An assessment of the United States Preventive Services Task Force cervical cancer screening guidelines

2021 ◽  
Vol 162 ◽  
pp. S88
Author(s):  
Vaidehi Mujumdar ◽  
Alexander Martin ◽  
Sushmita Gordhandas ◽  
Nita Lee
2018 ◽  
Vol 142 (6) ◽  
pp. 688-692 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melina B. Flanagan

Context.— The most recent update to cervical cancer screening guidelines offers interim guidance on the use of primary human papillomavirus (HPV) screening, with algorithms for management of results. After decades of screening with pure cytology and a shorter time with adjunctive HPV or cotesting with Papanicolaou (Pap) test and HPV, this is a significant change to our screening methods. Objective.— To briefly review the history of cervical cancer screening, the evidence upon which these interim guidelines were based, the arguments for and against primary HPV testing, and the current state of the field. Data Sources.— Primary studies, review articles, and commentaries were reviewed. Conclusions.— While there is evidence both for and against primary HPV testing, there are a growing number of countries adopting the practice. It would be worthwhile to be informed and prepared for such a change in the United States as well.


Author(s):  
James C. Quon

Background: 2017 US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines for screening cervical cancer and pre-malignant lesions advise that screenings cease for women over age 65, with qualifications. Recent literature has identified significant discrepancies in rates of cervical cancer in older women – if hysterectomies in this patient population is accounted for, cervical cancer incidence does not decline with age as previously established. This adjusted incidence of cervical cancer necessitates a re-examination of current practice.Methods: This study seeks to demonstrate the utility of extending the cervical cancer screening age recommendations to age 70. Cost effectiveness will be estimated, from a payer perspective, of extending screening to age 70 for the United States women’s population in those who have not undergone hysterectomy or otherwise been treated for past cervical cancer or premalignancy. A Markov model was constructed to project outcomes in a hypothetical cohort of 10 000 women aged 65 to 70, with a time horizon of lifetime. A Probability Sensitivity Analysis determined the robustness of the result, and the Incremental Cost-effectiveness Ratio (ICER) is charted.Results: The economic evaluation of screening compared to none in this population was determined to be cost effective, with an ICER demonstrating a cost benefit, and Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) benefit, to extended screening.Conclusions: The sensitivity analysis confirms the robustness of this result. Implementing extended screening guidelines could potentially be a significant gain for both patients and society.


2020 ◽  
Vol 153 (6) ◽  
pp. 734-742 ◽  
Author(s):  
C Paul Morris ◽  
Sayanan Chowsilpa ◽  
Sara Mustafa ◽  
Isaac Chan ◽  
Daniel Miller ◽  
...  

Abstract Objectives In 2012, the US Preventive Services Task Force decreased the recommended frequency of cervical cytology screening to once every 3 years and recommended against testing women younger than 21 years regardless of sexual history. We evaluated the impact of this in 21 to 29-year-old women at a tertiary care academic medical center in 2011 and 2017. Methods We retrospectively analyzed Papanicolaou test results at two time points in 21- to 29-year-old women. Results There was a decrease in the number of high-grade lesions in 21- to 25-year-old women (odds ratio [OR], 0.36) from 2011 to 2017. Within the 26- to 29-year-old patient group, there was a trend toward a higher percentage of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) in 2017 compared to 2011 on cytology, which did not reach statistical significance (OR, 1.46). However, follow-up histologic specimens showed a higher percentage of HSIL in 2017 compared to 2011 in this age group (OR, 2.16). Conclusions Our findings suggest that the cervical cancer screening guidelines introduced in 2012 have not had a detrimental impact on the outcomes of cervical cancer screening for 21- to 25-year-old women. However, we need to continue monitoring the effects of decreased screening in 26- to 29-year-old women.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document