Search

Background: Despite advances to prevent and detect cervical cancer, national targets for screening have not been met in the United States. Previous studies suggested that approximately half of women who developed cervical cancer were not adequately screened. This study aimed to provide an updated examination of women's screening and diagnostic practices five years prior to an invasive cervical cancer diagnosis., Methods: The study included women age 21 years and older diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer in 2013-2016 from three population-based state cancer registries in the United States. Medical records abstraction identified screening history and diagnostic follow-up. A mailed survey provided sociodemographic data. Screening was a Pap or human papillomavirus (HPV) test between 6 months and 5 years before diagnosis. Adequate follow-up was defined per management guidelines., Results: Of the 376 women, 60% (n = 228) had not been screened. Among women who received an abnormal screening result (n = 122), 67% (n = 82) had adequate follow-up. Predictors of: (a) being screened were younger age, having a higher income, and having insurance; (b) adequate follow-up were having a higher income, and (c) stage 1 cervical cancer were being screened and younger age., Conclusion: Unlike other cancer patterns of care studies, this study uses data obtained from medical records supplemented with self-report information to understand a woman's path to diagnosis, her follow-up care, and the stage of her cervical cancer diagnosis. This study provides findings that could be used to reach more unscreened or under screened women and to continue lowering cervical cancer incidence in the United States., (© 2021 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This article has been contributed to by US Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.)

Introduction: Leading professional organizations recommend cervical cancer screening for average-risk women aged 21-65 years. For average-risk women aged >65 years, routine screening may be discontinued if "adequate" screening with negative results is documented. Screening is recommended after age 65 years for women who do not meet adequate prior screening criteria or are at special risk., Methods: Authors examined the most recent cervical cancer incidence data from two federal cancer surveillance programs for all women by age and race, corrected for hysterectomy status. The 2013 and 2015 National Health Interview Surveys were analyzed in 2016 to examine the proportion of women aged 41-70 years without a hysterectomy who reported that they never had a Pap test or that their most recent Pap test was >5 years ago (not recently screened)., Results: The incidence rate for cervical cancer among older women, corrected for hysterectomy status, did not decline until age ≥85 years. The proportion not recently screened increased with age, from 12.1% for women aged 41-45 years to 18.4% for women aged 61-65 years., Conclusions: Even among women within the recommended age range for routine screening, many are not up to date, and a substantial number of women approach the "stopping" age for cervical cancer screening without an adequate prior screening history. Efforts are needed to reach women who have not been adequately screened, including women aged >65 years, to prevent invasive cervical cancer cases and deaths among older women., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Current cervical cancer screening guidelines include the option of lengthening the screening interval to 5 years for average-risk women aged 30-65 years when screened with Pap and human papillomavirus (HPV) test (co-test). Because many providers are reluctant to extend screening intervals, we launched an educational intervention to promote recommended screening practices. The study objective was to assess changes in provider attitudes and beliefs to extending screening intervals among low-income women., Methods: The study was conducted in 15 clinics in Federally Qualified Health Centers in Illinois. Providers in the intervention arm received a multicomponent educational intervention. Fifty-six providers (n = 29 intervention and n = 27 control) completed baseline and 12-month follow-up surveys assessing beliefs and intentions about extending screening intervals., Results: The 12-month assessment showed providers in the intervention arm were significantly more likely than those in the control arm to recommend a 3-year screening interval (guideline recommendation at time of study) with a normal co-test result. Providers who received the intervention were significantly more likely to agree that routine co-testing is the best way to screen for cervical cancer, that extending the screening interval would be good, easy, and beneficial, and to disagree that the increased screening interval would cause patients to lose contact with the medical system., Conclusion: Educating providers on the natural history of HPV infection and cervical cancer and the benefits of extended intervals increased their willingness to follow guidelines. This study provides evidence that an educational intervention delivered with HPV testing materials may be effective in encouraging appropriate cervical screening intervals.

Background: The benefits of the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) on cervical cancer screening for participating uninsured low-income women have never been measured., Purpose: To estimate the benefits in life-years (LYs) gained; quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained; and deaths averted., Methods: A cervical cancer simulation model was constructed based on an existing cohort model. The model was applied to NBCCEDP participants aged 18-64 years. Screening habits for uninsured low-income women were estimated using National Health Interview Survey data from 1990 to 2005 and NBCCEDP data from 1991 to 2007. The study was conducted during 2011-2012 and covered all 68 NBCCEDP grantees in 50 states, the District of Columbia, five U.S. territories, and 12 tribal organizations. Separate simulations were performed for the following three scenarios: (1) women who received NBCCEDP (Program) screening; (2) women who received screening without the program (No Program); and (3) women who received no screening (No Screening)., Results: Among 1.8 million women screened in 1991-2007, the Program added 10,369 LYs gained compared to No Program, and 101,509 LYs gained compared to No Screening. The Program prevented 325 women from dying of cervical cancer relative to No Program, and 3,829 relative to No Screening. During this time period, the Program accounted for 15,589 QALYs gained when compared with No Program, and 121,529 QALYs gained when compared with No Screening., Conclusions: These estimates suggest that NBCCEDP cervical cancer screening has reduced mortality among medically underserved low-income women who participated in the program., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The objectives of this study were to evaluate the quality of national data generated by the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP); to assess variables collected through the program that are appropriate to use for program management, evaluation, and data analysis; and to identify potential data-quality issues., Methods: Information was abstracted randomly from 5603 medical records selected from 6 NBCCEDP-funded state programs, and 76 categorical variables and 11 text-based breast and cervical cancer screening and diagnostic variables were collected. Concordance was estimated between abstracted data and the data collected by the NBCCEDP. Overall and outcome-specific concordance was calculated for each of the key variables. Four screening performance measures also were estimated by comparing the program data with the abstracted data., Results: Basic measures of program outcomes, such as the percentage of women with cancer or with abnormal screening tests, had a high concordance rate. Variables with poor or inconsistent concordance included reported breast symptoms, receipt of fine-needle aspiration, and receipt of colposcopy with biopsy., Conclusions: The overall conclusion from this comprehensive validation project of the NBCCEDP is that, with few exceptions, the data collected from individual program sites and reported to the CDC are valid and consistent with sociodemographic and clinical data within medical records., (© 2014 American Cancer Society.)

The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) has played a critical role in providing cancer screening services to American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/ANs) women and strengthening tribal screening capacity. Since 1991, the NBCCEDP has funded states, tribal nations, and tribal organizations to develop and implement organized screening programs. The ultimate goal is to deliver breast and cervical cancer screening to women who do not have health insurance and cannot afford to pay for these services. The delivery of clinical services is supported through complementary program efforts such as professional development, public education and outreach, and patient navigation. This article seeks to describe the growth of NBCCEDP's tribal commitment and the unique history and aspects of serving the AI/AN population. The article describes: 1) how this program has demonstrated success in improving screening of AI/AN women; 2) innovative partnerships with the Indian Health Service, state programs, and other organizations that have improved tribal public health infrastructure; and 3) the evolution of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention work with tribal communities., (© 2014 American Cancer Society.)

The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is implemented through cooperative agreements with state health departments, US territories, and tribal health organizations (grantees). Grantees typically contract with clinicians and other providers to deliver breast and cervical cancer screening and diagnostic services. As required by the CDC, grantees report biannually a subset of patient and clinical level program data known as the Minimum Data Elements. Rigorous processes are in place to ensure the completeness and quality of program data collection. In this article, the authors describe the NBCCEDP data-collection processes and data management system and discusses how data are used for 1) program monitoring and improvement, 2) evaluation and research, and 3) policy development and analysis. They also provide 2 examples of how grantees use data to improve their performance., (© 2014 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Cervical screening consumes substantial resources, but little is known about utilization in the United States or compliance with guideline recommendations., Methods: To describe population screening coverage, utilization, and outcomes and examine time trends from 2008 to 2011, cervical cytology reports from women residing in New Mexico (981,063 tests from 511,381 women) were evaluated., Results: From 2008 to 2011 cervical screening utilization decreased at all ages, but especially in younger women, with a two-third reduction at ages 15 to 20 years. Ninety-four percent of women ages 25 to 29 years were screened within 48 months but coverage decreased at older ages to 69% at 45 to 49 years and 55% at 60 to 64 years. Intervals between screening tests were significantly longer in 2011 compared with 2008 [HR = 1.23; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 1.22-1.24], although the commonest rescreening interval was 13 months. In 2011, 91.9% of screening tests for women ages 21 to 65 years were negative, 6.6% showed minor abnormalities, and 1.0% high-grade abnormalities. High-grade abnormality rates were relatively constant over time, but minor abnormalities and atypical cells cannot rule out high-grade (ASC-H) were increasing., Conclusions: This population-based evaluation of cervical screening shows high coverage under the age of 40 years, but lower levels in older women. Screening under age 21 years is becoming less common and screening intervals are lengthening, reflecting updates in national screening guidelines., Impact: Assessment of cervical screening intervals and population outcomes is essential for accurately estimating the impact and effectiveness of changing recommendations and vaccination against human papilloma virus infections., (©2013 AACR.)

Background: The recommended screening interval when using the Papanicolaou (Pap) and human papillomavirus (HPV) test (co-testing) is 5 years. However because providers are reluctant to extend the screening interval, we launched a study to identify barriers to appropriate use of the co-test and to implement an educational intervention to promote evidence-based screening practices. This article provides an overview of the study including the multi-component intervention and participant demographics., Methods: The study was conducted in 15 clinics associated with 6 Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) in Illinois. Each clinic received HPV tests to administer with routine Pap tests among enrolled patients (n=2,246) and was assigned to a study arm: intervention arm (n=7) received a multi-component educational intervention (small media, academic detailing, and website) for providers and printed educational materials for patients, and control arm (n=8) received printed copies of general guidelines. Clinic coordinators (n=15), providers (n=98), and patients (n=984) completed baseline surveys to assess screening practices., Results: Providers reported an average age of 41.3 years and were predominately female, non-Hispanic, and white. Patients reported an average age of 45.0 years and nearly two-thirds were Hispanic or black. Of the 2,246 patients, 89% had a normal co-test. Lessons learned from the study included the importance of buy-in at a high level in the organization, a champion provider, and a clinical coordinator devoted to the study., Conclusion: Materials from this study can be adapted to educate providers and patients on appropriate use of the co-test and encourage extended screening intervals as a safe and effective practice.

Objective: Despite guidelines recommending cervical cancer screening intervals be extended beyond one year, clinical practice has been slow to change. Patient preferences are a potential barrier. In the Centers for Disease Control's Cervical Cancer (Cx3) Study at Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) across Illinois, we surveyed patients about screening practices, and assessed beliefs regarding lengthening screening intervals., Method: We analyzed data from 984 low income women in the Cx3 Study (2009-2011). Participants completed a survey assessing health history, knowledge about Pap testing, beliefs and intentions about extending screening intervals, and demographics., Results: The majority reported annual Pap testing (61%), while only 24% reported a 2-3 year screening interval (recommendation at time of survey). Misunderstandings about the Pap test were prevalent, with over half believing it screened for vaginal, yeast, and sexually transmitted infections (58%-72%). Unfavorable beliefs about extending screening intervals were common. The majority (57%) indicated that they would not wait 3 years to be screened if their physician recommended it, and intentions were associated with knowledge about Pap testing., Conclusion: Most women reported annual cervical cancer screening, and intended to resist longer screening intervals. Patients' lack of knowledge and unfavorable beliefs may serve as barriers to extending screening intervals., (© 2013.)

Background: Cervical cancer screening guidelines have evolved significantly in the last decade for young adult women, with current recommendations promoting later initiation and longer intervals., Methods: Using self-reported cross-sectional National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) 2000-2010 data, trends in Papanicolaou (Pap) testing among women ages 18-29 years were examined. NHIS 2010 data were used to investigate age at first Pap test (N = 2,198), time since most recent Pap test (n = 1,622), and predictors of Pap testing within the last 12 months (n = 1,622)., Results: The percentage of 18-year-olds who reported ever having a Pap test significantly decreased from 49.9% in 2000 to 37.9% in 2010. Mean age at first Pap test in 2010 was significantly younger for non-Hispanic black women (16.9 years), women < high school education (16.9 years), women who received the HPV vaccine (17.1 years), and women who have ever given birth (17.3 years). The majority reported their last Pap test within the previous 12 months (73.1%). Usual source of healthcare (OR, 2.31) and current birth control use (OR, 1.64) significantly increased chances of having a Pap test within the previous 12 months., Conclusions: From 2000 to 2010, there was a gradual decline in Pap test initiation among 18-year-olds; however, in 2010, many women reported ≤12 months since last screening. Evidence-based guidelines should be promoted, as screening young adult women for cervical cancer more frequently than recommended can cause considerable harms., Impact: A baseline of cervical cancer screening among young adult women in the United States to assess adherence to evidence-based screening guidelines.

Objectives: To examine time intervals from cervical cancer screening to diagnosis and treatment initiation among low-income and uninsured women in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) during two consecutive time periods., Methods: We analyzed NBCCEDP data for women with abnormal Pap tests (n=100,167), from which 1,417 invasive cervical cancers were diagnosed. We examined two time intervals for this study: diagnostic interval (time from abnormal Pap test to the date of definitive diagnosis) and treatment initiation interval (time from definitive diagnosis to treatment initiation) for two time periods: 1996-2002 and 2003-2009. We compared median time intervals for diagnostic and treatment initiation using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Adjusted proportions (predicted marginals) were calculated using logistic regression to examine diagnosis and treatment within program benchmarks (≤60 days)., Results: Median diagnostic intervals decreased overall by 6 days (54 vs. 48 days, p<0.001). This decrease in the median diagnostic interval was noted for all variables examined. The median treatment initiation intervals remained stable over the two time periods., Conclusions: Women screened by the NBCCEDP receive diagnostic follow-up and initiate treatment within preestablished program guidelines.

Background: The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) provides low-income, uninsured women with screening and diagnostic services for breast and cervical cancer. Our study was conducted to describe the demographic and practice characteristics of participating and nonparticipating physicians, as well as their beliefs, adoption of new screening technologies, and recommendations for breast and cervical cancer screening., Methods: From a 2006-2007 nationally representative survey, we identified 1,111 practicing primary care physicians who provide breast and cervical cancer screenings and assessed their recommendations using clinical vignettes related to screening initiation, frequency, and cessation. Responses of physicians participating in the NBCCEDP were compared with those from nonparticipating physicians., Results: Of the physicians surveyed, 15% reported participation in the NBCCEDP, 65% were not participants, and 20% were not sure or did not respond to this question. Program physicians were significantly more likely to practice in multispecialty settings, in a rural location, and in a hospital or clinic setting and had more patients who were female and insured by Medicaid or uninsured compared with nonprogram physicians. Beliefs about the effectiveness of screening tools or procedures in reducing breast or cervical cancer mortality were similar by program participation. Adoption of new technologies, including digital mammography and human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, and making guideline-consistent recommendations for screening initiation, frequency, and cessation did not differ significantly by program participation., Conclusions: Although there may be differences in physician characteristics and practice settings, the beliefs and screening practices for both breast and cervical cancer are similar between program and nonprogram providers.

Background: Primary care physicians (PCPs) play a key role in breast cancer screening, yet no current data exist regarding PCP practices., Methods: The authors analyzed a nationally representative survey of PCPs that was fielded during September 2006 to May 2007 to investigate PCP breast cancer screening beliefs, recommendations, and practices., Results: Most of the 1212 PCPs who participated in the survey (80%) reported that mammography for average-risk women aged ≥ 50 years was very effective in reducing cancer mortality, and 54% reported that it was very effective for women ages 40 to 49 years. Fewer respondents reported that clinical breast examination (CBE) or breast self-examination (BSE) was very effective, but the majority rated CBE and BSE as somewhat effective. The majority of PCPs routinely recommended mammography, CBE, and BSE to patients aged ≥ 40 years. In multivariate models, family/general practitioners (odds ratio [OR], 2.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.57-3.17 for mammography; OR, 4.42; 95% CI, 2.60-7.52 for CBE) and internal medicine specialists (OR, 3.21; 95% CI, 2.21-4.66 for mammography; OR, 5.34; 95% CI, 3.21-8.88 for CBE) were more likely to recommend an upper age limit for screening than obstetrician/gynecologists. Physicians who reported that US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines were very influential were more likely to recommend an age at which they no longer recommend mammography and CBE., Conclusions: To the authors' knowledge, the current study is the first national study in over 2 decades to report the breast cancer screening practices of PCPs and provides baseline data for monitoring the impact of changes in clinical practice guidelines. The current findings suggested that virtually all PCPs routinely recommend mammography, CBE, and BSE to their patients aged ≥ 40 years, although recommendations vary by primary care specialty., (Published 2011 American Cancer Society.)

ObjectiveThe primary cervical cancer screening strategy for women over age 30 is high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) testing combined with Papanicolaou (Pap) testing (cotesting) every 5 years. This combination strategy is a preventive service that is required by the Affordable Care Act to be covered with no cost-sharing by most health insurance plans. The cotesting recommendation was made based entirely on prospective data from an insured population that may have a lower proportion of women with HPV positive and Pap negative results (ie, discordant results). The discordant group represents a very difficult group to manage. If the frequency of discordant results among underserved women is higher, health care providers may perceive the cotesting strategy to be a less favorable screening strategy than traditional Pap testing every 3 years.Study designThe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Cervical Cancer Study was conducted at 15 clinics in 6 federally qualified health centers across Illinois. Providers at these clinics were given the option of cotesting for routine cervical cancer screening. Type-specific HPV detection was performed on residual extracts using linear array.ResultsPap test results were abnormal in 6.0% and HPV was positive in 7.2% of the underserved women screened in this study (mean age, 45.1 years). HPV prevalence decreased with age, from 10.3% among 30- to 39-year-olds to 4.5% among 50- to 60-year-olds. About 5% of the women had a combination of a positive HPV test and normal Pap test results; HPV 16/18 was identified in 14% of discordant women.ConclusionThe rate of discordant results among underserved women was similar to those reported throughout the US in a variety of populations. Typing for HPV 16/18 appears to assist in the management in a small proportion of women with discordant results.

Background: Screening and timely follow-up have lowered cervical cancer incidence in the US; however, screening coverage, incidence, and death rates have remained fairly stable in recent years. Studies suggest that half of women diagnosed with cervical cancer don't receive appropriate screening prior to diagnosis; cervical cancer survivors can provide crucial insight into barriers and facilitators to screening. Methods: Participants were cervical cancer survivors ≥21 years, identified through population-based central cancer registries (CR) in 3 US states or a social network (SN), Cervivor. CR participants completed a mailed survey on screening history, barriers, and facilitators to screening and sociodemographic data. SN participants completed the same survey online. Results: CR participants (N = 480) were older, with a lower proportion of non-Hispanic white, married, and insured women compared to SN participants (N = 148). Fifty percent of CR and 79% of SN participants were screened 5 years prior to their diagnoses. Of those screened, 28% in both groups reported not following-up on abnormal results. For both groups, the most frequently identified screening barrier was that participants never imagined they would develop cervical cancer (percent agree CR = 76%; SN = 86%), and the facilitator was wanting to take care of their bodies (CR = 95%; SN = 94%). Conclusion: Addressing key barriers to obtaining screening and timely follow-up related to lack of knowledge of cervical cancer risk and screening tests and addressing insurance coverage in the design or modification of interventions may increase cervical cancer screening and lower cervical cancer incidence in the US. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Cancer Society, the National Cancer Institute, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries collaborate to provide annual updates on cancer occurrence and trends in the United States and to address a special topic of interest. Part I of this report focuses on national cancer statistics, and part 2 characterizes progress in achieving select Healthy People 2020 cancer objectives.Methods: For this report, the authors selected objectives-including death rates, cancer screening, and major risk factors-related to 4 common cancers (lung, colorectal, female breast, and prostate). Baseline values, recent values, and the percentage change from baseline to recent values were examined overall and by select sociodemographic characteristics. Data from national surveillance systems were obtained from the Healthy People 2020 website.Results: Targets for death rates were met overall and in most sociodemographic groups, but not among males, blacks, or individuals in rural areas, although these groups did experience larger decreases in rates compared with other groups. During 2007 through 2017, cancer death rates decreased 15% overall, ranging from -4% (rural) to -22% (metropolitan). Targets for breast and colorectal cancer screening were not yet met overall or in any sociodemographic groups except those with the highest educational attainment, whereas lung cancer screening was generally low (<10%). Targets were not yet met overall for cigarette smoking, recent smoking cessation, excessive alcohol use, or obesity but were met for secondhand smoke exposure and physical activity. Some sociodemographic groups did not meet targets or had less improvement than others toward reaching objectives.Conclusions: Monitoring trends in cancer risk factors, screening test use, and mortality can help assess the progress made toward decreasing the cancer burden in the United States. Although many interventions to reduce cancer risk factors and promote healthy behaviors are proven to work, they may not be equitably applied or work well in every community. Implementing cancer prevention and control interventions that are sustainable, focused, and culturally appropriate may boost success in communities with the greatest need, ensuring that all Americans can access a path to long, healthy, cancer-free lives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite advances in cervical cancer screening, a significant number of women in the United States have not received adequate screening. Studies have suggested that approximately half of the women who developed cervical cancer were not adequately screened. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Case Investigation of Cervical Cancer (CICC) Study took a unique approach to reconstruct the time before a woman's cervical cancer diagnosis and understand the facilitators and barriers to screening and care. This article provides an overview of the study. Methods: This study included all cervical cancer survivors diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer aged 21 years and older in three U.S. states from 2014–2016. The study design consisted of three different data collection methods, including comprehensive registry data, a mailed survey, and medical chart abstraction. This overview compares the characteristics of cervical cancer survivors in the three states by study participation and eligibility status. Results: Registries identified 2,748 women diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer. Of these, 1,730 participants were eligible for participation, 28% (n = 481) enrolled in the study and 23% (n = 400) consented to the medical chart abstraction. Conclusion: The CICC Study is unique in that it addresses, with medical record verification, the medical history of woman 5 years before their cervical cancer diagnosis as well as provides information from the woman on her health care behaviors. This study provides data on a general population of cervical cancer survivors in three states that could be used to guide interventions to increase cervical cancer screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]