Abstract

Screening for cervical cancer by testing for human papillomavirus (HPV), the major cause of the disease, reportedly increases the sensitivity of detecting high-grade (grade 2 or 3) cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). It is not clear, however, whether this reflects protection against future high-grade CIN or cervical cancer, or whether it represents over-diagnosis. This Swedish population-based screening program randomly assigned 12,527 women ranging in age from 32 to 38 years to have either an HPV test plus a Pap test (n = 6257, the intervention group) or a Pap test alone (n = 6270, the control group). Those having a positive HPV test and a normal Pap test were offered a second HPV test at least 1 year later, and those persistently infected with the same high-risk type of HPV were offered colposcopy with cervical biopsy. A similar number of double-blinded Pap smears and colposcopies with biopsy were done in randomly selected control women to avoid ascertainment bias. The average follow-up interval was 4.1 years. Initially, 51% more women in the intervention group than in the control group had grade 2 or 3 CIN or cancer. On subsequent screening, the proportion of women in the intervention group who had grade 2/3 lesions or cancer was 42% less, and the proportion with grade 3 lesions or cancer was 47% less than the proportion of control women having such lesions. The increased incidence of grade 2 lesions found at initial screening in the intervention group was not followed by a significant reduction of such lesions at later screening. Women with persistent HPV infection remained at high risk of grade 2 or 3 lesions or cancer after being referred for colposcopy. Five women in the control group and one in the intervention group were found to have invasive squamous-cell carcinoma. Four in each group developed adenocarcinoma in situ or adenocarcinoma. All of these women with advanced changes were HPV-positive at baseline. The improved sensitivity of HPV testing in women in their mid-30s who are screened for cervical cancer is not solely a result of over-diagnosis. It can be ascribed-at least in part-to the earlier diagnosis of cervical lesions that do not regress on follow-up screening.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call