scholarly journals Disparities in Cervical Cancer Screening with HPV Test among Females with Diabetes in the Deep South

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (24) ◽  
pp. 6319
Author(s):  
Cassidi C. McDaniel ◽  
Hayleigh H. Hallam ◽  
Tiffany Cadwallader ◽  
Hee-Yun Lee ◽  
Chiahung Chou
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Deep South ◽  
Hpv Testing ◽  
The South ◽  
Diabetes Status ◽  
Hpv Test ◽  
Study Population ◽  
The U.S

Background: Due to diabetes being linked with poorer cervical cancer prognosis, this study aimed to evaluate HPV testing behaviors among females with and without diabetes across the U.S. by geographic area in 2016, 2018, and 2020. Methods: This cross-sectional study used the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) from 2016, 2018, and 2020. The study population included females aged 25–69 years old, stratified by self-reported diabetes status. The primary outcome measure was cervical cancer screening behavior, which was evaluated by self-reported HPV test uptake/receipt (yes/no). Results: A total of 361,546 females from across the U.S. were sampled. Within the study population combined from all study years, the overall likelihood of receiving an HPV test was significantly lower among females with diabetes [37.95% (95% CI: 36.87–39.04)] compared to those without diabetes [46.21% (95% CI: 45.84–46.58)] (p < 0.001). Screening rates with HPV tests were lowest among females with diabetes in the South in 2016 (29.32% (95% CI: 26.82–31.83)), 2018 (39.63% (95% CI: 36.30–42.96)), and 2020 (41.02% (95% CI: 37.60–44.45)). Conclusions: Females with diabetes are screening with HPV tests less frequently than females without diabetes, and females living in the South, particularly states in the Deep South, report the lowest rates of HPV testing.

scholarly journals De-implementation and Substitution of Clinical Care Processes: Stakeholder Perspectives on the Transition to Primary Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Testing for Cervical Cancer Screening

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin E Hahn ◽  
Corrine Munoz-Plaza ◽  
Danielle Altman ◽  
Chunyi Hsu ◽  
Nancy Cannizzaro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Human Papillomavirus ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Readiness To Change ◽  
Barriers And Facilitators ◽  
Hpv Testing ◽  
Cost Cutting ◽  
Hpv Test

Abstract Background: New cervical cancer screening guidelines recommend primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for women age 30-65 years. Healthcare organizations are preparing to de-implement the previous recommended strategies of Pap testing or co-testing (Pap plus HPV test) and substitute primary HPV testing. However, there may be significant challenges to replacement of this entrenched clinical practice, even with an evidence-based substitution. We sought to identify stakeholder-perceived barriers and facilitators to this substitution within a large healthcare system, Kaiser Permanente Southern California.Methods: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with clinician, administrative and patient stakeholders regarding: (a) acceptability and feasibility of the planned substitution; (b) perceptions of barriers and facilitators, with an emphasis on those related to the de-implementation/implementation cycle of substitution; and (c) perceived readiness to change. Our interview guide was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Using a team coding approach, we developed an initial coding structure refined during iterative analysis; the data were subsequently organized thematically into domains, key themes, and sub-themes using thematic analysis, followed by framework analysis informed by CFIR.Results: We conducted 23 interviews: 5 patient and 18 clinical/administrative. Clinicians perceived that patients feel more tests equals better care, and clinicians and patients expressed fear of missed cancers (“…it’ll be more challenging convincing the patient that only one test is…good enough to detect cancer.”). Patients perceived practice changes resulting in “less care” are driven by desire to cut costs. In contrast, clinicians/administrators viewed changing from two tests to one as acceptable and a workflow efficiency (“…It’s very easy and half the work.”). Stakeholder-recommended strategies included focusing on the increased efficacy of primary HPV testing and developing clinician talking points incorporating national guidelines to assuage ‘cost-cutting’ fears. Conclusions: Substitution to replace an entrenched clinical practice is complex. Leveraging available facilitators is key to ease the process for clinical and administrative stakeholders—e.g., emphasizing the efficiency of going from two tests to one. Identifying and addressing clinician and patient fears regarding cost-cutting and perceived poorer quality of care is critical for substitution. Multicomponent and multilevel strategies for engagement and education will be required.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT04371887

scholarly journals HrHPV testing vs liquid-based cytology in cervical cancer screening among women aged 50 and older: a prospective study

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (11) ◽  
pp. 1678-1683
Author(s):  
Berit Andersen ◽  
Sisse Helle Njor ◽  
Anne Marie Schak Jensen ◽  
Tonje Johansen ◽  
Ulla Jeppesen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Prospective Study ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Gynecological Cancer ◽  
Dna Amplification ◽  
Hpv Testing ◽  
Promising Alternative ◽  
Hpv Test ◽  
Liquid Based Cytology

IntroductionEvidence supports high-risk human papilloma virus (HPV) testing as the primary cervical cancer screening tool. However, benefits and harms should be carefully considered before replacing liquid-based cytology. In women age 50 and older, we evaluated how a commercially available DNA amplification HPV test compares with routine liquid-based cytology.MethodsThis prospective study included 4043 patients who had a cervical sample analyzed from September 2011 to September 2012. Patients were followed between 64 and 76 months (median: 70 months). Samples were analyzed using both liquid-based cytology and the Cobas 4800 HPV DNA test. We calculated the diagnostic efficacy of liquid-based cytology and HPV, with or without the opposite test as triage, using cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+/CIN3+) as reference.ResultsThe patients had a median age of 58 years, (range; 50–90). At baseline, HPV prevalence was 8.0%: a total of 3.7% of patients had atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse (ASCUS+). Positive test results were 1.9% for liquid-based cytology with HPV triage and 3.0% for HPV with liquid-based cytology triage. The cumulative incidence of CIN3+ was 1.0% (40/4043). Sensitivities for CIN3+ were: liquid-based cytology 47.5% (31.5%–63.9%); liquid-based cytology with HPV triage 45.0% (29.3%–61.5%); HPV 90.0% (76.3%–97.2%); and HPV with liquid-based cytology triage 67.5% (50.9%–81.4%). Corresponding specificities were: liquid-based cytology 96.6% (96.0%–97.2%); liquid-based cytology with HPV triage 98.5% (98.0%–98.8%); HPV 92.8% (92.0%–93.6%); and HPV with liquid-based cytology triage 97.7% (97.2%–98.1%). At baseline, HPV testing overlooked five cases of gynecological cancer other than cervical cancer. Five cervical cancers were detected, two had been overlooked at baseline by liquid-based cytology and two by HPV testingConclusionHPV screening using DNA amplification is a promising alternative to liquid-based cytology in women age 50 and older, but evaluation of alternative triage methods is warranted. The risk of overlooking cancers needs consideration when replacing liquid-based cytology with HPV testing as a method for primary screening.

scholarly journals The Clinical Role of HPV Testing in Primary and Secondary Cervical Cancer Screening

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Hoste ◽  
K. Vossaert ◽  
W. A. J. Poppe
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Screening ◽  
Screening Methods ◽  
Hpv Testing ◽  
Clinical Role ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Hpv Test

Traditional population-based cervical screening programs, based on cytology, have successfully reduced the burden of cervical cancer. Nevertheless limitations remain and new screening methods are emerging. Despite vaccination against the 2 most oncogenic types (HPV 16/18), cervical cancer screening will have to continue as an essential public health strategy. As the acquisition of an HR-HPV infection is critical in the progression to (pre-)cancerous cervical lesions, recent research has focused on HR-HPV detection. The sensitivity of HPV testing in primary and secondary prevention outweighs that of cytology, at the cost of slightly lower specificity. Although most of the HR-HPV infections are cleared after conization, new evidence from numerous studies encourages the implementation of HR-HPV testing and genotyping to improve posttreatment surveillance. An HR-HPV test 6 months after conization is a promising useful clinical marker to detect persistence and prevent progression. This review highlights the clinical role of HPV testing in primary and secondary cervical cancer screening.

scholarly journals HPV and Pap testing among white, black, and hispanic women: results from a survey study

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilana M. Ventura ◽  
Selena Zhong ◽  
Ipek Bilgen ◽  
David Dutwin ◽  
Jane L. Delgado
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Black Women ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Hispanic Women ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Hpv Testing ◽  
Health Providers ◽  
Pap Tests ◽  
Hpv Test

AbstractWhile the Pap test, HPV vaccine, and HPV test are important tools to promote cervical health, the American Cancer Society (ACS) recently updated its cervical cancer prevention recommendations to give primacy to HPV testing for cervical cancer screening. We investigate how women’s health providers view these changes, and the extent to which they have reached American women. To do so, we present results from a novel two-survey study of women’s health providers (N = 558) and White, Black, and Hispanic women (N = 1900). We find that a minority of providers report that the HPV test alone is adequate for cervical cancer screening (18%, CI = 14%, 21%) while 96% (CI = 94%, 97%) indicated that women should regularly have both Pap and HPV screenings. Black (88% CI = 86%, 91%) and Hispanic (87% CI = 84%, 89%) women report lower rates of Pap tests compared to White women (94%, CI = 92%, 96%). Only 35% (CI = 33%, 37%) of women report having had an HPV test, and these levels were similar across groups. White (29%, CI = 25%, 33%) and Hispanic women (26% CI = 23%, 29%) report statistically similar levels of provider recommendation for joint Pap-HPV testing, while Black women report statistically lower rates (22%, CI = 18%, 25%). These patterns hold after controlling for several important socio-demographic variables in logistic regression models. The continued lower rates of Pap tests among Black and Hispanic women, combined with low rates of HPV testing is likely to hinder the ability to reduce cervical cancer incidence and mortality, particularly for Hispanic and Black women.

scholarly journals De-implementation and substitution of clinical care processes: stakeholder perspectives on the transition to primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical cancer screening

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin E. Hahn ◽  
Corrine Munoz-Plaza ◽  
Danielle E. Altman ◽  
Chunyi Hsu ◽  
Nancy T. Cannizzaro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Human Papillomavirus ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Readiness To Change ◽  
Barriers And Facilitators ◽  
Hpv Testing ◽  
Cost Cutting ◽  
Hpv Test

Abstract Background New cervical cancer screening guidelines recommend primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for women age 30–65 years. Healthcare organizations are preparing to de-implement the previous recommended strategies of Pap testing or co-testing (Pap plus HPV test) and substitute primary HPV testing. However, there may be significant challenges to the replacement of this entrenched clinical practice, even with an evidence-based substitution. We sought to identify stakeholder-perceived barriers and facilitators to this substitution within a large healthcare system, Kaiser Permanente Southern California. Methods We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with clinician, administrative, and patient stakeholders regarding (a) acceptability and feasibility of the planned substitution; (b) perceptions of barriers and facilitators, with an emphasis on those related to the de-implementation/implementation cycle of substitution; and (c) perceived readiness to change. Our interview guide was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Using a team coding approach, we developed an initial coding structure refined during iterative analysis; the data were subsequently organized thematically into domains, key themes, and sub-themes using thematic analysis, followed by framework analysis informed by CFIR. Results We conducted 23 interviews: 5 patient and 18 clinical/administrative. Clinicians perceived that patients feel more tests equals better care, and clinicians and patients expressed fear of missed cancers (“…it’ll be more challenging convincing the patient that only one test is…good enough to detect cancer.”). Patients perceived practice changes resulting in “less care” are driven by the desire to cut costs. In contrast, clinicians/administrators viewed changing from two tests to one as acceptable and a workflow efficiency (“…It’s very easy and half the work.”). Stakeholder-recommended strategies included focusing on the increased efficacy of primary HPV testing and developing clinician talking points incorporating national guidelines to assuage “cost-cutting” fears. Conclusions Substitution to replace an entrenched clinical practice is complex. Leveraging available facilitators is key to ease the process for clinical and administrative stakeholders—e.g., emphasizing the efficiency of going from two tests to one. Identifying and addressing clinician and patient fears regarding cost-cutting and perceived poorer quality of care is critical for substitution. Multicomponent and multilevel strategies for engagement and education will be required. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, #NCT04371887

Cervical Cancer: Assessment of Its Knowledge, Utilization of Services and Its Determinant Among Female Undergraduate Students in a Low Resource Setting

2021 ◽  
pp. 0272684X2110066
Author(s):  
Chidebe Christian Anikwe ◽  
Philip Chidubem Osuagwu ◽  
Cyril Chijioke Ikeoha ◽  
Okechukwu B Ikechukwu Dimejesi ◽  
Bartholomew Chukwunonye Okorochukwu
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Pap Smear ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
P Value ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Resource Setting ◽  
Study Population

Background Cervical cancer is a preventable disease that contributes significantly to the death of women. This study is aimed at determining the level of knowledge and utilization of cervical cancer screening and its determinants among female undergraduates of Ebonyi State University. Methods A structured questionnaire was used for a cross-sectional survey of the study population between January 1 and March 3, 2018. The data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics version 20. Data were represented with frequency table, simple percentage, mode, range, Chi square and pie chart. The level of significance is at P-value < 0.05. Results Majority (74.8%) of the respondents were aware of cervical cancer and it could be prevented (70.8%). More than three-fifths (68.30%) were informed via health workers, and 86.8% were aware that post-coital vaginal bleeding is a symptom. Less than half (49.8%) knew that HPV is the primary cause, and only 32.9% were aware of the HPV vaccine. One-quarter of the respondent were aware that early coitarche is a risk factor for cervical cancer. Only 41.8% of the women were aware of Pap smear, 9.2% had undergone screening, and 97.6% were willing to be screened. Marital status was the significant determinant of being screened while class level did not significantly influence uptake of cervical cancer screening. The most common reason (20.6%) for not being screened was lack of awareness of the test. Conclusion Our study population had a good knowledge of cervical cancer, but utilization of cervical cancer screening was poor. Awareness creation through the mass media and provision of affordable screening services can promote the use of cervical cancer screening in the study area.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of a two-stage strategy with HPV testing followed by visual inspection with acetic acid for cervical cancer screening in a low-income setting

2014 ◽  
Vol 136 (6) ◽  
pp. E743-E750 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre-Marie Tebeu ◽  
Joël Fokom-Domgue ◽  
Victoria Crofts ◽  
Emmanuel Flahaut ◽  
Rosa Catarino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Acetic Acid ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Visual Inspection ◽  
Hpv Testing ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
Low Income Setting

The Pittsburgh Cervical Cancer Screening Model: A Risk Assessment Tool

2010 ◽  
Vol 134 (5) ◽  
pp. 744-750
Author(s):  
R. Marshall Austin ◽  
Agnieszka Onisko ◽  
Marek J. Druzdzel
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Disease Risk ◽  
Hpv Vaccination ◽  
Dynamic Bayesian Network ◽  
Adenocarcinoma In Situ ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Hpv Test

Abstract Context.—Evaluation of cervical cancer screening has grown increasingly complex with the introduction of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and newer screening technologies approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. Objective.—To create a unique Pittsburgh Cervical Cancer Screening Model (PCCSM) that quantifies risk for histopathologic cervical precancer (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia [CIN] 2, CIN3, and adenocarcinoma in situ) and cervical cancer in an environment predominantly using newer screening technologies. Design.—The PCCSM is a dynamic Bayesian network consisting of 19 variables available in the laboratory information system, including patient history data (most recent HPV vaccination data), Papanicolaou test results, high-risk HPV results, procedure data, and histopathologic results. The model's graphic structure was based on the published literature. Results from 375 441 patient records from 2005 through 2008 were used to build and train the model. Additional data from 45 930 patients were used to test the model. Results.—The PCCSM compares risk quantitatively over time for histopathologically verifiable CIN2, CIN3, adenocarcinoma in situ, and cervical cancer in screened patients for each current cytology result category and for each HPV result. For each current cytology result, HPV test results affect risk; however, the degree of cytologic abnormality remains the largest positive predictor of risk. Prior history also alters the CIN2, CIN3, adenocarcinoma in situ, and cervical cancer risk for patients with common current cytology and HPV test results. The PCCSM can also generate negative risk projections, estimating the likelihood of the absence of histopathologic CIN2, CIN3, adenocarcinoma in situ, and cervical cancer in screened patients. Conclusions.—The PCCSM is a dynamic Bayesian network that computes quantitative cervical disease risk estimates for patients undergoing cervical screening. Continuously updatable with current system data, the PCCSM provides a new tool to monitor cervical disease risk in the evolving postvaccination era.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document