ArticleCancer causes & control : CCC2016
The potential harms of primary human papillomavirus screening in over-screened women: a microsimulation study.
Article in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Triaging HPV-Positive Cervical Samples with p16 and Ki-67 Dual Stained Cytology within an Organized Screening Program-A Prospective Observational Study from Western Norway.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Observational
- Effect of introducing human papillomavirus genotyping into real-world screening on cervical cancer screening in China: a retrospective population-based cohort study.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2021Article
- The Impact of Different Screening Model Structures on Cervical Cancer Incidence and Mortality Predictions: The Maximum Clinical Incidence Reduction (MCLIR) Methodology.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2020Article
- Article
- Relative Performance of HPV and Cytology Components of Cotesting in Cervical Screening.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2018Article
- Primary HPV testing recommendations of US providers, 2015.Preventive medicine · 2017Article
- Choosing wisely: a model-based analysis evaluating the trade-offs in cancer benefit and diagnostic referrals among alternative HPV testing strategies in Norway.British journal of cancer · 2017Article
- Why does cervical cancer occur in a state-of-the-art screening program?Gynecologic oncology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt is well acknowledged that HPV testing should not be performed at young age and at short intervals. Cytological screening practices have shown that over-screening, i.e., from a younger age and at shorter intervals than recommended, is hard to avoid. We quantified the consequences of a switch to primary HPV screening for over-screened women, taking into account its higher sensitivity but lower specificity than cytology.
methodsThe health effects of using the HPV test instead of cytology as the primary screening method were determined with the MISCAN-Cervix model. We varied the age women start screening and the interval between screens. In the sensitivity analyses, we varied the background risk of cervical cancer, the HPV prevalence, the discount rate, the triage strategy after cytology, and the test characteristics of both cytology and the HPV test.
resultsFor women screened 5 yearly from age 30, 32 extra deaths per 100,000 simulated women were prevented when switching from primary cytology to primary HPV testing. For annual screening from age 20, such a switch resulted in 6 extra deaths prevented. It was associated with 9,044 more positive primary screens in the former scenario versus 76,480 in the latter. Under all conditions, for women screened annually, switching to HPV screening resulted in a net loss of quality-adjusted life years.
conclusionFor over-screened women, the harms associated with a lower test specificity outweigh the life years gained when switching from primary cytology to primary HPV testing. The extent of over-screening should be considered when deciding on inclusion of primary HPV screening in cervical cancer screening guidelines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.