Cytology history preceding cervical cancer diagnosis: a regional analysis of 286 cases.
BACKGROUND
Despite programmed screening in the Netherlands, the decrease in incidence of cervical carcinoma lags behind. We analysed screening results preceding carcinoma cases, timeliness in case of follow-up, and FIGO (International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics) stages as efficiency parameters for screening were taken.


METHODS
We analysed 286 women with cervical cancer between 2005 and 2007 for cytology history preceding carcinoma, hierarchically arranging cytology history (if present) into three groups: 'screened', 'work-up', and 'underscreened' (>6 yrs before diagnosis). For screen- and work-up smears, we analysed timeliness. FIGO stage was measured in relation to cytology history.


RESULTS
A total of 105 out of 286 (36.7%) women with cervical carcinoma were screened preceding the diagnosis. Delayed time intervals in case of abnormal cytology were 43.5% for borderline/mild dyskaryosis (BMD) and 38.0% for BMD (moderate dyskaryosis or worse; P=0.51). A total of 108 out of 286 (36.4%) women were underscreened, and 73 out of 286 (25.5%) were unscreened. Advanced carcinoma or FIGO stage ≥2B in screened women was 16.0 vs 48.7% in work-up, underscreened, or unscreened (P<0.001).


CONCLUSIONS
Women with cervical cancer are underscreened and have poor timeliness in case of abnormal cytology. Being un- or underscreened correlates significantly with higher cervical cancer stages, especially in older women (aged ≥49 years; P<0.001). Improvement of attendancy is needed to meet the standard of quality for screening programmes.
Department of Pathology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam 1007 MB, The Netherlands.
M
M
Gök
L
L
Rozendaal
J
J
Berkhof
O
O
Visser
C J L M
CJ
Meijer
F J
FJ
van Kemenade
D000328:Adult; D000465:Algorithms; D002277:Carcinoma / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000473:pathology; D003581:Cytodiagnosis / Q000379:methods / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D015994:Incidence; D008403:Mass Screening / Q000379:methods; D008487:Medical History Taking; D008875:Middle Aged; D009426:Netherlands / Q000453:epidemiology; D011230:Precancerous Conditions / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000473:pathology; D013997:Time Factors; D002583:Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000473:pathology; D014626:Vaginal Smears
Int J Cancer. 2006 Sep 1;119(5):1095-101
16586444
Br J Cancer. 1991 Sep;64(3):559-65
1911199
Lancet. 2007 Nov 24;370(9601):1764-72
17919718
BMJ. 1999 May 8;318(7193):1244-5
10231253
Cell Oncol. 2007;29(1):19-24
17429138
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008 Apr 2;100(7):492-501
18364502
Cancer Causes Control. 1997 Sep;8(5):755-63
9328198
Int J Cancer. 2007 Feb 15;120(4):806-12
17131311
BMJ. 2010 Mar 11;340:c1040
20223872
Int J Cancer. 2007 Apr 1;120(7):1505-10
17205514
Int J Cancer. 2006 Nov 15;119(10):2372-5
16858676
N Engl J Med. 2007 Oct 18;357(16):1579-88
17942871
Prev Med. 2007 Aug-Sep;45(2-3):93-106
17651792
Int J Qual Health Care. 1999 Jun;11(3):193-200
10435839
Prev Med. 2000 Jan;30(1):35-42
10642458
Eur J Cancer. 2002 Apr;38(6):827-31
11937318
Prev Med. 1986 Nov;15(6):582-90
3797390
Int J Cancer. 2000 May 1;86(3):429-35
10760834
Lancet Oncol. 2010 Mar;11(3):249-57
20089449