Search

Objectives: The longer-term impact of introducing human papillomavirus (HPV) testing into routine cervical cancer screening on precancer and cancer rates by histologic type has not been well described. Calendar trends in diagnoses were examined using data from Kaiser Permanente Northern California, which introduced triennial HPV and cytology co-testing in 2003 for women aged ≥30 years., Methods: We examined trends in cervical precancer (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 [CIN3] and adenocarcinoma in situ [AIS]) and cancer (squamous cell carcinoma [SCC] and adenocarcinoma [ADC]) diagnoses per 1000 screened during 2003-2018. We examined ratios of squamous vs. glandular diagnoses (SCC:ADC and CIN3:AIS)., Results: CIN3 and AIS diagnoses increased approximately 2% and 3% annually, respectively (p trend  < 0.001 for both). While SCC diagnoses decreased by 5% per annually (p trend  < 0.001), ADC diagnoses did not change. These patterns were generally observed within each age group (30-39, 40-49, and 50-64 years). ADC diagnoses per 1000 screened did not change even among those who underwent co-testing starting in 2003-2006. SCC:ADC decreased from approximately 2.5:1 in 2003-2006 to 1.3:1 in 2015-2018 while the CIN3:AIS remained relatively constant, ∼10:1., Conclusions: Since its introduction at KPNC, co-testing increased the detection of CIN3 over time, which likely caused a subsequent reduction of SCC. However, there has been no observed decrease in ADC. One possible explanation for lack of effectiveness against ADC is the underdiagnosis of AIS. Novel strategies to identify and treat women at high risk of ADC need to be developed and clinically validated., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. Castle has received HPV tests and assays for research at a reduced cost from Atila Biosystems in the last 3 years., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

This invited commentary discusses the article by Richards et al. describing differences in rates of on-time HPV vaccination and cervical cancer screening in 2018 among enrollees in different insurance plans. The commentary focuses on the larger problem of low vaccination HPV rates and decreasing cervical cancer screening rates seen across all sectors. We outline challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic on HPV vaccination and cervical cancer screening, and discuss opportunities to improve cervical cancer prevention., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The COVID-19 pandemic has a major impact on a wide range of health outcomes. Disruptions of elective health services related to cervical screening, management of abnormal screening test results, and treatment of precancers, may lead to increases in cervical cancer incidence and exacerbate existing health disparities. Modeling studies suggest that a short delay of cervical screening in subjects with previously negative HPV results has minor effects on cancer outcomes, while delay of management and treatment can lead to larger increases in cervical cancer. Several approaches can mitigate the effects of disruption of cervical screening and management. HPV-based screening has higher accuracy compared to cytology, and a negative HPV result provides longer reassurance against cervical cancer; further, HPV testing can be conducted from self-collected specimens. Self-collection expands the reach of screening to underserved populations who currently do not participate in screening. Self-collection and can also provide alternative screening approaches during the pandemic because testing can be supported by telehealth and specimens collected in the home, substantially reducing patient-provider contact and risk of COVID-19 exposure, and also expanding the reach of catch-up services to address backlogs of screening tests that accumulated during the pandemic. Risk-based management allows prioritizing management of patients at highest risk of cervical cancer while extending screening intervals for those at lowest risk. The pandemic provides important lessons for how to make cervical screening more resilient to disruptions and how to reduce cervical cancer disparities that may be exacerbated due to disruptions of health services., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The primary goal of cervical screening is to identify women with cervical precancers who need treatment to prevent invasive cervical cancer. Cervical cancer screening programs in high-resource settings rely on a multi-step process to reassure the majority of women of low cancer risk and treat the small number of women at high risk of precancer and cancer. The requirement of major resource investment for training and capacity building of multi-step cervical cancer screening programs prevents their introduction in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Screen-and-treat programs have been evaluated and introduced in some countries that use mainly ablative treatment as primary treatment options. Ablative treatment with cryotherapy and thermal ablation has a favorable tradeoff of benefits and harms and can be introduced more widely than excisional treatment in LMICs. While most women below 40 are eligible for ablative procedures, fewer than 50% are eligible by age 50 and ablative treatment is not appropriate over age 50. Excisional treatment is required for women ineligible for ablative treatment. Since screening programs in LMICs necessarily detect invasive cancers, cancer treatment and palliative care needs to be considered as well., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Women previously vaccinated against human papillomavirus (HPV) type 16 and 18 are now reaching the age (21 years) at which cervical-cancer screening is recommended in the U.S. The impact of HPV vaccination on risks of cervical precancer following a positive and negative screen among women aged 21-24 years who just started routine cervical screening are not well described. Therefore, three-year absolute and relative (RR) cumulative risks of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe diagnoses (≥CIN2) and grade 3 or more severe diagnoses (≥CIN3) were estimated for women undergoing cervical screening at Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Risks were estimated in women aged 21-24 years (n = 75,008) undergoing cervical screening since late 2006, 6 months after HPV vaccination became available; women were categorized vaccinated at ages <18, 18-20, and 21-24 years and compared to those who were unvaccinated. Three-year risks were estimated for normal, low-grade, and high-grade cytology results. Three-year risks of ≥CIN2 and ≥CIN3 for unvaccinated women following low-grade cytology were 10.89% for and 3.70%, respectively. By comparison, Three-year risks of ≥CIN2 and ≥CIN3 were 5.26% (RR = 0.48, 95%CI = 0.24-0.99) and 0.99% (RR = 0.27, 95%CI = 0.06-1.13), respectively, for women vaccinated under the age of 18 years. Three-year ≥CIN2 and ≥CIN3 risks were lower for those HPV vaccinated at younger age for any screening result (p trend  ≤ 0.01 for all comparisons). These data support initiating cervical screening at an older age or changing the management of a low-grade cytology result in women aged 21-24 years who were vaccinated against HPV younger than age of 18 years., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)