Search

Background: The Nordic Cancer Registries are among the oldest population-based registries in the world, with more than 60 years of complete coverage of what is now a combined population of 26 million. However, despite being the source of a substantial number of studies, there is no published paper comparing the different registries. Therefore, we did a systematic review to identify similarities and dissimilarities of the Nordic Cancer Registries, which could possibly explain some of the differences in cancer incidence rates across these countries. Methods: We describe and compare here the core characteristics of each of the Nordic Cancer Registries: (i) data sources; (ii) registered disease entities and deviations from IARC multiple cancer coding rules; (iii) variables and related coding systems. Major changes over time are described and discussed. Results: All Nordic Cancer Registries represent a high quality standard in terms of completeness and accuracy of the registered data. Conclusions: Even though the information in the Nordic Cancer Registries in general can be considered more similar than any other collection of data from five different countries, there are numerous differences in registration routines, classification systems and inclusion of some tumors. These differences are important to be aware of when comparing time trends in the Nordic countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. High-risk human papilloma virus (hrHPV) testing was added to the cytology triage of women with equivocal screening smears in the Norwegian programme for cervical cancer screening in 2005. In this population-based observational before and after study we assessed the effect of changing the screening algorithm. Material and methods. In periods before and after the change 75 852 and 66 616 women, respectively, were eligible for triage, i.e. they had smear results of unsatisfactory, atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US), or low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) at routine screening. The triage was delayed as supplementary testing started six months after the initial screening. The groups were compared with respect to results of triage and later three-year cumulative incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+). Results. Before and after the change in the screening algorithm 5.2% (3964/75 852) and 8.1% (5417/66 616) of women, respectively, were referred to colposcopy. Among women referred to colposcopy cumulative incidence of CIN2+ (positive predictive value of referral) increased from 42.0% [95% confidence interval (CI): 40.3 − 43.7%] in the period with cytology only to 48.0% (95% CI 46.6 − 49.4%) after the start of HPV testing. For women recalled to ordinary screening the three-year cumulative incidence decreased from 2.7% (95% CI 2.5 − 2.9%) to 1.0% (95% CI 0.9 − 1.2%) during the same period. Among women with LSIL at routine screening and HPV testing in triage, 52.5% (1976/3766) were HPV positive. Conclusion. The new algorithm with HPV testing implemented in 2005 resulted in an increased rate of referral to colposcopy, but in a better risk stratification with respect to precancerous disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]