Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Mar 1;146(5):1230-1240.
doi: 10.1002/ijc.32416. Epub 2019 Jun 3.

Cervical cancer case-control audit: Results from routine evaluation of a nationwide cervical screening program

Affiliations

Cervical cancer case-control audit: Results from routine evaluation of a nationwide cervical screening program

Jiangrong Wang et al. Int J Cancer. .

Abstract

Our study used a refined case-control cervical cancer Audit framework to investigate effectiveness of cervical screening, with measures of three screening failures: irregular-participation, cervical cancer developed after cytological abnormalities and after normal screening results. The register-based study included 4,254 cervical cancer cases diagnosed in Sweden during 2002-2011, and 30 population-based controls per case. We used conditional logistic regression models to examine relative risks of cervical cancer in relation to screening participation and screening results in the past two screening rounds from 6 months before cancer diagnosis. We found that women unscreened in past two screening rounds showed four times increased risk of cervical cancer compared to women screened in time (OR = 4.1, 95% CI = 3.8-4.5), and women unscreened in the previous round but screened in the most recent round also showed a statistically significantly elevated risk (OR = 1.6, 95% CI = 1.5-1.8). Women having abnormality in previous two rounds exhibited higher risk of cervical cancer compared to women screened with normal results, while having normal results in the subsequent round after the abnormality also yielded an increased risk (OR = 4.0, 95% CI = 3.2-5.1). Being screened with only normal results was associated with 89% risk reduction for squamous cell cancer, compared to women unscreened, but only 60% reduction for adenocarcinoma. Our findings emphasize the importance of routine participation in cervical screening and suggest that management of abnormalities, as well as sensitivity of the test, warrants improvement especially for preventing cervical adenocarcinoma. The Audit framework serves as routine evaluation model and the findings benchmark for future evaluation of changes in screening practice.

Keywords: cervical cancer; cervical screening; cytology; prevention.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study population.

References

    1. Schiffman M, Castle PE, Jeronimo J, et al. Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. Lancet 2007;370:890–907. - PubMed
    1. Lynge E, Rygaard C, Baillet MV‐P, et al. Cervical cancer screening at crossroads. APMIS 2014;122:667–73. - PubMed
    1. Lynge E. Screening for cancer of the cervix uteri. World J Surg 1989;13:71–8. - PubMed
    1. International Agency for Research on Cancer . IARC Handbooks of Cancer Prevention: Cervix Cancer Screening. Lyon, France: IARC, 2005. [cited 2019 May 26]; Available from: https://www.iarc.fr/en/publications/pdfs-online/prev/handbook10/HANDBOOK....
    1. Vaccarella S, Franceschi S, Engholm G, et al. 50 years of screening in the Nordic countries: quantifying the effects on cervical cancer incidence. Br J Cancer 2014;111:965–9. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms