A world without cervical cancer is within our reach

Adherence and Correlates of Cervical Cancer Screening Among East African Immigrant Women in Washington State

INTRODUCTION

Cervical cancer screening (CCS) among East African immigrants (EAI) in the USA is under explored. This study aimed to investigate adherence to CCS and its correlates among EAI.

METHODS

We identified 1664 EAI women (25-65 years) with ≥ 1 primary care clinic visit(s) between 2017 and 2018, using University of Washington (UW) Medicine electronic health record data. CCS adherence was defined as Pap testing within 3 years or human papillomavirus/Pap co-testing within 5 years. We used Poisson regression with robust standard errors to cross-sectionally estimate associations with correlates of adherence. Twelve-month screening uptake was also evaluated among overdue women.

RESULTS

CCS adherence was 63%. Factors associated with higher adherence included older age (adjusted prevalence ratios [APRs]:1.47:95%CI:1.14-1.90, 1.38:95%CI:1.05-1.80, respectively, for ages 30-39 and 40-49 vs 25-29 years), longer duration of care at UW Medicine (APR:1.22:95%CI:1.03-1.45, comparing > 10 vs < 5 years), higher visit frequency (APR:1.23:95%CI:1.04-1.44, 1.46:95%CI:1.24-1.72, respectively, for 3-5 and ≥ 6 vs 1-2 visits), index visit in an obstetrics-gynecology clinic (APR:1.26:95%CI:1.03-1.55, vs family practice), having an assigned primary care provider (APR:1.35: 95%CI:1.02-1.79), breast cancer screening adherence (APR:1.66: 95%CI:1.27-2.17), and colorectal cancer screening adherence (APR:1.59:95%CI:1.24-2.03). Low BMI was associated with lower adherence (APR:0.50:95%CI:0.26-0.96, comparing < 18.5 kg/m2 vs 18.5-24.9 kg/m2). Among 608 (37%) overdue women, 9% were screened in the subsequent 12 months. Having commercial health insurance vs Medicare/Medicaid was associated with higher uptake (adjusted risk ratio:2.44:95%CI:1.15-5.18).

CONCLUSION

CCS adherence among EAI was lower than the national average of 80%. Interventions focused on increasing healthcare access/utilization or leveraging healthcare encounters to address barriers could increase CCS in EAIs.

Precision Prevention: The 2019 ASCCP Risk-Based Management Consensus Guidelines for Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Tests and Cancer Precursors

The approach to cervical cancer prevention has evolved significantly over the past two decades. HPV immunization has decreased the specificity of screening modalities and HPV-based testing has been replacing our previously successful morphology-only approach. Additionally, there is much more emphasis on providing precision prevention, rather than the previously used “one-fits-all” management strategies. A number of new biomarkers are entering clinical practice and being integrated into cervical cancer screening and management in order to enable a more personalized assessment of the risk for precancer/cancer for an individual patient. The 2019 ASCCP Risk-Based Management Consensus Guidelines expand on the concept of “equal management for equal risk”. They consider a patient’s history in addition to current test results to provide recommendations for increased surveillance/treatment in patients at higher risk for CIN3+ while minimizing interventions for lower-risk patients who have new versus persistent HPV infection. Clinical management decisions are based on immediate risk and 5-year risk estimates for CIN3+, which are determined by referencing an extensive risk table compiled by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). The course of action for a given patient is recommended by comparison of the risk in the risk database, to the predetermined clinical action thresholds. These guidelines address the need for simplification and offer some stability for the provider while being conducive to the incorporation of anticipated continued technologic advances in methods for cervical cancer prevention. Their enduring nature will allow for changes needed based on risk reduction as HPV vaccination uptake increases and vaccinated women reach screening age. Similarly, the design allows for the addition of new tests into the risk assessment calculations after their approval by applicable regulatory agencies and review/consensus approval by the ASCCP new technology and enduring guidelines workgroups. As cytopathologists, we must be familiar with the scientific advancements in primary and secondary prevention, evolving screening and management guidelines, and participate actively in the multidisciplinary approach for the prevention of cervical cancer.