These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Uptake of HPV testing and extended cervical cancer screening intervals following cytology alone and Pap/HPV cotesting in women aged 30-65 years.
    Author: Silver MI, Rositch AF, Phelan-Emrick DF, Gravitt PE.
    Journal: Cancer Causes Control; 2018 Jan; 29(1):43-50. PubMed ID: 29124542.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the adoption of HPV testing and recommended extended cervical cancer screening intervals in clinical practice, we described yearly uptake of Pap/HPV cotesting and estimated length of time between normal screens by patient characteristics. METHODS: We examined 55,575 Pap/HPV records from 27,035 women aged 30-65 years from the Johns Hopkins Hospital Pathology Data System between 2006 and 2013. Cotest uptake and median times to next screening test for cotests and cytology only were calculated. Adjusted hazard ratios were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models, with random effects adjustment for clustering within clinic. RESULTS: Cotest usage increased from < 10% in 2006 to 78% in 2013. The median time to next screening test following normal cytology alone remained constant around 1.5 years. Screening intervals following a dual-negative cotest increased from 1.5 years in 2006/2007 to 2.5 years in 2010, coincident with increases in the proportion of women cotested. Intervals following a dual negative cotest were longer among Medicare patients (3 years) compared with privately insured women (2.5 years), and shorter among black (2 years) compared with white women (2.8 years). CONCLUSION: By mid-2013 we observed broad adoption of Pap/HPV cotesting in routine screening in a large academic medical center. Increased screening intervals were observed only among cotested women, while those screened by cytology alone continued to be screened almost annually. The influence of different combinations of race and insurance on screening intervals should be further evaluated to ensure balance of screening risks and benefits in the U.S.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]