title: [Cervical screening: toward a new paradigm?].
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Analysis of the trials which compare the virologic testing (HPV testing) and the cytology in the cervical screening.
  
  
  METHODS
  The MedLine database was consulted using the Keywords: "cervical screening", "pap smear", "liquid based cytology", "HPV testing", "adults", "adolescents", "cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)", "uterine cervix cancer". Articles were selected according their concern about the debate of the uterine cervix cancer screening in France.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The HPV testing seems interesting allowing a decreasing delay in the diagnosis of CIN (more diagnosis of CIN2+ in the first round and less during the second one). But, when the two rounds are added, the number of CIN2+ are identical in the two arms (cytology and HPV testing) in all the trials (except the Italian NTCC trial). A negative HPV testing protects the women much longer than cytology can do: a delay of five years between two rounds seems ideal. The HPV testing alone increases the detection rate of cervical lesions, which could regress spontaneously and may induce an overtreatment, especially in the youngest population: a triage is necessary and the cytology appears to be the best way to select the candidates for colposcopy in case of positive HPV testing and cytology. The HPV infection presents some particularities in adolescent females: for this reason, the HPV testing should not be used in this special population. In vaccinated women, a consensus for the screening is necessary.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The health care providers in France have to understand the characteristics of the HPV testing: its advantages compared to the cytologic screening are only evident in case of an organization of the screening in France and even in Europe.
authors.affiliation: Service de gynécologie, CHU Anne-de-Bretagne, 16, boulevard de Bulgarie, BP 90347, 35203 Rennes cedex 2, France.
authors.forename: V
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Lavoué
authors.forename: C
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Bergeron
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Riethmuller
authors.forename: E
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Daraï
authors.forename: J-L
authors.initials: JL
authors.lastname: Mergui
authors.forename: J-J
authors.initials: JJ
authors.lastname: Baldauf
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Gondry
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Douvier
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Lopès
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: de Reilhac
authors.forename: C
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Quéreux
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Letombe
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Marchetta
authors.forename: J-C
authors.initials: JC
authors.lastname: Boulanger
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Levêque
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D005060:Europe; D005260:Female; D005602:France; D006801:Humans; D008403:Mass Screening / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods*; D065006:Papanicolaou Test; D027383:Papillomaviridae / Q000302:isolation & purification*; D030361:Papillomavirus Infections / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000821:virology; D053918:Papillomavirus Vaccines; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; D013997:Time Factors; D002583:Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000517:prevention & control* / Q000821:virology; D014626:Vaginal Smears; D002578:Uterine Cervical Dysplasia / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000821:virology
chemical_list: D053918:Papillomavirus Vaccines