Estimating the Long-Term Clinical Impact of Cervical Cancer Vaccination in Taiwan

2009 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 281-288 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ming-Shien Yen ◽  
Shan-Lin You ◽  
Nicole Ferko ◽  
Donna Debicki ◽  
Yi-Chen Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Incidence ◽  
Vaccine Coverage ◽  
Precancerous Lesions ◽  
Hpv Infection ◽  
Clinical Impact ◽  
Cervical Cancer Incidence ◽  
Health States ◽  
Incidence And Mortality ◽  
The Impact

The high burden of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and subsequent cervical cancer in the presence of screening in Taiwan suggests the need for further prevention strategies. Epidemiology and screening practices vary considerably between countries, and specific analyses are required to estimate the impact of HPV vaccination. This study adapted a computer-based health economic model to Taiwan to project the clinical impact of the introduction of a prophylactic vaccine against persistent HPV 16/18 infection on cervical disease. A Markov model based on the natural history of HPV and cervical cancer was developed to simulate transitions between health states (normal, HPV, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia [CIN] stages I to III, cervical cancer stages I to IV, and death) in the presence of screening. The model was calibrated to Taiwan epidemiological end points including age-specific HPV prevalence, prevalence of CIN lesions, and predicted cervical cancer incidence and mortality. Taiwanese screening and treatment practices were modeled, and published clinical trial data were used to estimate vaccine efficacy. With 100% vaccine coverage in a 13-year-old cohort of females, there is estimated to be a 71% reduction in cervical cancer cases and deaths due to all HPV types and substantial reductions in the prevalence of precancerous lesions and screening outcomes. Removing the risk of HPV infection of a large proportion of Taiwanese females, with a high underlying cervical cancer incidence rate, would be expected to have dramatic effects on the health care system and mortality in Taiwan.

scholarly journals The Impact of Different Screening Model Structures on Cervical Cancer Incidence and Mortality Predictions: The Maximum Clinical Incidence Reduction (MCLIR) Methodology

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 474-482
Author(s):  
Inge M. C. M. de Kok ◽  
Emily A. Burger ◽  
Steffie K. Naber ◽  
Karen Canfell ◽  
James Killen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Incidence ◽  
Model Structure ◽  
Cervical Cancer Incidence ◽  
Screening Model ◽  
Incidence And Mortality ◽  
Cancer Intervention ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Model Structures

Background. To interpret cervical cancer screening model results, we need to understand the influence of model structure and assumptions on cancer incidence and mortality predictions. Cervical cancer cases and deaths following screening can be attributed to 1) (precancerous or cancerous) disease that occurred after screening, 2) disease that was present but not screen detected, or 3) disease that was screen detected but not successfully treated. We examined the relative contributions of each of these using 4 Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models. Methods. The maximum clinical incidence reduction (MCLIR) method compares changes in the number of clinically detected cervical cancers and mortality among 4 scenarios: 1) no screening, 2) one-time perfect screening at age 45 that detects all existing disease and delivers perfect (i.e., 100% effective) treatment of all screen-detected disease, 3) one-time realistic-sensitivity cytological screening and perfect treatment of all screen-detected disease, and 4) one-time realistic-sensitivity cytological screening and realistic-effectiveness treatment of all screen-detected disease. Results. Predicted incidence reductions ranged from 55% to 74%, and mortality reduction ranged from 56% to 62% within 15 years of follow-up for scenario 4 across models. The proportion of deaths due to disease not detected by screening differed across the models (21%–35%), as did the failure of treatment (8%–16%) and disease occurring after screening (from 1%–6%). Conclusions. The MCLIR approach aids in the interpretation of variability across model results. We showed that the reasons why screening failed to prevent cancers and deaths differed between the models. This likely reflects uncertainty about unobservable model inputs and structures; the impact of this uncertainty on policy conclusions should be examined via comparing findings from different well-calibrated and validated model platforms.

Differences on the prevalence of cervical HPV between Lithuania and Belarus

Open Medicine ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 285-291
Author(s):  
Zivile Gudleviciene ◽  
Daiva Kanopiene ◽  
Janina Didziapetriene ◽  
Raisa Smolyakova ◽  
Ekaterina Gutkovskaya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Incidence ◽  
Intraepithelial Neoplasia ◽  
Study Groups ◽  
Hpv Infection ◽  
Study Group ◽  
Cervical Cancer Incidence ◽  
Infection Level ◽  
Incidence And Mortality ◽  
Hpv 18

AbstractIn some countries the cervical cancer incidence and mortality rates are much higher compared to the European average. The differences of HPV and its type prevalence between countries and regions influence cervical cancer incidence and mortality. Regarding the differences in cervical cancer incidence and mortality in Lithuania and Belarus, the aim of this study was to describe HPV infection level and HPVs type distribution among two study groups of patients with moderate or severe cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2-3) and cervical cancer. Our data shows that 74.2% [95% CI: 63.64÷84.76] of Lithuanian patients with cervical cancer and 85.6% [95% CI: 85.53÷92.85] of the study group with CIN2-3 were HPV positive, while in the study groups of Belarusian patients HPV infection was detected in 92.6% [95% CI, 74.25÷98.71] and 65.4% [95% CI, 44.36÷82.06] cases respectively. HPV 16 was the most prevalent type in Lithuanian as well as in Belarusian patients of the study groups. HPV 18 in Lithuanian patients of the study group with cervical cancer was identified in 10.2% [95% CI: 1.73÷18.67] and in the study group with CIN2-3 — in 2.6% [95% CI: 0.95÷6.15] of cases. HPV 18 was not detected in Belarusian patients of both groups.

scholarly journals Human Papillomavirus Infection and Cervical Cancer: Epidemiology, Screening, and Vaccination—Review of Current Perspectives

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chee Kai Chan ◽  
Gulzhanat Aimagambetova ◽  
Talshyn Ukybassova ◽  
Kuralay Kongrtay ◽  
Azliyati Azizan
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Incidence ◽  
Cervical Screening ◽  
Hpv Infection ◽  
Screening Methods ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Major Public Health Problem ◽  
Cervical Cancer Incidence ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Incidence And Mortality

Viral infections contribute as a cause of 15–20% of all human cancers. Infection by oncogenic viruses can promote different stages of carcinogenesis. Among many types of HPV, around 15 are linked to cancer. In spite of effective screening methods, cervical cancer continues to be a major public health problem. There are wide differences in cervical cancer incidence and mortality by geographic region. In addition, the age-specific HPV prevalence varies widely across different populations and showed two peaks of HPV positivity in younger and older women. There have been many studies worldwide on the epidemiology of HPV infection and oncogenic properties due to different HPV genotypes. However, there are still many countries where the population-based prevalence has not yet been identified. Moreover, cervical cancer screening strategies are different between countries. Organized cervical screening programs are potentially more effective than opportunistic screening programs. Nevertheless, screening programs have consistently been associated with a reduction in cervical cancer incidence and mortality. Developed countries have achieved such reduced incidence and mortality from cervical cancer over the past 40 years. This is largely due to the implementation of organized cytological screening and vaccination programs. HPV vaccines are very effective at preventing infection and diseases related to the vaccine-specific genotypes in women with no evidence of past or current HPV infection. In spite of the successful implementation of the HPV vaccination program in many countries all over the world, problems related to HPV prevention and treatment of the related diseases will continue to persist in developing and underdeveloped countries.

Invasive Cervical Cancer Incidence and Mortality Among Canadian Women Aged 15 to 29 and the Impact of Screening

2012 ◽  
Vol 34 (12) ◽  
pp. 1167-1176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Popadiuk ◽  
Agata Stankiewicz ◽  
James Dickinson ◽  
Lisa Pogany ◽  
Anthony B. Miller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Incidence ◽  
Invasive Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cervical Cancer Incidence ◽  
Incidence And Mortality ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals Impact of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-collection on subsequent cervical cancer screening completion among under-screened US women: MyBodyMyTest-3 protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Trials ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa P. Spees ◽  
Andrea C. Des Marais ◽  
Stephanie B. Wheeler ◽  
Michael G. Hudgens ◽  
Sarah Doughty ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Human Papillomavirus ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Cancer Incidence ◽  
Perceived Risk ◽  
Pap Test ◽  
Hpv Testing ◽  
Cervical Cancer Incidence ◽  
Incidence And Mortality

Abstract Background Screening substantially reduces cervical cancer incidence and mortality. More than half of invasive cervical cancers are attributable to infrequent screening or not screening at all. The current study, My Body My Test (MBMT), evaluates the impact of mailed kits for self-collection of samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing on completion of cervical cancer screening in low-income, North Carolina women overdue for cervical cancer screening. Methods/design The study will enroll at least 510 US women aged 25–64 years who report no Pap test in the last 4 years and no HPV test in the last 6 years. We will randomize participants to an intervention or control arm. The intervention arm will receive kits to self-collect a sample at home and mail it for HPV testing. In both the intervention and control arms, participants will receive assistance in scheduling an appointment for screening in clinic. Study staff will deliver HPV self-collection results by phone and assist in scheduling participants for screening in clinic. The primary outcome is completion of cervical cancer screening. Specifically, completion of screening will be defined as screening in clinic or receipt of negative HPV self-collection results. Women with HPV-negative self-collection results will be considered screening-complete. All other participants will be considered screening-complete if they obtain co-testing or Pap test screening at a study-affiliated institution or other clinic. We will assess whether the self-collection intervention influences participants’ perceived risk of cervical cancer and whether perceived risk mediates the relationship between HPV self-collection results and subsequent screening in clinic. We also will estimate the incremental cost per woman screened of offering at-home HPV self-collection kits with scheduling assistance as compared to offering scheduling assistance alone. Discussion If mailed self-collection of samples for HPV testing is an effective strategy for increasing cervical cancer screening among women overdue for screening, this method has the potential to reduce cervical cancer incidence and mortality in medically underserved women at higher risk of developing cervical cancer. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02651883, Registered on 11 January 2016.

Breast and cervical cancer incidence and mortality trends in Russia 1980–2013

2018 ◽  
Vol 55 ◽  
pp. 73-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anton Barchuk ◽  
Alexander Bespalov ◽  
Heini Huhtala ◽  
Tuvshinjargal Chimed ◽  
Irina Laricheva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Incidence ◽  
Cervical Cancer Incidence ◽  
Mortality Trends ◽  
Breast And Cervical Cancer ◽  
Incidence And Mortality
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document