Search

Rosenblum and colleagues reported a study describing cross-sectional HPV prevalence through 2018 among a national sample of sexually experienced persons. The editorialists discuss the findings and actions that will be crucial to ensuring we do not lose a generation to preventable HPV-associated cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An update to the American Cancer Society (ACS) guideline regarding screening for the early detection of cervical precancerous lesions and cancer is presented. The guidelines are based on a systematic evidence review, contributions from 6 working groups, and a recent symposium cosponsored by the ACS, the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and the American Society for Clinical Pathology, which was attended by 25 organizations. The new screening recommendations address age-appropriate screening strategies, including the use of cytology and high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, follow-up (eg, the management of screen positives and screening intervals for screen negatives) of women after screening, the age at which to exit screening, future considerations regarding HPV testing alone as a primary screening approach, and screening strategies for women vaccinated against HPV16 and HPV18 infections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Although overall cervical cancer incidence rates have decreased in both black and white women in the U.S. since the mid 1950s due to widespread screening, rates continue to be higher among blacks than among whites. However, whether this pattern differs by age is unknown. Methods: Cervical cancer cases (1975–2009, N=36,503) were obtained from nine Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program registries. Age-standardized incidence rates for white and black women were calculated from 1975–1979 through 2005–2009 by age group (<50, 50–64, and ≥65years). Rate ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) evaluated differences in rates for blacks vs. whites by age group and stage at diagnosis during 1975–1979 and 2005–2009. Results: Among women aged <50years, the black-to-white disparity RR decreased from nearly two-fold (RR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.7–2.1) during 1975–1979 to unity during 2005–2009 (RR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.8–1.0). In contrast, rates remained significantly elevated for blacks vs. whites aged 50–64years (RR, 2.4; 95% CI, 2.1–2.7 and 1.7; 95% CI, 1.5–2.0), and for those aged ≥65years (RR, 3.3; 95% CI, 2.9–3.8 and 2.2; 95% CI, 1.9–2.7) during both time periods, although the disparities decreased over time. Similar disparities persisted for older black women with cervical cancer of all stages. Conclusion: Disparities in cervical cancer incidence rates were eliminated for younger blacks vs. whites but persisted for blacks aged 50years and older. Additional strategies are needed to increase follow-up and treatment of precancerous lesions among middle-aged and older black women. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The article reports on the significance of human papillomavirus vaccination to prevent the cervical cancer programs in the U.S. It states that the development of prophylactic human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine is a landmark in cancer prevention. It infers that integration of vaccination and screening reduces not only cervical cancer risk but also overtreatment for abnormalities destined to resolve.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infections cause more than 35,900 cancers annually in the United States. Although cervical cancer is the most prevalent HPV-related malignancy in women, the virus is also responsible for a significant percentage of anal, vaginal, and vulvar cancers. A comprehensive approach to mitigating cervical cancer includes HPV vaccination (primary prevention), screening and treatment of precancerous lesions (secondary prevention), and diagnosis and treatment of invasive cancer (tertiary prevention). Although a successful strategy, there are opportunities to innovate and increase access that can also be adapted to address the unique clinical care gaps that exist with the other anogenital cancers. The Society for Women's Health Research held a series of interdisciplinary meetings and events, during which expert researchers, clinicians, patient advocates, and health care policy leaders evaluated the current landscape of HPV-related cancers and their effects on women's health. This report summarizes the discussions of this working group and areas it identified in which to address gaps in primary and secondary prevention approaches to improve access and health outcomes for women with HPV-related anogenital cancers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical screening has been shown to increase the yield of precancerous disease and reduce the incidence of cervical cancer more than cytology alone. Here we document the state-wide uptake of co-testing with HPV and cytology in women aged 30–64 years as recommended by national and international bodies. Registry-based study of all screening cytology and HPV tests in New Mexico from 2008 to 2019 among women aged 21–64 years, with a focus on cytology negative tests to distinguish co-testing from reflex HPV testing to triage equivocal or mildly abnormal cytology. A total of 1,704,055 cervical screening tests from 681,440 women aged 21–64 years in the state of New Mexico were identified. The proportion of screening tests which were co-tests rose from 5.6% in 2008 to 84.3% in 2019 among women aged 30–64 years with a marked change from the near exclusive use of the Hybrid Capture II HPV test, (a signal amplified test method) to the use of target amplified HPV tests. The largest increases were seen between 2013 and 2015, reflecting the introduction and adoption of new clinical guidelines. Increases in co-testing were also seen in younger women. Co-testing is now well established in women aged 30–64 years, but smaller increases have also been seen at younger ages, although this is not currently recommended. The impact of co-testing on cervical disease outcomes and number of colposcopies and biopsies in routine population settings remain important, especially in young women. • Cervical cancer screening by co-testing increased from 5.6% in 2008 to 84.3% in 2019 among women ages 30–64 years. • Smaller increases in co-test usage were observed in women of younger ages, although not currently recommended. • The median screening interval increased from 15 to 39 months as screening guideline recommendations were adopted. • The near exclusive use of the Hybrid Capture II HPV test has changed to the use of target amplified HPV tests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cervical cancer screening recommendations for women aged 30-65 years include co-testing (high-risk human papillomavirus [hrHPV] with Pap testing) every five years or Pap testing alone every three years. Geographic variations of these different screening modalities across the United States have not been examined. We selected 82,426 non-pregnant women aged 30-65 years from the 2016 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System with data on sociodemographics, hysterectomy, and cervical cancer screening, representing 42 states and the District of Columbia. Logistic regression models with predicted marginal probabilities were used to calculate state-level prevalence estimates of recent cervical cancer screening and uptake of co-testing, Pap testing, and hrHPV testing among those who were recently screened. Analysis was conducted in 2018-2019. Recent screening prevalence ranged from 80.0% (Idaho) to 92.2% (Massachusetts), with more state-level geographic variability in co-testing than Pap testing alone. Uptake of co-testing ranged from 27.5% (Utah) to 49.9% (District of Columbia); compared to the national estimate, co-testing was lower in 12 states and higher in six states. Overall, Midwestern and Southern states had the lowest uptake of co-testing whereas Northeastern states had the highest. Sociodemographic, healthcare, and behavioral factors accounted for some but not all state-level variation in co-testing. There was substantial state-level variability in co-testing prevalence, which was lowest in Midwestern and Southern states; the variation was not entirely explained by individual sociodemographic, healthcare, and behavioral factors. Future studies should monitor the impact of geographic variations in screening modalities on state-level differences in cervical cancer incidence, survival, and mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Human papillomavirus vaccine school entry requirements may be an opportunity to improve the low rates of human papillomavirus vaccination among adolescents. This study evaluates changes in provider-verified human papillomavirus vaccine uptake by age 13 years for adolescents in Rhode Island compared with all other states from 2011 to 2017.Methods: The National Immunization Survey-Teen 2011-2017, a population-based cross-sectional survey, was analyzed in 2019. The survey included telephone interviews and provider-verified reports of vaccination among U.S. adolescents aged 13-17 years. The sample was subset to participants with provider-verified human papillomavirus vaccination reports (n=145,153). A difference-in-differences approach evaluated the Rhode Island human papillomavirus vaccination school entry requirement enacted in 2015. The main outcome was provider-verified human papillomavirus vaccine uptake by age 13 years.Results: Compared with boys in other states, boys in Rhode Island had an increase of 14 percentage points in the probability of uptake of human papillomavirus vaccination by age 13 years (β=0.139, 95% CI=0.073, 0.205). No such differences were observed on comparing girls in Rhode Island with girls in other states (β=0.009, 95% CI= -0.068, 0.086).Conclusions: The Rhode Island school entry requirement for human papillomavirus vaccination improved rates of vaccine uptake among boys and may be a useful option for improving human papillomavirus vaccination nationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Human papillomavirus vaccination (HPVV) prevents several types of cancer. The American Cancer Society recently established a goal that by 2026, 80% of adolescents will be up to date (UTD) before their 13th birthday. However, the number in need of vaccination to reach this goal is unknown. This study estimated the number of additional adolescents (11-12 years old) who need HPVV for 80% prevalence to be reached by 2026.Methods: The study used de-identified and publicly available data and exempt from institutional review board approval and informed consent. The 2016 National Immunization Survey for Teens was used to estimate the baseline HPVV prevalence. Linear growth to 80% HPVV prevalence by 2026 was applied to set intermediate targets. US Census Bureau data were used for population projections. This study estimated the cumulative number of additional adolescents 11 to 12 years old who would need to become UTD (ie, receive 2 doses) by first subtracting the number who would need to be vaccinated to achieve an intermediate target prevalence from the estimated number currently compliant and then summing these numbers between 2018 and 2026.Results: Nationwide, an additional 7.62 million males (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.78 million to 8.40 million) and an additional 6.77 million females (95% CI, 5.95 million to 7.55 million), aged 11 to 12 years, would need to receive 2 doses of the vaccine between 2018 and 2026 for 80% prevalence to be achieved. Most adolescents not UTD (80%) also needed to initiate vaccination, and more than 90% recently visited a health care provider.Conclusions: It is estimated that at least 14.39 million additional adolescents aged 11 to 12 years in the United States will need to receive 2 doses of HPVV for a UTD HPVV prevalence of 80% to be achieved by 2026. To reach this goal, improvements in facilitators of HPVV initiation, including physician recommendations and parental acceptability, are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Breast cancer is a leading cause of premature mortality among US women. Early detection has been shown to be associated with reduced breast cancer morbidity and mortality.Objective: To update the American Cancer Society (ACS) 2003 breast cancer screening guideline for women at average risk for breast cancer.Process: The ACS commissioned a systematic evidence review of the breast cancer screening literature to inform the update and a supplemental analysis of mammography registry data to address questions related to the screening interval. Formulation of recommendations was based on the quality of the evidence and judgment (incorporating values and preferences) about the balance of benefits and harms.Evidence Synthesis: Screening mammography in women aged 40 to 69 years is associated with a reduction in breast cancer deaths across a range of study designs, and inferential evidence supports breast cancer screening for women 70 years and older who are in good health. Estimates of the cumulative lifetime risk of false-positive examination results are greater if screening begins at younger ages because of the greater number of mammograms, as well as the higher recall rate in younger women. The quality of the evidence for overdiagnosis is not sufficient to estimate a lifetime risk with confidence. Analysis examining the screening interval demonstrates more favorable tumor characteristics when premenopausal women are screened annually vs biennially. Evidence does not support routine clinical breast examination as a screening method for women at average risk.Recommendations: The ACS recommends that women with an average risk of breast cancer should undergo regular screening mammography starting at age 45 years (strong recommendation). Women aged 45 to 54 years should be screened annually (qualified recommendation). Women 55 years and older should transition to biennial screening or have the opportunity to continue screening annually (qualified recommendation). Women should have the opportunity to begin annual screening between the ages of 40 and 44 years (qualified recommendation). Women should continue screening mammography as long as their overall health is good and they have a life expectancy of 10 years or longer (qualified recommendation). The ACS does not recommend clinical breast examination for breast cancer screening among average-risk women at any age (qualified recommendation).Conclusions and Relevance: These updated ACS guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for breast cancer screening for women at average risk of breast cancer. These recommendations should be considered by physicians and women in discussions about breast cancer screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2011, the American Cancer Society, the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and the American Society for Clinical Pathology updated screening guidelines for the early detection of cervical cancer and its precursors. Recommended screening strategies were cytology or cotesting (cytology in combination with high-risk human papillomavirus [hrHPV] testing). These guidelines also addressed the use of hrHPV testing alone as a primary screening approach, which was not recommended for use at that time. There is now a growing body of evidence for screening with primary hrHPV testing, including a prospective U.S.-based registration study. Thirteen experts, including representatives from the Society of Gynecologic Oncology, the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Cancer Society, the American Society of Cytopathology, the College of American Pathologists, and the American Society for Clinical Pathology, convened to provide interim guidance for primary hrHPV screening. This guidance panel was specifically triggered by an application to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for a currently marketed HPV test to be labeled for the additional indication of primary cervical cancer screening. Guidance was based on literature review and review of data from the FDA registration study, supplemented by expert opinion. This document aims to provide information for health care providers who are interested in primary hrHPV testing and an overview of the potential advantages and disadvantages of this strategy for screening as well as to highlight areas in need of further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2011, the American Cancer Society, the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and the American Society for Clinical Pathology updated screening guidelines for the early detection of cervical cancer and its precursors. Recommended screening strategies were cytology or cotesting (cytology in combination with high-risk human papillomavirus [hrHPV] testing). These guidelines also addressed the use of hrHPV testing alone as a primary screening approach, which was not recommended for use at that time. There is now a growing body of evidence for screening with primary hrHPV testing, including a prospective U.S.-based registration study. Thirteen experts, including representatives from the Society of Gynecologic Oncology, the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Cancer Society, the American Society of Cytopathology, the College of American Pathologists, and the American Society for Clinical Pathology, convened to provide interim guidance for primary hrHPV screening. This guidance panel was specifically triggered by an application to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for a currently marketed HPV test to be labeled for the additional indication of primary cervical cancer screening. Guidance was based on literature review and review of data from the FDA registration study, supplemented by expert opinion. This document aims to provide information for health care providers who are interested in primary hrHPV testing and an overview of the potential advantages and disadvantages of this strategy for screening as well as to highlight areas in need of further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The American Cancer Society (ACS), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Cancer Institute (NCI), and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR) collaborate annually to provide updates on cancer incidence and death rates and trends in these outcomes for the United States. This year’s report includes incidence trends for human papillomavirus (HPV)–associated cancers and HPV vaccination (recommended for adolescents aged 11–12 years). Methods Data on cancer incidence were obtained from the CDC, NCI, and NAACCR, and data on mortality were obtained from the CDC. Long- (1975/1992–2009) and short-term (2000–2009) trends in age-standardized incidence and death rates for all cancers combined and for the leading cancers among men and among women were examined by joinpoint analysis. Prevalence of HPV vaccination coverage during 2008 and 2010 and of Papanicolaou (Pap) testing during 2010 were obtained from national surveys. Results Death rates continued to decline for all cancers combined for men and women of all major racial and ethnic groups and for most major cancer sites; rates for both sexes combined decreased by 1.5% per year from 2000 to 2009. Overall incidence rates decreased in men but stabilized in women. Incidence rates increased for two HPV-associated cancers (oropharynx, anus) and some cancers not associated with HPV (eg, liver, kidney, thyroid). Nationally, 32.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 30.3% to 33.6%) of girls aged 13 to 17 years in 2010 had received three doses of the HPV vaccine, and coverage was statistically significantly lower among the uninsured (14.1%, 95% CI = 9.4% to 20.6%) and in some Southern states (eg, 20.0% in Alabama [95% CI = 13.9% to 27.9%] and Mississippi [95% CI = 13.8% to 28.2%]), where cervical cancer rates were highest and recent Pap testing prevalence was the lowest. Conclusions The overall trends in declining cancer death rates continue. However, increases in incidence rates for some HPV-associated cancers and low vaccination coverage among adolescents underscore the need for additional prevention efforts for HPV-associated cancers, including efforts to increase vaccination coverage. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Objectives. We examined the relationship of age at diagnosis and insurance status with stage among cervical cancer patients aged 21 to 85 years. Methods. We selected data on women (n = 69 739) diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer between 2000 and 2007 from the National Cancer Database. We evaluated the association between late stage (stage III/IV) and both insurance and age, with adjustment for race/ethnicity and other sociodemographic and clinical factors. We used multivariable log binomial models to estimate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results. The proportion of late-stage disease increased with age: from 16.53% (21-34 years) to 42.44% (≥ 70 years). The adjusted relative risk of advanced-stage disease among women aged 50 years and older was 2.2 to 2.5 times that of patients aged 21 to 34years. Uninsured (RR = 1.44; 95% CI = 1.40, 1.49), Medicaid (RR = 1.37, 95% CI = 1.34, 1.41 ), younger Medicare (RR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.06,1.19), and older Medicare (RR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.15, 1.26) patients had a higher risk of late-stage disease than did privately insured patients. Conclusions. Screening should be encouraged for women at high risk for advanced-stage disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing was recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use as an adjunct to cytology for cervical cancer screening. To help provide guidance to clinicians and patients when using HPV DNA testing as an adjunct to cervical cytology for screening, a workshop was cosponsored by the National Institutes of Health-National Cancer Institute, American Society of Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP), and American Cancer Society. Consensus was reached based on a literature review, expert opinion, and unpublished results from large ongoing screening studies. The conclusions of the workshop were that HPV DNA testing may be added to cervical cytology for screening in women aged 30 years or more. Women whose results are negative by both HPV DNA testing and cytology should not be re-screened before 3 years. Women whose results are negative by cytology, but are high-risk HPV DNA positive, are at a relatively low risk of having high-grade cervical neoplasia, and colposcopy should not be performed routinely in this setting. Instead, HPV DNA testing along with cervical cytology should be repeated in these women at 6 to 12 months. If test results of either are abnormal, colposcopy should then be performed. This guidance should assist clinicians in utilizing HPV DNA testing in an effective manner, while minimizing unnecessary evaluations and treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]