Search

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women have lower participation in Australia's National Cervical Screening Program than other Australian women. Under-screened (including never screened) women's voices are rarely heard in research evidence, despite being a priority group for interventions to increase cervical screening participation. This study aimed to describe under-screened Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women's perspectives on cervical screening. Participants were 29 under-screened (women who had either never screened, had not screened in the previous five years or had recently screened in the past three months after more than five years) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women from five communities across three states/territories. Female Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander researchers Yarned with women about why they did not participate in screening and how to improve screening. Yarning is an Indigenous qualitative research method in which relationships and trust facilitate culturally safe conversation. Transcripts were analysed thematically. The proportion of eligible women who screened within 30 days after the Yarn was calculated. We identified four themes describing how the harms outweighed the benefits of cervical screening for under-screened women. These were: 1) distress, discomfort, and trauma; 2) lack of privacy and control; 3) complicated relationships with health care providers (HCPs); and 4) pressured, insensitive, and/or culturally unsafe communication from HCPs. Under-screened women who had recently screened had maintained privacy and control through self-collection and had experienced trauma-informed and empathetic care from their HCPs. While we cannot unequivocally attribute women's subsequent participation in screening to their involvement in this study, it is notable that one third of eligible under-screened women were screened within 30 days after the Yarn. Enhancing privacy, implementing trauma-informed approaches to care and sensitivity to the clinician-client relationship dynamics could enhance women's sense of comfort in, and control over, the screening procedure. The opportunity to Yarn about cervical screening and self-collection may address these issues and support progress toward cervical cancer elimination in Australia., Competing Interests: The authors have read the journal’s policy and have the following conflicts: The study is affiliated with Southern Queensland Centre of Excellence in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Primary Health Care, Wuchopperen Health Service Pty Ltd and Yerin Eleanor Duncan Aboriginal Health Centre. These commercial affiliations provided support in the form of salaries for authors CM, JM, and EW, respectively. This does not alter our adherence to all the PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Background: Early detection of breast cancer can improve survival rates and decrease mortality rates. This study investigates whether there are significant differences in participation in breast screening among women born in Muslim countries compared to women born in Non-Muslim countries and Australia., Methods: Screening data from January 1st, 2000 to December 31st, 2013 from the Breast Screen Victoria Registry (BSV) was linked with hospital records from the Victorian Admitted Episodes Dataset (VAED). Countries having more than 50% of their population as Muslim were categorised as Muslim countries. Age adjusted rates were calculated for women born in Muslim and Non-Muslim countries and compared with the Australian age adjusted rates. Logistic regression assessed the association between screening status and other factors which include country of birth, marital status, age and socio-economic status., Results: Women born in Muslim countries (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.70, 95%CI = 0.68-0.72) and in other Non-Muslim countries (OR = 0.87, 95%CI = 0.86-0.88) had lower odds of participation in breast screening than Australian born women. Women aged 60-64 years (OR = 1.42, 95%CI = 1.40-1.44) had higher odds of participation in the BreastScreen program than 50-54 age group., Conclusion: This study provides valuable insights to understanding breast screening participation among women born in Muslim countries residing in Victoria. This population level study contributes to the broader knowledge of screening participation of women born in Muslim countries, an understudied population group in Australia and across the world. This study has implications for breast screening programs as it highlights the need for culturally sensitive approaches to support breast screening participation among women born in Muslim countries., Competing Interests: Tahira Yeasmeen and Margaret Kelaher certify that they have NO affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest, or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript. Julia Brotherton and Michael Malloy report the following affiliation or involvement in an organization or entity with a financial or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript. Julia Brotherton is affiliated with VCS Foundation. Michael Malloy is affiliated with VICNISS, Melbourne Health and formerly with VCS Foundation.

Background: Autoimmune conditions (AICs) and/or their treatment may alter risk of human papilloma virus (HPV) infection and females with AICs are therefore at an increased risk of cervical dysplasia. However, inclusion of these at-risk populations in cervical cancer screening and HPV-vaccination guidelines, are mostly lacking. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of cervical dysplasia in a wide range of AICs and compare that to HIV and immunocompetent controls to support the optimisation of cervical cancer preventive health measures., Methods: Data linkage was used to match cervical screening episodes to emergency department records of females with AICs or HIV to immunocompetent controls over a 14-year period. The primary outcome was histologically confirmed high-grade cervical disease. Results, measured as rates by cytology and histology classification per 1,000 females screened, were analysed per disease group, and intergroup comparisons were performed., Results: Females with inflammatory bowel disease (2,683), psoriatic and enteropathic arthropathies (1,848), multiple sclerosis (MS) (1,426), rheumatoid arthritis (1,246), systemic lupus erythematosus and/or mixed connective tissue disease (SLE/MCTD) (702), HIV (44), and 985,383 immunocompetent controls were included. SLE/MCTD and HIV groups had greater rates of high-grade histological and cytological abnormalities compared to controls. Increased rates of low-grade cytological abnormalities were detected in all females with AICs, with the exception of the MS group., Conclusions: Females with SLE/MCTD or HIV have increased rates of high-grade cervical abnormalities. The increased low-grade dysplasia rate seen in most females with AICs is consistent with increased HPV infection. These findings support expansion of cervical cancer preventative programs to include these at-risk females., Competing Interests: Dr Foster, Dr Malloy, A/Prof Van Doornum, Dr Unglik and A/Prof Brotherton have no conflict of interest to declare. Dr Jokubaitis has received speaker’s honoraria from Biogen, and conference travel support from Merck. She receives research funding from MS Research Australia, and the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). Mr. Wrede has received Honoraria and Sponsorship from Biogen and Seqirus. He is Deputy Chairman of the Board of VCS Foundation Pty Ltd. He is a member of the Clinical Expert Panel reviewing the Australian Cervical Screening Program. Prof Butzkueven serves as the Director of the MSBase foundation. He serves on steering committees and advisory boards for Biogen, Roche, Merck, Sanofi, Novartis. He has received speaker’s honoraria, travel support and receives research grant support from Roche, Biogen, Merck, Sanofi, Novartis and Teva. Prof Sasadeusz has been on advisory boards for Merck. Prof Macrae is on advisory committee for Pfizer and receives funding for the conduct of multiple clinical trials in inflammatory bowel disease. He receives funding from Cancer Australia, Cancer Council NSW, and NHMRC for investigator-initiated studies. A/Prof van der Walt has received speaker’s honoraria, travel support and served on advisory boards for Biogen, Merck, Sanofi, Novartis and Teva. She receives funding from the NHMRC Australia. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (collectively, Indigenous Australian) women experience a higher burden of cervical cancer than other women. The National Cervical Screening Program (NCSP) is failing to meet the needs of Indigenous Australian women, resulting in many women not regularly participating in cervical screening. However, one third of Indigenous Australian women do participate in cervical screening. The reasons that some women in this population commence and continue to screen remain unheard but could provide insights to support women who currently do not participate. We aimed to describe Indigenous Australian women's experiences and views of participation in cervical screening by yarning (a culturally-appropriate interview technique) with 50 Indigenous Australian women aged 25-70 years who had completed cervical screening in the past five years, recruited via Primary Health Care Centres (PHCCs) from three jurisdictions. Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander women researchers conducted the interviews. Thematic analysis identified six themes: screening as a means of staying strong and in control; overcoming fears, shame, and negative experiences of screening; needing to talk openly about screening; the value of trusting relationships with screening providers; logistical barriers; and overcoming privacy concerns for women employed at PHCCs. Despite describing screening as shameful, invasive, and uncomfortable, women perceived it as a way of staying healthy and exerting control over their health. This ultimately supported their participation and a sense of empowerment. Women valued open discussion about screening and strong relationships with health providers. We identified logistical barriers and specific barriers faced by women employed at PHCCs. This study is strengthened by a research approach that centred Indigenous Australian women's voices. Understanding the experiences of Indigenous Australian women who participate in screening will help screening providers support women to start and continue to screen regularly. Recommendations for practice are provided., Competing Interests: The authors have read the journal's policy and have the following conflicts: The study is affiliated with Southern Queensland Centre of Excellence in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Primary Health Care, Wuchopperen Health Service Pty Ltd and Yerin Eleanor Duncan Aboriginal Health Centre. These commercial affiliations provided support in the form of salaries for authors CM, JM, and EW, respectively. This does not alter our adherence to all the PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

The National Cervical Screening Program (NCSP) in Australia underwent major changes on December 1st, 2017. The program changed from 2-yearly Pap testing for women aged 18-69 years to 5-yearly HPV testing for women aged 25-74 years including differential management pathways for oncogenic HPV 16/18 positive versus HPV non16/18 positive test results and the option of self-collection for under-screened women. We conducted a survey among cervical screening providers in primary care to assess their level of preparedness in undertaking cervical screening before (pre-renewal) and after (post-renewal) the new program was implemented. Surveys were conducted between 14th August and 30th November 2017 (pre-renewal) and 9th February and 26th October 2018 (post-renewal) among cervical screening providers who attended education sessions related to the new guidelines. Preparedness was assessed in three areas: 1) level of comfort implementing the new guidelines (7 questions), 2) level of confidence in their ability to convey information about the new guidelines (9 questions) and 3) level of agreement regarding access to resources to support implementation (11 questions). Proportions were calculated for each question response and pre- and post-renewal periods compared using generalised linear models. Open-ended questions related to anticipated barriers and ways to overcome barriers were also included in the questionnaires. Compared to the pre-renewal period, a higher proportion of practitioners in the post-renewal period were more comfortable offering routine screening to women ≥25 years (p = 0.005) and more confident explaining the rationale for not screening before 25 years (p = 0.015); confident explaining a positive HPV 16/18 (p = 0.04) and HPV non 16/18(p = 0.013) test result and were comfortable with not referring women with a positive HPV non 16/18 test result and low grade/negative cytology for colposcopy (p = 0.01). A higher proportion of Victorian practitioners in the post-renewal period sample were also comfortable (p = 0.04) and confident (p = 0.015) recommending self-collection to under-screened women and agreed that self-collection is a reliable test (p = 0.003). The most commonly reported suggestion was to provide information, education and communication materials to both patients and practitioners. Compared to the pre-renewal period, practitioners in the post-renewal period were better prepared to implement the renewed screening program. Healthcare providers require further support to implement the self-collection pathway., Competing Interests: JMLB and MS are chief investigators of the NHMRC Centre for Research Excellence in Cervical Cancer Control (APP1135172) from which FS (formerly) & TLM receives salary support. JMLB, MS and LR are investigators of a trial of primary HPV screening in Australia (Compass) that has received a part funding contribution from Roche Molecular Systems, Ventana Inc. USA. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Background: Little is known about the impact of comorbidity on cervical cancer survival in Australian women, including whether Indigenous women's higher prevalence of comorbidity contributes to their lower survival compared to non-Indigenous women., Methods: Data for cervical cancers diagnosed in 2003-2012 were extracted from six Australian state-based cancer registries and linked to hospital inpatient records to identify comorbidity diagnoses. Five-year cause-specific and all-cause survival probabilities were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Flexible parametric models were used to estimate excess cause-specific mortality by Charlson comorbidity index score (0,1,2+), for Indigenous women compared to non-Indigenous women., Results: Of 4,467 women, Indigenous women (4.4%) compared to non-Indigenous women had more comorbidity at diagnosis (score ≥1: 24.2% vs. 10.0%) and lower five-year cause-specific survival (60.2% vs. 76.6%). Comorbidity was associated with increased cervical cancer mortality for non-Indigenous women, but there was no evidence of such a relationship for Indigenous women. There was an 18% reduction in the Indigenous: non-Indigenous hazard ratio (excess mortality) when comorbidity was included in the model, yet this reduction was not statistically significant. The excess mortality for Indigenous women was only evident among those without comorbidity (Indigenous: non-Indigenous HR 2.5, 95%CI 1.9-3.4), indicating that factors other than those measured in this study are contributing to the differential. In a subgroup of New South Wales women, comorbidity was associated with advanced-stage cancer, which in turn was associated with elevated cervical cancer mortality., Conclusions: Survival was lowest for women with comorbidity. However, there wasn't a clear comorbidity-survival gradient for Indigenous women. Further investigation of potential drivers of the cervical cancer survival differentials is warranted., Impact: The results highlight the need for cancer care guidelines and multidisciplinary care that can meet the needs of complex patients. Also, primary and acute care services may need to pay more attention to Indigenous Australian women who may not obviously need it (i.e. those without comorbidity).