Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31829241›Full record

ArticleBMC medicine2019

Introduction of primary screening using high-risk HPV DNA detection in the Dutch cervical cancer screening programme: a population-based cohort study.

Clare A Aitken, Heleen M E van Agt, Albert G Siebers, Folkert J van Kemenade, Hubert G M Niesters, Willem J G Melchers, Judith E M Vedder, Rob Schuurman, Adriaan J C van den Brule, Hans C van der Linden and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 84 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
84citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

84 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Randomized Implementation of a Primary Human Papillomavirus Testing-based Cervical Cancer Screening Protocol for Women 34 to 69 Years in Norway.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2022
    Trial
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. PAX1 and ZNF582 Methylation as a Triage Strategy in Cytologic and hrHPV+ Scrapings in Both Chinese and Dutch Cohorts.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026
    Article
  8. Loop electrosurgical excision procedure and perinatal outcomes post-human papillomavirus cervical screening: A longitudinal cohort study.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

24 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Clare A AitkenDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 CN, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. c.aitken@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-9973-7376
Heleen M E van AgtDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 CN, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Albert G SiebersPALGA, the nationwide network and registry of histo- and cytopathology in the Netherlands, De Bouw 123, 3991 SZ, Houten, the Netherlands.
Folkert J van KemenadeDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 CN, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Hubert G M NiestersDivision of Clinical Virology, Department of Medical Microbiology, The University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Willem J G MelchersDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Judith E M VedderDepartment of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Rob SchuurmanFacilitaire Samenwerking Bevolkingsonderzoeken, Godebaldkwartier 435, 3511 DT, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Adriaan J C van den BruleJeroen Bosch Hospital, Pathologie-DNA, Henri Dunantstraat 1, 5223 GZ, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands.
Hans C van der LindenJeroen Bosch Hospital, Pathologie-DNA, Henri Dunantstraat 1, 5223 GZ, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands.
John W J HinrichsSymbiant Pathology Expert Centre Hoorn (Westfriesgasthuis), Maelsonstraat 3, 1624 NP, Hoorn, the Netherlands.
Anco MolijnNMDL-LCPL, Visseringlaan 25, 2288 ER, Rijswijk, the Netherlands.
Klaas J HoogduinNMDL-LCPL, Visseringlaan 25, 2288 ER, Rijswijk, the Netherlands.
Bettien M van HemelDepartment of Pathology and Medical Biology, the University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Inge M C M de KokDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 CN, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn January 2017, the Dutch cervical cancer screening programme transitioned from cytomorphological to primary high-risk HPV (hrHPV) DNA screening, including the introduction of self-sampling, for women aged between 30 and 60 years. The Netherlands was the first country to switch to hrHPV screening at the national level. We investigated the health impact of this transition by comparing performance indicators from the new hrHPV-based programme with the previous cytology-based programme.

methodsWe obtained data from the Dutch nationwide network and registry of histo- and cytopathology (PALGA) for 454,573 women eligible for screening in 2017 who participated in the hrHPV-based programme between 1 January 2017 and 30 June 2018 (maximum follow-up of almost 21 months) and for 483,146 women eligible for screening in 2015 who participated in the cytology-based programme between 1 January 2015 and 31 March 2016 (maximum follow-up of 40 months). We compared indicators of participation (participation rate), referral (screen positivity; referral rate) and detection (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) detection; number of referrals per detected CIN lesion).

resultsParticipation in the hrHPV-based programme was significantly lower than that in the cytology-based programme (61% vs 64%). Screen positivity and direct referral rates were significantly higher in the hrHPV-based programme (positivity rate: 5% vs 9%; referral rate: 1% vs 3%). CIN2+ detection increased from 11 to 14 per 1000 women screened. Overall, approximately 2.2 times more clinical irrelevant findings (i.e. ≤CIN1) were found in the hrHPV-based programme, compared with approximately 1·3 times more clinically relevant findings (i.e. CIN2+); this difference was mostly due to a national policy change recommending colposcopy, rather than observation, of hrHPV-positive, ASC-US/LSIL results in the hrHPV-based programme.

conclusionsThis is the first time that comprehensive results of nationwide implementation of hrHPV-based screening have been reported using high-quality data with a long follow-up. We have shown that both benefits and potential harms are higher in one screening round of a well-implemented hrHPV-based screening programme than in an established cytology-based programme. Lower participation in the new hrHPV programme may be due to factors such as invitation policy changes and the phased roll-out of the new programme. Our findings add further to evidence from trials and modelling studies on the effectiveness of hrHPV-based screening.

Indexed as

AdultCohort StudiesEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMass ScreeningMiddle AgedNetherlandsPapillomavirus InfectionsRetrospective StudiesUterine Cervical NeoplasmsCancer screening programmesCervical cancer screeninghrHPV screeningPopulation-based screening

Identifiers

PMID31829241
PMCPMC6907114

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.