, although diagnostic rates of CIN 2 or 3 were similar and 95% of positive screening test results were for mild abnormalities likely to resolve on their own. For a representative group of a thousand 20-year-old women undergoing triennial screening for 10 years, we expect 1038 colposcopy referrals (7 CIN 2 or 3 diagnoses) from combined cytologic and HPV DNA testing and fewer than 200 referrals (6-7 CIN 2 or 3 diagnoses) for strategies that use triage testing. Similarly, for a thousand 40-year-old women, combined cytologic and HPV DNA testing led to 489 referrals (9 CIN 2 or 3), whereas alternative strategies resulted in fewer than 150 referrals (7-8 CIN 2 or 3). Using cytologic testing followed by triage testing in younger women minimizes both diagnostic workups and positive HPV test results, whereas in older women diagnostic workups are minimized with HPV DNA testing followed by cytologic triage testing.
Conclusions: Clinically relevant information highlighting trade-offs among cervical cancer prevention strategies allows for inclusion of personal preferences into women's decision making about screening and provides additional dimensions to the construction of clinical guidelines.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Choosing wisely: a model-based analysis evaluating the trade-offs in cancer benefit and diagnostic referrals among alternative HPV testing strategies in Norway.Br J Cancer. 2017 Sep 5;117(6):783-790. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2017.248. Epub 2017 Aug 3. Br J Cancer. 2017. PMID: 28772279 Free PMC article.
-
Age-specific evaluation of primary human papillomavirus screening vs conventional cytology in a randomized setting.J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009 Dec 2;101(23):1612-23. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djp367. Epub 2009 Nov 9. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009. PMID: 19903804 Clinical Trial.
-
[A study of cervical cancer screening algorithms].Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi. 2010 Jun;32(6):420-4. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi. 2010. PMID: 20819481 Chinese.
-
Screening for Cervical Cancer With High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Testing: A Systematic Evidence Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force [Internet].Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2018 Aug. Report No.: 17-05231-EF-1. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2018 Aug. Report No.: 17-05231-EF-1. PMID: 30256575 Free Books & Documents. Review.
-
Screening for Cervical Cancer: A Decision Analysis for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force [Internet].Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2011 May. Report No.: 11-05157-EF-1. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2011 May. Report No.: 11-05157-EF-1. PMID: 22553886 Free Books & Documents. Review.
Cited by
-
Negative loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) following cervical biopsy diagnosis of high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion.Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2021 Dec 15;14(12):1148-1154. eCollection 2021. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2021. PMID: 35027995 Free PMC article.
-
Cervical cytopathological changes in pregnancy: An experience from a low resource setting.Ann Afr Med. 2021 Jul-Sep;20(3):212-221. doi: 10.4103/aam.aam_47_20. Ann Afr Med. 2021. PMID: 34558451 Free PMC article.
-
Providing more balanced information on the harms and benefits of cervical cancer screening: A randomized survey among US and Norwegian women.Prev Med Rep. 2021 Jun 23;23:101452. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2021.101452. eCollection 2021 Sep. Prev Med Rep. 2021. PMID: 34221852 Free PMC article.
-
Public Health Interventions with Harms and Benefits: A Graphical Framework for Evaluating Tradeoffs.Med Decis Making. 2020 Nov;40(8):978-989. doi: 10.1177/0272989X20960458. Epub 2020 Sep 30. Med Decis Making. 2020. PMID: 32996356 Free PMC article.
-
Choosing wisely: a model-based analysis evaluating the trade-offs in cancer benefit and diagnostic referrals among alternative HPV testing strategies in Norway.Br J Cancer. 2017 Sep 5;117(6):783-790. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2017.248. Epub 2017 Aug 3. Br J Cancer. 2017. PMID: 28772279 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Ries LAG, Melbert D, Krapcho M, et al. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2004. National Cancer Institute; Bethesda, MD: [Accessed June 2006]. http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2004/
-
- American College of Obstetricians-Gynecologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin: Cervical Cytology Screening, Number 45, August 2003. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2003;83(2):237–247. - PubMed
-
- Wright TCJ, Schiffman M, Solomon D, et al. Interim guidance for the use of human papillomavirus DNA testing as an adjunct to cervical cytology for screening. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;103(2):304–309. - PubMed
-
- Smith RA, Cokkinides V, Eyre HJ. Cancer screening in the United States, 2007: a review of current guidelines, practices, and prospects. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007;57(2):90–104. - PubMed
-
- Screening for cervical cancer, topic page. US Preventive Services Task Force, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; Rockville, MD. : Jan2003. [Accessed June 2006]. http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/uspstf/uspscerv.htm.
