Cargando…

Do women ⩾50 years of age need as much screening as women <50 years after they have had negative screening results?

To assess the adequacy of a routine screening to identify cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse (CIN2+) in women over 50 years of age, a retrospective cohort was set in six Italian organised population-based screening programmes. In all, 287 330 women (1 714 550 person-years of observation,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Armaroli, P, Gallo, F, Bellomi, A, Ciatto, S, Consonni, D, Davi, D, Giorgi-Rossi, P, Iossa, A, Mancini, E, Naldoni, C, Polla, E, Ronco, G, Serafini, M, Vergini, V, Zanier, L, Zappa, M, Segnan, N
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2480977/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18594534
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6604455
_version_ 1782157965471514624
author Armaroli, P
Gallo, F
Bellomi, A
Ciatto, S
Consonni, D
Davi, D
Giorgi-Rossi, P
Iossa, A
Mancini, E
Naldoni, C
Polla, E
Ronco, G
Serafini, M
Vergini, V
Zanier, L
Zappa, M
Segnan, N
author_facet Armaroli, P
Gallo, F
Bellomi, A
Ciatto, S
Consonni, D
Davi, D
Giorgi-Rossi, P
Iossa, A
Mancini, E
Naldoni, C
Polla, E
Ronco, G
Serafini, M
Vergini, V
Zanier, L
Zappa, M
Segnan, N
author_sort Armaroli, P
collection PubMed
description To assess the adequacy of a routine screening to identify cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse (CIN2+) in women over 50 years of age, a retrospective cohort was set in six Italian organised population-based screening programmes. In all, 287 330 women (1 714 550 person-years of observation, 1110 cases) screened at age 25–64, with at least two cytological screening tests, the first negative, were followed from their first negative smear until a biopsy proven CIN2+ lesion or their last negative smear. For women aged 25–49 and 50–64 years, crude and age-standardised detection rate (DR), cumulative risk (CR), adjusted hazard risk for number of previous negative screens, probability of false-positive CIN2+ after two or more smear tests were calculated. Detection rate is significantly lower over 50 years of age. Multivariable analysis shows a significant protective effect from four screening episodes (DR=0.70, 95% CI: 0.51–0.97); the effect of age ⩾50 is 0.29 (95% CI: 0.24–0.35). The CR of CIN2+ is at least eightfold higher in women <50 (CR=2.06, 95% CI: 1.88–2.23) after one previous negative test than in women ⩾50 years with four screens (CR=0.23, 95% CI: 0.00–0.46). Over 50 years of age, after four tests at least three false-positive cases are diagnosed for every true positive. Benefits arising from cytological screening is uncertain in well-screened older women.
format Text
id pubmed-2480977
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher Nature Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-24809772009-09-11 Do women ⩾50 years of age need as much screening as women <50 years after they have had negative screening results? Armaroli, P Gallo, F Bellomi, A Ciatto, S Consonni, D Davi, D Giorgi-Rossi, P Iossa, A Mancini, E Naldoni, C Polla, E Ronco, G Serafini, M Vergini, V Zanier, L Zappa, M Segnan, N Br J Cancer Clinical Study To assess the adequacy of a routine screening to identify cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse (CIN2+) in women over 50 years of age, a retrospective cohort was set in six Italian organised population-based screening programmes. In all, 287 330 women (1 714 550 person-years of observation, 1110 cases) screened at age 25–64, with at least two cytological screening tests, the first negative, were followed from their first negative smear until a biopsy proven CIN2+ lesion or their last negative smear. For women aged 25–49 and 50–64 years, crude and age-standardised detection rate (DR), cumulative risk (CR), adjusted hazard risk for number of previous negative screens, probability of false-positive CIN2+ after two or more smear tests were calculated. Detection rate is significantly lower over 50 years of age. Multivariable analysis shows a significant protective effect from four screening episodes (DR=0.70, 95% CI: 0.51–0.97); the effect of age ⩾50 is 0.29 (95% CI: 0.24–0.35). The CR of CIN2+ is at least eightfold higher in women <50 (CR=2.06, 95% CI: 1.88–2.23) after one previous negative test than in women ⩾50 years with four screens (CR=0.23, 95% CI: 0.00–0.46). Over 50 years of age, after four tests at least three false-positive cases are diagnosed for every true positive. Benefits arising from cytological screening is uncertain in well-screened older women. Nature Publishing Group 2008-07-22 2008-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC2480977/ /pubmed/18594534 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6604455 Text en Copyright © 2008 Cancer Research UK https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material.If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Clinical Study
Armaroli, P
Gallo, F
Bellomi, A
Ciatto, S
Consonni, D
Davi, D
Giorgi-Rossi, P
Iossa, A
Mancini, E
Naldoni, C
Polla, E
Ronco, G
Serafini, M
Vergini, V
Zanier, L
Zappa, M
Segnan, N
Do women ⩾50 years of age need as much screening as women <50 years after they have had negative screening results?
title Do women ⩾50 years of age need as much screening as women <50 years after they have had negative screening results?
title_full Do women ⩾50 years of age need as much screening as women <50 years after they have had negative screening results?
title_fullStr Do women ⩾50 years of age need as much screening as women <50 years after they have had negative screening results?
title_full_unstemmed Do women ⩾50 years of age need as much screening as women <50 years after they have had negative screening results?
title_short Do women ⩾50 years of age need as much screening as women <50 years after they have had negative screening results?
title_sort do women ⩾50 years of age need as much screening as women <50 years after they have had negative screening results?
topic Clinical Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2480977/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18594534
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6604455
work_keys_str_mv AT armarolip dowomen50yearsofageneedasmuchscreeningaswomen50yearsaftertheyhavehadnegativescreeningresults
AT gallof dowomen50yearsofageneedasmuchscreeningaswomen50yearsaftertheyhavehadnegativescreeningresults
AT bellomia dowomen50yearsofageneedasmuchscreeningaswomen50yearsaftertheyhavehadnegativescreeningresults
AT ciattos dowomen50yearsofageneedasmuchscreeningaswomen50yearsaftertheyhavehadnegativescreeningresults
AT consonnid dowomen50yearsofageneedasmuchscreeningaswomen50yearsaftertheyhavehadnegativescreeningresults
AT david dowomen50yearsofageneedasmuchscreeningaswomen50yearsaftertheyhavehadnegativescreeningresults
AT giorgirossip dowomen50yearsofageneedasmuchscreeningaswomen50yearsaftertheyhavehadnegativescreeningresults
AT iossaa dowomen50yearsofageneedasmuchscreeningaswomen50yearsaftertheyhavehadnegativescreeningresults
AT mancinie dowomen50yearsofageneedasmuchscreeningaswomen50yearsaftertheyhavehadnegativescreeningresults
AT naldonic dowomen50yearsofageneedasmuchscreeningaswomen50yearsaftertheyhavehadnegativescreeningresults
AT pollae dowomen50yearsofageneedasmuchscreeningaswomen50yearsaftertheyhavehadnegativescreeningresults
AT roncog dowomen50yearsofageneedasmuchscreeningaswomen50yearsaftertheyhavehadnegativescreeningresults
AT serafinim dowomen50yearsofageneedasmuchscreeningaswomen50yearsaftertheyhavehadnegativescreeningresults
AT verginiv dowomen50yearsofageneedasmuchscreeningaswomen50yearsaftertheyhavehadnegativescreeningresults
AT zanierl dowomen50yearsofageneedasmuchscreeningaswomen50yearsaftertheyhavehadnegativescreeningresults
AT zappam dowomen50yearsofageneedasmuchscreeningaswomen50yearsaftertheyhavehadnegativescreeningresults
AT segnann dowomen50yearsofageneedasmuchscreeningaswomen50yearsaftertheyhavehadnegativescreeningresults