Cargando…

Colposcopy referral rates post-introduction of primary screening with human papillomavirus testing: evidence from a large British Columbia cohort study

BACKGROUND: Shifting from cytology to human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening will initially increase colposcopy referrals. The anticipated impact on health systems has been raised as a concern for implementation. It is unclear if the higher rate of colposcopy referrals is sustain...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gottschlich, Anna, Gondara, Lovedeep, Smith, Laurie W., Anderson, Jennifer Joy, Cook, Darrel, Krajden, Mel, Lee, Marette, Martin, Ruth Elwood, Melnikow, Joy, Peacock, Stuart, Proctor, Lily, Stuart, Gavin, Franco, Eduardo L., van Niekerk, Dirk, Ogilvie, Gina S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10542010/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37786399
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lana.2023.100598
_version_ 1785114015234523136
author Gottschlich, Anna
Gondara, Lovedeep
Smith, Laurie W.
Anderson, Jennifer Joy
Cook, Darrel
Krajden, Mel
Lee, Marette
Martin, Ruth Elwood
Melnikow, Joy
Peacock, Stuart
Proctor, Lily
Stuart, Gavin
Franco, Eduardo L.
van Niekerk, Dirk
Ogilvie, Gina S.
author_facet Gottschlich, Anna
Gondara, Lovedeep
Smith, Laurie W.
Anderson, Jennifer Joy
Cook, Darrel
Krajden, Mel
Lee, Marette
Martin, Ruth Elwood
Melnikow, Joy
Peacock, Stuart
Proctor, Lily
Stuart, Gavin
Franco, Eduardo L.
van Niekerk, Dirk
Ogilvie, Gina S.
author_sort Gottschlich, Anna
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Shifting from cytology to human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening will initially increase colposcopy referrals. The anticipated impact on health systems has been raised as a concern for implementation. It is unclear if the higher rate of colposcopy referrals is sustained after initial HPV-based screens or reverts to new lower baselines due to earlier detection and treatment of precancer. This study aimed to investigate long-term rates of colposcopy referrals after participation in HPV-based screening. METHODS: Participants of HPV for Cervical Cancer Screening trial (HPV FOCAL) received one (HPV1, N = 6204) or two (HPV2, N = 9540) HPV-based screens. After exit, they returned to British Columbia's (BC) cytology screening program. A comparison cohort from the BC screening population (BCS, N = 1,140,745) was identified, mirroring trial inclusion criteria. All participants were followed for 10–14 years through the provincial screening registry. Colposcopy referral rates per 1000 screens were calculated for each group. Trial colposcopy referrals for HPV1 and HPV2 were calculated under two referral scenarios: (1) all HPV positive referred to colposcopy; (2) cytology triage with ASCUS or greater referred to colposcopy. Colposcopy referrals from post-trial screens in HPV1 an HPV2 and all screens in BCS were based on actual recommendations from the screening program. A multivariable flexible survival regression model compared hazard ratios (HR) throughout follow-up. FINDINGS: Scenario 2 referral rates were higher during initial HPV screen(s) vs cytology screen (HPV1: 28 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 24, 33), HPV2: 32 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 29, 36), BCS: 8 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 8.9)). However, post-trial rates in HPV1 and HPV2 were significantly lower than in BCS. Cumulative rates in HPV1 and HPV2 approached the cumulative rate in BCS 11–12 years after HPV-based screening (HPV1: 11 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 10, 12), HPV2: 16 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 15–17), BCS: 11 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 10, 11)). Adjusted models demonstrated reductions in referral rates in HPV1 (HR = 0.6, 95% CI: 0.5, 0.7) and HPV2 (HR = 0.7, 95% CI: 0.6, 0.8) relative to BCS by 54 and 72 months post-final HPV screen respectively. INTERPRETATION: Reduced colposcopy referral rates were observed after initial rounds of HPV-based screening. After initial HPV screening, referral rates to colposcopy after cytology triage were below the current rates seen in a centralized cytology program after approximately four years. Any expected increase in referrals at initiation of HPV-based screening could be countered by staged program implementation. FUNDING: This work was supported by the 10.13039/100000002National Institutes of Health (R01 CA221918), 10.13039/501100000245Michael Smith Health Research BC (RT-2021-1595), and the 10.13039/501100000024Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MCT82072).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10542010
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105420102023-10-02 Colposcopy referral rates post-introduction of primary screening with human papillomavirus testing: evidence from a large British Columbia cohort study Gottschlich, Anna Gondara, Lovedeep Smith, Laurie W. Anderson, Jennifer Joy Cook, Darrel Krajden, Mel Lee, Marette Martin, Ruth Elwood Melnikow, Joy Peacock, Stuart Proctor, Lily Stuart, Gavin Franco, Eduardo L. van Niekerk, Dirk Ogilvie, Gina S. Lancet Reg Health Am Articles BACKGROUND: Shifting from cytology to human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening will initially increase colposcopy referrals. The anticipated impact on health systems has been raised as a concern for implementation. It is unclear if the higher rate of colposcopy referrals is sustained after initial HPV-based screens or reverts to new lower baselines due to earlier detection and treatment of precancer. This study aimed to investigate long-term rates of colposcopy referrals after participation in HPV-based screening. METHODS: Participants of HPV for Cervical Cancer Screening trial (HPV FOCAL) received one (HPV1, N = 6204) or two (HPV2, N = 9540) HPV-based screens. After exit, they returned to British Columbia's (BC) cytology screening program. A comparison cohort from the BC screening population (BCS, N = 1,140,745) was identified, mirroring trial inclusion criteria. All participants were followed for 10–14 years through the provincial screening registry. Colposcopy referral rates per 1000 screens were calculated for each group. Trial colposcopy referrals for HPV1 and HPV2 were calculated under two referral scenarios: (1) all HPV positive referred to colposcopy; (2) cytology triage with ASCUS or greater referred to colposcopy. Colposcopy referrals from post-trial screens in HPV1 an HPV2 and all screens in BCS were based on actual recommendations from the screening program. A multivariable flexible survival regression model compared hazard ratios (HR) throughout follow-up. FINDINGS: Scenario 2 referral rates were higher during initial HPV screen(s) vs cytology screen (HPV1: 28 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 24, 33), HPV2: 32 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 29, 36), BCS: 8 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 8.9)). However, post-trial rates in HPV1 and HPV2 were significantly lower than in BCS. Cumulative rates in HPV1 and HPV2 approached the cumulative rate in BCS 11–12 years after HPV-based screening (HPV1: 11 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 10, 12), HPV2: 16 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 15–17), BCS: 11 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 10, 11)). Adjusted models demonstrated reductions in referral rates in HPV1 (HR = 0.6, 95% CI: 0.5, 0.7) and HPV2 (HR = 0.7, 95% CI: 0.6, 0.8) relative to BCS by 54 and 72 months post-final HPV screen respectively. INTERPRETATION: Reduced colposcopy referral rates were observed after initial rounds of HPV-based screening. After initial HPV screening, referral rates to colposcopy after cytology triage were below the current rates seen in a centralized cytology program after approximately four years. Any expected increase in referrals at initiation of HPV-based screening could be countered by staged program implementation. FUNDING: This work was supported by the 10.13039/100000002National Institutes of Health (R01 CA221918), 10.13039/501100000245Michael Smith Health Research BC (RT-2021-1595), and the 10.13039/501100000024Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MCT82072). Elsevier 2023-09-29 /pmc/articles/PMC10542010/ /pubmed/37786399 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lana.2023.100598 Text en © 2023 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Articles
Gottschlich, Anna
Gondara, Lovedeep
Smith, Laurie W.
Anderson, Jennifer Joy
Cook, Darrel
Krajden, Mel
Lee, Marette
Martin, Ruth Elwood
Melnikow, Joy
Peacock, Stuart
Proctor, Lily
Stuart, Gavin
Franco, Eduardo L.
van Niekerk, Dirk
Ogilvie, Gina S.
Colposcopy referral rates post-introduction of primary screening with human papillomavirus testing: evidence from a large British Columbia cohort study
title Colposcopy referral rates post-introduction of primary screening with human papillomavirus testing: evidence from a large British Columbia cohort study
title_full Colposcopy referral rates post-introduction of primary screening with human papillomavirus testing: evidence from a large British Columbia cohort study
title_fullStr Colposcopy referral rates post-introduction of primary screening with human papillomavirus testing: evidence from a large British Columbia cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Colposcopy referral rates post-introduction of primary screening with human papillomavirus testing: evidence from a large British Columbia cohort study
title_short Colposcopy referral rates post-introduction of primary screening with human papillomavirus testing: evidence from a large British Columbia cohort study
title_sort colposcopy referral rates post-introduction of primary screening with human papillomavirus testing: evidence from a large british columbia cohort study
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10542010/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37786399
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lana.2023.100598
work_keys_str_mv AT gottschlichanna colposcopyreferralratespostintroductionofprimaryscreeningwithhumanpapillomavirustestingevidencefromalargebritishcolumbiacohortstudy
AT gondaralovedeep colposcopyreferralratespostintroductionofprimaryscreeningwithhumanpapillomavirustestingevidencefromalargebritishcolumbiacohortstudy
AT smithlauriew colposcopyreferralratespostintroductionofprimaryscreeningwithhumanpapillomavirustestingevidencefromalargebritishcolumbiacohortstudy
AT andersonjenniferjoy colposcopyreferralratespostintroductionofprimaryscreeningwithhumanpapillomavirustestingevidencefromalargebritishcolumbiacohortstudy
AT cookdarrel colposcopyreferralratespostintroductionofprimaryscreeningwithhumanpapillomavirustestingevidencefromalargebritishcolumbiacohortstudy
AT krajdenmel colposcopyreferralratespostintroductionofprimaryscreeningwithhumanpapillomavirustestingevidencefromalargebritishcolumbiacohortstudy
AT leemarette colposcopyreferralratespostintroductionofprimaryscreeningwithhumanpapillomavirustestingevidencefromalargebritishcolumbiacohortstudy
AT martinruthelwood colposcopyreferralratespostintroductionofprimaryscreeningwithhumanpapillomavirustestingevidencefromalargebritishcolumbiacohortstudy
AT melnikowjoy colposcopyreferralratespostintroductionofprimaryscreeningwithhumanpapillomavirustestingevidencefromalargebritishcolumbiacohortstudy
AT peacockstuart colposcopyreferralratespostintroductionofprimaryscreeningwithhumanpapillomavirustestingevidencefromalargebritishcolumbiacohortstudy
AT proctorlily colposcopyreferralratespostintroductionofprimaryscreeningwithhumanpapillomavirustestingevidencefromalargebritishcolumbiacohortstudy
AT stuartgavin colposcopyreferralratespostintroductionofprimaryscreeningwithhumanpapillomavirustestingevidencefromalargebritishcolumbiacohortstudy
AT francoeduardol colposcopyreferralratespostintroductionofprimaryscreeningwithhumanpapillomavirustestingevidencefromalargebritishcolumbiacohortstudy
AT vanniekerkdirk colposcopyreferralratespostintroductionofprimaryscreeningwithhumanpapillomavirustestingevidencefromalargebritishcolumbiacohortstudy
AT ogilvieginas colposcopyreferralratespostintroductionofprimaryscreeningwithhumanpapillomavirustestingevidencefromalargebritishcolumbiacohortstudy