Increasing Cervical Cancer Screening Coverage: A Randomised, Community-Based Clinical Trial

Effects of screening coverage and screening quality assurance on cervical cancer mortality: Implication for integrated framework to monitor global implementation of cervical cancer screening programmes

Background

Cervical cancer is a global health threat and a manifestation of inequality, and screening is an effective intervention. However, little is known about how screening coverage and quality assurance, influence cervical cancer mortality. We aimed to investigate the association between screening coverage, screening quality assurance and cervical cancer mortality among women from countries at different developmental levels.

Methods

We obtained data on age-standardised mortality from cervical cancer from the GLOBOCAN 2020 database; coverage of cervical cancer screening from World Health Organization (WHO) Global Health Observatory; and cervical screening programme settings and quality assurance from the Cancer Screening in Five Continents (CanScreen5) database. We assessed the dependency of cervical cancer age-standardised mortality on screening coverage and quality assurance by simple and multiple regression models. We also used linear regression models to identify factors that improved the screening coverage.

Results

The study included data from 53 countries. Reduced mortality was associated with increased screening programme quality assurance in 22 high-development countries. In 31 low-development countries, screening coverage in women aged 30-49 years was inversely associated with cervical cancer mortality. Political commitment (documentation of the cervical cancer screening policy as law) and financial support (treatment services provided free of charge) positively associated with screening coverage.

Conclusions

Screening programmes need strengthening commensurate with local resources and context. Priority should be given to improving screening coverage through stronger political commitment and financial support in low-development countries, and to ensuring good performance at all levels in high-development countries.

Organized cervical cancer screening: A randomized controlled trial assessing the effect of sending invitation letters

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of implementing two modalities of organized Cervical Cancer Screening (CCS) program on screening uptake after a six-month delay.

METHODS

A three-armed cluster randomized control trial was conducted in France between January 8 and July 2, 2021, involving148 510 women aged 40 to 65 and 1070 general practitioners. In the Optimized screening group, an invitation letter was posted to non-adherent women, and general practitioners were sent a list of their non-adherent patients. In the Organized screening group, an invitation letter was posted to non-adherent women. In the Usual care group, no invitation was sent. The endpoint was cervical cancer screening uptake after a six months period a) among all eligible women (primary endpoint); and b) among initially non-adherent women (post-hoc analysis). Statistical analysis was based on a logistic mixed model that compared between-group percentages of adherent women. A hierarchical comparison successively tested differences between the three arms (alpha 5 % risk).

RESULTS

Among all 148,510 eligible women, screening uptake was 63.6 % (31,731/49910) in the Optimized screening group vs 61.8 % (30,210/48847) in the Usual care group (OR [IC95 %] = 1.05[0.93; 1.18]). Among the 64,370 initially non-adherent women, screening uptake was 17.9 % (3955/22134) in the Optimized screening group vs 11.6 % (5321/20995) in the Usual care group (OR [IC95 %] = 1.70[1.56;1.86]). There was no significant difference between Optimized and Organized screening groups (17.2 % vs 17.9 %; OR [IC95 %] = 1.02[0.94; 1.11]).

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of an organized screening based on an invitation letter resulted in a modest increase in participation among non-adherent women six months later.

How do we measure unmet need within sexual and reproductive health? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Addressing health inequality with sexual and reproductive health requires an understanding of unmet need within a range of populations. This review examined the methods and definitions that have been used to measure unmet need, and the populations most frequently assessed.

METHODS

Five databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, The Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Health Management and Policy Database (HMIC)) were searched for studies that described quantitative measurement of unmet need within sexual and/or reproductive health between 2010 and 2021. A narrative synthesis was then undertaken to ascertain themes within the literature.

RESULTS

The database search yielded 19,747 papers; 216 papers were included after screening. 190 studies assessed unmet reproductive health need, of which 137 were analyses of trends among people living in low/lower-middle income countries; 181 used cross-sectional data, with only nine analyses being longitudinal. Eighteen studies analysed unmet sexual health need, of which 12 focused on high and upper-middle income populations. 16 papers used cross-sectional analyses. The remaining 10 studies examined unmet need for a combination of sexual and reproductive health services, eight among populations from upper-middle or high income countries. All were cross-sectional analyses. 165 studies used the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) definition of unmet need; no other standardised definition was used among the remaining papers.

DISCUSSION

There is a significant focus on unmet need for contraception among women in low income countries within the published literature, leaving considerable evidence gaps in relation to unmet need within sexual health generally and among men in particular, and unmet reproductive health need in high income settings. In addition, using an increased range of data collection methods, analyses and definitions of unmet need would enable better understanding of health inequality in this area.

The impact of age-relevant and generic infographics on knowledge, attitudes and intention to attend cervical screening: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

Cervical screening uptake in England is falling. Infographics could strengthen intention to attend, increase positive attitudes and improve knowledge. Age targeting could improve these outcomes further. We tested the impact of generic and age-targeted infographics.

DESIGN

A randomized controlled trial using an age-stratified, parallel-group design.

METHODS

Women aged 25-64 (n = 2095) were recruited through an online panel and randomized to see one of the three infographics. We tested: (i) impact of a generic cervical screening infographic compared to a control infographic on an unrelated topic with all screening age women and (ii) impact of an age-targeted infographic compared to a generic cervical screening infographic with older women (50-64 years). Intentions, knowledge and attitudes were measured.

RESULTS

Women aged 25-64 years who viewed the generic infographic had significantly higher intentions [F(1, 1513) = 6.14, p = .013,η p 2  = .004], more accurate beliefs about the timeline of cervical cancer development (OR: 5.18, 95% CI: 3.86-6.95), more accurate social norms (OR: 3.03, 95% CI: 2.38-3.87) and more positive beliefs about screening benefits (OR: 2.23, 95% CI: 1.52-3.28) than those viewing the control infographic. In the older age group, there was no significant difference in intention between those viewing the generic versus age-targeted versions [F(1, 607) = .03, p = .853,η p 2  < .001], but the age-targeted version was more engaging [F(1, 608) = 9.41, p = .002,η p 2  = .015].

CONCLUSIONS

A cervical screening infographic can result in more positive attitudes and better knowledge and may have a small impact on intentions. Although age targeting did not affect intention, it had a positive impact on engagement and may therefore be useful in encouraging women to read and process materials.

Cluster-randomized trials of cancer screening interventions: Has use of appropriate statistical methods increased over time?

BACKGROUND

In a cluster randomized trial, groups of individuals (e.g., clinics, schools) are randomized to conditions. The design and analysis of cluster randomized trials can require more care than individually randomized trials. Past reviews have noted deficiencies in the use of appropriate statistical methods for such trials.

METHODS

We reviewed cluster randomized trials of cancer screening interventions published 1995-2019 to determine whether appropriate statistical methods had been used for sample size calculation and outcome analysis and whether they reported intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values. This work expanded a previous review of articles published 1995-2010.

RESULTS

Our search identified 88 articles published 1995-2020 that reported outcomes of cluster randomized trials of breast, cervix, and colorectal cancer screening interventions. There was increased reporting of the trials' sample size calculations over time, with the percentage increasing from 31% in 1995-2004 to 77% in 2014-2019. However, the percentage of calculations failing to account for cluster randomization did not change over time and was 17% of studies in 2014-2019. There was a nonsignificant trend towards increased use of outcome analysis methods that accounted for the cluster randomized design. However, in lower impact journals, use of appropriate analysis methods was only 80% in 2014-2019. Only 33% of studies reported ICC values in 2014-2019.

CONCLUSION

For cluster randomized trials with cancer screening outcomes, there have been improvements in the reporting of sample size calculations but methodological and reporting deficiencies persist. Efforts to disseminate, adopt and report the use of appropriate statistical methodologies are still needed.

Participation rate in cervical cancer screening in general practice related to the proximity of gynecology care facilities: A 3 year follow-up cohort study

Cervical cancer screening (CCS) by Pap tests is mainly performed by gynecologists in France, but also by general practitioners (GPs) and midwives. The screening uptake is insufficient to reduce the incidence of cervical neoplasms. Our aim was to investigate the association between screening rates in patients listed with GPs and the distance between GPs' offices and gynecology facilities. The population of 345 GPs, and their 93,918 female patients eligible for screening over 3 years (2013-2015), were derived from the Health Insurance claim database. We estimated the socioeconomic level of the geographical area of GPs' offices using the European Deprivation Index (EDI). The proximity of gynecology facilities was calculated by computing their distance from GPs' offices (in order to adjust the proximity of gynecology facilities with EDI and performance of smears by the GP). The number of gynecologists within 5 km of a GP's office was associated with the CCS rate increasing by 0.31% for every unit increase in the density of gynecologists within 5 km (p < 0.0001). The close proximity of gynecology facilities was not significantly associated with screening uptake among female patients when the office of the GP where they were registered was settled in a deprived area.

Impact of health education intervention on demand of women for cervical cancer screening: a cluster-randomized controlled trial

Background

Cervical cancer is considered preventable disease, though it is the second largest killer of women’s cancer in low and middle-income countries. Despite the government’s attempts to broaden screening facilities, the screening service utilization was poor. Our study evaluated the impact of health education intervention on women’s demand for cervical cancer screening.

Methods

Community-based cluster-randomized controlled trial was conducted in thirty district towns as clusters in Tigray region, Ethiopia. A total of 700 women aged 20 to 60 years were recruited for both groups using simple random sampling from April to July, 2018. After baseline data collection, health education intervention was given to the intervention group by trained health professionals using power point presentation and peer group discussion at the nearest health institution. The health education was given for three days followed by subsequent consultations for 6 months. The outcome variable was demand of women for cervical cancer screening. The intent-to-treat and per-protocol analysis were considered to evaluate the inflation of the loss to follow-up on effect size. Chi-square test was used to assess the difference of variables between control and intervention groups at baseline data. Finally, difference in difference analysis was used to see the true effect of the intervention on outcome variable.

Results

A total of 674 participants (340 in intervention and 334 in control groups) were able to complete the follow-up, making a response rate of 96.3%. At baseline, the differences in proportion of all outcome variables in control and intervention groups were not statistically significant. After follow-up, a statistically significant difference between control and intervention groups was observed in the proportion of willingness to screen (p value = 0.000), having plan to screen (p value = 0.000), ever screened (p value = 0.000), and the overall demand for cervical cancer screening (p value = 0.000). Finally, the impact of intervention was explained by the difference in differences in the proportion of willingness to screen (36.6%) (p value < 0.000), having plan to screen (14.6%) (p value < 0.000), ever screened (16.9%) (p value < 0.000), and overall demand for cervical cancer screening (36.9%) (p value < 0.000).

Conclusion

This study revealed that health education intervention could increase in overall demand of women for cervical cancer screening. Thus, it would be helpful to consider health education in health planning and service provision.

Trial registration

The registration number is PACTR201808126223676; date registered: 23 April 2018, and the type is “retrospectively registered.”

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06765-0.

Factors Promoting Breast, Cervical and Colorectal Cancer Screenings participation: A Systematic Review

Objective

The present study aims at systematically reviewing research conducted on factors promoting breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screenings participation.

Methods

A literature search in MEDLINE/PubMed and PsycInfo from January 2017 to October 2021 was performed. Data extraction, researchers' full agreement and the inclusion criteria produced 102 eligible studies. Data were narratively synthesized and critically interpreted.

Results

Multiple factors favoring or hindering breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screenings were identified and summarized as factors operating at the individual level (background information, individual characteristics, emotions related to screening procedure and to cancer, knowledge and awareness), at the relational level (relationships with healthcare staff, significant others, community members), and at the healthcare system level (systems barriers/policy, lack of staff). A critical appraisal of studies revealed a fragmentation in the literature, with a compartmentalization of studies by type of cancer screening, country and specific populations of destination.

Conclusions

Overall findings indicated that greater integration of research results obtained independently for each cancer diagnosis and within the different countries/populations could foster a more comprehensive understanding of factors potentially enhancing the participation in breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screenings worldwide. This review, which is grounded in the current context of globalization and superdiversification in population, can help to enhance a better integration between research and practices, by supporting the development of more effective and inclusive evidence‐based interventions and health‐promotion campaigns worldwide. Research and practical implications are highlighted and discussed.

Research can be integrated into public health policy-making: global lessons for and from Spanish economic evaluations

WHO promotes the use of research in policy-making to drive improvements in health, including in achieving Sustainable Development Goals such as tobacco control. The European Union’s new €95 billion Horizon Europe research framework programme parallels these aims, and also includes commitments to fund economic evaluations. However, researchers often express frustration at the perceived lack of attention to scientific evidence during policy-making. For example, some researchers claim that evidence regarding the return on investment from optimal implementation of evidence-based policies is frequently overlooked. An increasingly large body of literature acknowledges inevitable barriers to research use, but also analyses facilitators encouraging such use. This opinion piece describes how some research is integrated into policy-making. It highlights two recent reviews. One examines impact assessments of 36 multi-project research programmes and identifies three characteristics of projects more likely to influence policy-making. These include a focus on healthcare system needs, engagement of stakeholders, and research conducted for organizations supported by structures to receive and use evidence. The second review suggests that such characteristics are likely to occur as part of a comprehensive national health research system strategy, especially one integrated into the healthcare system. We also describe two policy-informing economic evaluations conducted in Spain. These examined the most cost-effective package of evidence-based tobacco control interventions and the cost-effectiveness of different strategies to increase screening coverage for cervical cancer. Both projects focused on issues of healthcare concern and involved considerable stakeholder engagement. The Spanish examples reinforce some lessons from the global literature and, therefore, could help demonstrate to authorities in Spain the value of developing comprehensive health research systems, possibly following the interfaces and receptor model. The aim of this would be to integrate needs assessment and stakeholder engagement with structures spanning the research and health systems. In such structures, economic evaluation evidence could be collated, analysed by experts in relation to healthcare needs, and fed into both policy-making as appropriate, and future research calls. The increasingly large local and global evidence base on research utilization could inform detailed implementation of this approach once accepted as politically desirable. Given the COVID-19 pandemic, increasing the cost-effectiveness of healthcare systems and return on investment of public health interventions becomes even more important.

Explaining Correlates of Cervical Cancer Screening among Minority Women in the United States

Globally, cervical cancer is the fourth leading cause of death among women. While overall cervical cancer rates have decreased over the last few decades, minority women continue to be disproportionately affected compared to White women. Given the paucity of theory-based interventions to promote Pap smear tests among minority women, this cross-sectional study attempts to examine the correlates of cervical cancer screening by Pap test using the Multi-theory Model (MTM) as a theoretical paradigm among minority women in the United States (U.S.). Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) was done for testing the construct validity of the survey instrument. Data were analyzed through bivariate and multivariate tests. In a sample of 364 minority women, nearly 31% (n = 112) of women reported not having received a Pap test within the past three years compared to the national rate (20.8%) for all women. The MTM constructs of participatory dialogue, behavioral confidence, and changes in the physical environment explained a substantial proportion of variance (49.5%) in starting the behavior of getting Pap tests, while the constructs of emotional transformation, practice for change, and changes in the social environment, along with lack of health insurance and annual household income of less than $25,000, significantly explained the variance (73.6%) of the likelihood to sustain the Pap test behavior of getting it every three years. Among those who have had a Pap smear (n = 252), healthcare insurance, emotional transformation, practice for change, and changes in the social environment predicted nearly 83.3% of the variance in sustaining Pap smear test uptake behavior (adjusted R² = 0.833, F = 45.254, p < 0.001). This study validates the need for health promotion interventions based on MTM to be implemented to address the disparities of lower cervical cancer screenings among minority women.

Interventions targeted at women to encourage the uptake of cervical screening

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the Cochrane review published in Issue 5, 2011. Worldwide, cervical cancer is the fourth commonest cancer affecting women. High-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is causative in 99.7% of cases. Other risk factors include smoking, multiple sexual partners, the presence of other sexually transmitted diseases and immunosuppression. Primary prevention strategies for cervical cancer focus on reducing HPV infection via vaccination and data suggest that this has the potential to prevent nearly 90% of cases in those vaccinated prior to HPV exposure. However, not all countries can afford vaccination programmes and, worryingly, uptake in many countries has been extremely poor. Secondary prevention, through screening programmes, will remain critical to reducing cervical cancer, especially in unvaccinated women or those vaccinated later in adolescence. This includes screening for the detection of pre-cancerous cells, as well as high-risk HPV. In the UK, since the introduction of the Cervical Screening Programme in 1988, the associated mortality rate from cervical cancer has fallen. However, worldwide, there is great variation between countries in both coverage and uptake of screening. In some countries, national screening programmes are available whereas in others, screening is provided on an opportunistic basis. Additionally, there are differences within countries in uptake dependent on ethnic origin, age, education and socioeconomic status. Thus, understanding and incorporating these factors in screening programmes can increase the uptake of screening. This, together with vaccination, can lead to cervical cancer becoming a rare disease.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions aimed at women, to increase the uptake, including informed uptake, of cervical screening.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Issue 6, 2020. MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS databases up to June 2020. We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to increase uptake/informed uptake of cervical screening.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Where possible, the data were synthesised in a meta-analysis using standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

Comprehensive literature searches identified 2597 records; of these, 70 met our inclusion criteria, of which 69 trials (257,899 participants) were entered into a meta-analysis. The studies assessed the effectiveness of invitational and educational interventions, lay health worker involvement, counselling and risk factor assessment. Clinical and statistical heterogeneity between trials limited statistical pooling of data. Overall, there was moderate-certainty evidence to suggest that invitations appear to be an effective method of increasing uptake compared to control (risk ratio (RR) 1.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.49 to 1.96; 141,391 participants; 24 studies). Additional analyses, ranging from low to moderate-certainty evidence, suggested that invitations that were personalised, i.e. personal invitation, GP invitation letter or letter with a fixed appointment, appeared to be more successful. More specifically, there was very low-certainty evidence to support the use of GP invitation letters as compared to other authority sources' invitation letters within two RCTs, one RCT assessing 86 participants (RR 1.69 95% CI 0.75 to 3.82) and another, showing a modest benefit, included over 4000 participants (RR 1.13, 95 % CI 1.05 to 1.21). Low-certainty evidence favoured personalised invitations (telephone call, face-to-face or targeted letters) as compared to standard invitation letters (RR 1.32, 95 % CI 1.11 to 1.21; 27,663 participants; 5 studies). There was moderate-certainty evidence to support a letter with a fixed appointment to attend, as compared to a letter with an open invitation to make an appointment (RR 1.61, 95 % CI 1.48 to 1.75; 5742 participants; 5 studies). Low-certainty evidence supported the use of educational materials (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.54; 63,415 participants; 13 studies) and lay health worker involvement (RR 2.30, 95% CI 1.44 to 3.65; 4330 participants; 11 studies). Other less widely reported interventions included counselling, risk factor assessment, access to a health promotion nurse, photo comic book, intensive recruitment and message framing. It was difficult to deduce any meaningful conclusions from these interventions due to sparse data and low-certainty evidence. However, having access to a health promotion nurse and attempts at intensive recruitment may have increased uptake. One trial reported an economic outcome and randomised 3124 participants within a national screening programme to either receive the standard screening invitation, which would incur a fee, or an invitation offering screening free of charge. No difference in the uptake at 90 days was found (574/1562 intervention versus 612/1562 control, (RR 0.94, 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.03). The use of HPV self-testing as an alternative to conventional screening may also be effective at increasing uptake and this will be covered in a subsequent review. Secondary outcomes, including cost data, were incompletely documented. The majority of cluster-RCTs did not account for clustering or adequately report the number of clusters in the trial in order to estimate the design effect, so we did not selectively adjust the trials. It is unlikely that reporting of these trials would impact the overall conclusions and robustness of the results. Of the meta-analyses that could be performed, there was considerable statistical heterogeneity, and this should be borne in mind when interpreting these findings. Given this and the low to moderate evidence, further research may change these findings. The risk of bias in the majority of trials was unclear, and a number of trials suffered from methodological problems and inadequate reporting. We downgraded the certainty of evidence because of an unclear or high risk of bias with regards to allocation concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data and other biases.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence to support the use of invitation letters to increase the uptake of cervical screening. Low-certainty evidence showed lay health worker involvement amongst ethnic minority populations may increase screening coverage, and there was also support for educational interventions, but it is unclear what format is most effective. The majority of the studies were from developed countries and so the relevance of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), is unclear. Overall, the low-certainty evidence that was identified makes it difficult to infer as to which interventions were best, with exception of invitational interventions, where there appeared to be more reliable evidence.

The application of health behavior theories to promote cervical cancer screening uptake

BACKGROUND

While cervical cancer is a major cause of mortality, its progress and survival rate can be improved through screening. Yet despite their wide availability, women's participation in cervical cancer screening (CCS) programs is often suboptimal, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Besides demographic and organizational characteristics, screening uptake is influenced by psychological factors, most of which are included in health behavior theories. This systematic review compared different health behavior theories in terms of their capacity to explain CCS uptake and inform CCS promotion campaigns.

METHODS

A comprehensive search and analysis of published intervention and non-intervention (observational) studies that applied at least one health behavior theory to CCS participation.

RESULTS

After quality screening, 48 observational and 21 intervention studies were identified that applied the Health Belief Model (HBM), Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), Transtheoretical model (TTM), Social-ecological Model (SEM), and/or Theory of Triadic Influence (TTI) to CCS. The HBM was most frequently used to explain behavior, whereas the TPB was better at explaining screening intentions. Tailored intervention studies focusing on all theoretical constructs were most effective in modifying perceptions and increasing CCS uptake.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite their inconsistent use, health behavior theories can explain CCS intentions and behavior and contribute to the development of targeted interventions to promote screening uptake.

Long-term protection of HPV test in women at risk of cervical cancer

Objective

To evaluate the 9-year incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and cumulative adherence to perform a next test in a cohort of women aged 40+ years with no cervical screening cytology within a window of 5 years (underscreened women), after baseline cervical cytology and HPV tests.

Methods

In Catalonia, Spain, co-testing with cytology and HPV test has been recommended in the Public Health system since 2006 for underscreened women. In 2007, 1,594 women with underscreened criteria were identified and followed through medical records form Pathological Department. 9-year cumulative incidence of histologically confirmed CIN2+ and cumulative adherence to perform a next test were estimated using Kaplan-Meier statistics.

Results

Follow-up was available for 1,009 women (63.3%) resulting in 23 women with. CIN2+ (2.3%). Of them, 4 women (17%) had both tests negative at baseline (3CIN2 and 1CIN3) with cumulative incidence of CIN2+ of 0.4% (95% CI: 0.1–1.4) at 5-years and 1.3% (95% CI: 0.4–3.7) at 9-years. During the first year, the prevalence among women with both tests positive was 27.0% (95% CI: 13.0–50.6) for CIN2+. Lost to follow-up was higher among women with both tests negative compared to those with both positive tests (38.7% vs 4.2%, p-value <0.001). 40.5% of the women HPV-/cyto- had a re-screening test during the 4 years following the baseline, increasing until 53.5% during the 6 years of follow-up.

Conclusions

HPV detection shows a high longitudinal predictive value at 9-year to identify women at risk to develop CIN2+. The data validate a safe extension of the 3-year screening intervals (current screening interval) to 5-year intervals in underscreened women that had negative HPV result at baseline. It is necessary to establish mechanisms to ensure screening participation and adequate follow-up for these women.

[Survival by cervical cancer stage and factors collected by the Cancer Registry in Mallorca (Spain)]

OBJECTIVE

To ascertain the survival by stage of cervical cancer in Mallorca (Spain), to explore factors collected by the Mallorcan Cancer Registry associated with survival, and to determine the distribution of cervical cases by stage.

METHOD

Retrospective follow-up study of cases diagnosed with cervical cancer between 2006 and 2012 through the Mallorcan Cancer Registry. Cases identified only by death certificate were excluded.

VARIABLES

age; date and method of diagnosis; histology (ICD-O 3rd ed.); TNM and stage (UICC 7th ed.); date of follow-up or death and cause of death. Follow-up ended on 31 of December 2015. Multiple imputation was used for missing stage cases. Actuarial and Kaplan-Meier methods were used for survival analysis and Cox regression models to identify factors that explain and predict survival.

RESULTS

321 cases were identified. The stage was missing in 8.4% of cases. After multiple imputation, 42.63% were stage I, 24.01% stage II, 19.94% stage III and 13.42% stage IV. Survival was 63% at 5 years: 92% for women diagnosed in stage I, 59% in stage II, 37% in stage III and 18% in stage IV. Stage and age were associated to survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnosis of cervical cancer in stage I is essential. Less than half of the women were diagnosed in stage I. Cervical cancer screening programmes must be improved.

Prevalence and determinants in cytology testing for cervical cancer screening in Spain (2006-14)

Background

Cervical cancer has decreased in developed countries thanks to cytology screening programmes. The aims of this study were To analyse the frequency and evolution of performing cytology tests and to determine the variables that influence their use.

Methods

Cross-sectional study of non-institutionalized women who participated in the national health survey (2006, 2011/12) and the European Health Survey in Spain (2009, 2014). Study variables: cytology-testing, time since last cytology-test, reason for performing the test, age, nationality, marital status, social status, education level and place of residence.

Results

The study evaluated 53 628 women in Spain over 15 years old, with a mean age of 52.68 (SD ± 19.12). About 94.1% were Spanish, 49.2% were married and 77.2% lived with a partner. In 2014, 72% had a cytology test, a number that increased significantly. Women aged 25-65 were 5.13 times more likely to undergo a cytology test than those aged 15-24 years old (odds ratio (OR): 5.13; P < 0.001); women with university educations were 9.23 times more likely to undergo a cytology test than those without university educations (P > 0.001); those of social classes I and II (high) were 1.2 more likely to undergo a cytology test than those of low social class (P = 0.026); and Spanish women were 1.74 times more likely to undergo a cytology test than foreigners living in Spain (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Frequency of cytology testing has increased in the last few years. Screening for cervical cancer is associated with higher social status, education level, age, and not being foreign.