Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32007142›Full record

ArticleLancet (London, England)2020

Mortality impact of achieving WHO cervical cancer elimination targets: a comparative modelling analysis in 78 low-income and lower-middle-income countries.

Karen Canfell, Jane J Kim, Marc Brisson, Adam Keane, Kate T Simms, Michael Caruana, Emily A Burger, Dave Martin, Diep T N Nguyen, Élodie Bénard and 13 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Lancet (London, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 358 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
358citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
50.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

358 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 631 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. A systematic review of microsimulation models for skin cancer.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. A Comparative Policy Analysis of HPV Vaccination Guidelines: Actors, Context, Content, and Process Across Eight Countries.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

23 authors at 8 institutions in 6 countries.

Karen CanfellCancer Research Division, Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia; School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia. Electronic address: karen.canfell@nswcc.org.au.
Jane J KimCenter for Health Decision Science, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Marc BrissonCentre de recherche du CHU de Québec - Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada; Département de médecine sociale et préventive, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada; MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College, London, UK.
Adam KeaneCancer Research Division, Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia; School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Kate T SimmsCancer Research Division, Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia; School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Michael CaruanaCancer Research Division, Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia; School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Emily A BurgerCenter for Health Decision Science, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Dave MartinCentre de recherche du CHU de Québec - Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada.
Diep T N NguyenCancer Research Division, Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia; School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Élodie BénardCentre de recherche du CHU de Québec - Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada.
Stephen SyCenter for Health Decision Science, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Catherine ReganCenter for Health Decision Science, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Mélanie DroletCentre de recherche du CHU de Québec - Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada.
Guillaume GingrasCentre de recherche du CHU de Québec - Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada.
Jean-Francois LapriseCentre de recherche du CHU de Québec - Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada.
Julie TorodeUnion for International Cancer Control, Geneva, Switzerland.
Megan A SmithCancer Research Division, Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia; School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Elena FidarovaDepartment for the Management of Noncommunicable Diseases, Disability, Violence and Injury Prevention, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Dario TrapaniDepartment for the Management of Noncommunicable Diseases, Disability, Violence and Injury Prevention, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Freddie BraySection of Cancer Surveillance, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Andre IlbawiDepartment for the Management of Noncommunicable Diseases, Disability, Violence and Injury Prevention, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Nathalie BroutetDepartment of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Raymond HutubessyDepartment of Immunization, Vaccines and Biologicals, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Université Laval · CAUniversity of Sydney · AUWorld Health Organization · CHCancer Council NSW · AUCentre International de Recherche sur le Cancer · FRLondon Centre for Neglected Tropical Disease Research · GBUnion for International Cancer Control · CHUniversity of Oslo · NO

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWHO is developing a global strategy towards eliminating cervical cancer as a public health problem, which proposes an elimination threshold of four cases per 100 000 women and includes 2030 triple-intervention coverage targets for scale-up of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination to 90%, twice-lifetime cervical screening to 70%, and treatment of pre-invasive lesions and invasive cancer to 90%. We assessed the impact of achieving the 90-70-90 triple-intervention targets on cervical cancer mortality and deaths averted over the next century. We also assessed the potential for the elimination initiative to support target 3.4 of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)-a one-third reduction in premature mortality from non-communicable diseases by 2030.

methodsThe WHO Cervical Cancer Elimination Modelling Consortium (CCEMC) involves three independent, dynamic models of HPV infection, cervical carcinogenesis, screening, and precancer and invasive cancer treatment. Reductions in age-standardised rates of cervical cancer mortality in 78 low-income and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) were estimated for three core scenarios: girls-only vaccination at age 9 years with catch-up for girls aged 10-14 years; girls-only vaccination plus once-lifetime screening and cancer treatment scale-up; and girls-only vaccination plus twice-lifetime screening and cancer treatment scale-up. Vaccination was assumed to provide 100% lifetime protection against infections with HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58, and to scale up to 90% coverage in 2020. Cervical screening involved HPV testing at age 35 years, or at ages 35 years and 45 years, with scale-up to 45% coverage by 2023, 70% by 2030, and 90% by 2045, and we assumed that 50% of women with invasive cervical cancer would receive appropriate surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy by 2023, which would increase to 90% by 2030. We summarised results using the median (range) of model predictions.

findingsIn 2020, the estimated cervical cancer mortality rate across all 78 LMICs was 13·2 (range 12·9-14·1) per 100 000 women. Compared to the status quo, by 2030, vaccination alone would have minimal impact on cervical cancer mortality, leading to a 0·1% (0·1-0·5) reduction, but additionally scaling up twice-lifetime screening and cancer treatment would reduce mortality by 34·2% (23·3-37·8), averting 300 000 (300 000-400 000) deaths by 2030 (with similar results for once-lifetime screening). By 2070, scaling up vaccination alone would reduce mortality by 61·7% (61·4-66·1), averting 4·8 million (4·1-4·8) deaths. By 2070, additionally scaling up screening and cancer treatment would reduce mortality by 88·9% (84·0-89·3), averting 13·3 million (13·1-13·6) deaths (with once-lifetime screening), or by 92·3% (88·4-93·0), averting 14·6 million (14·1-14·6) deaths (with twice-lifetime screening). By 2120, vaccination alone would reduce mortality by 89·5% (86·6-89·9), averting 45·8 million (44·7-46·4) deaths. By 2120, additionally scaling up screening and cancer treatment would reduce mortality by 97·9% (95·0-98·0), averting 60·8 million (60·2-61·2) deaths (with once-lifetime screening), or by 98·6% (96·5-98·6), averting 62·6 million (62·1-62·8) deaths (with twice-lifetime screening). With the WHO triple-intervention strategy, over the next 10 years, about half (48% [45-55]) of deaths averted would be in sub-Saharan Africa and almost a third (32% [29-34]) would be in South Asia; over the next 100 years, almost 90% of deaths averted would be in these regions. For premature deaths (age 30-69 years), the WHO triple-intervention strategy would result in rate reductions of 33·9% (24·4-37·9) by 2030, 96·2% (94·3-96·8) by 2070, and 98·6% (96·9-98·8) by 2120.

interpretationThese findings emphasise the importance of acting immediately on three fronts to scale up vaccination, screening, and treatment for pre-invasive and invasive cervical cancer. In the next 10 years, a one-third reduction in the rate of premature mortality from cervical cancer in LMICs is possible, contributing to the realisation of the 2030 UN SDGs. Over the next century, successful implementation of the WHO elimination strategy would reduce cervical cancer mortality by almost 99% and save more than 62 million women's lives.

fundingWHO, UNDP, UN Population Fund, UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Program of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, Germany Federal Ministry of Health, National Health and Medical Research Council Australia, Centre for Research Excellence in Cervical Cancer Control, Canadian Institute of Health Research, Compute Canada, and Fonds de recherche du Québec-Santé.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildChild, PreschoolDeveloping CountriesEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansIncomeInfantInfant, NewbornMass ScreeningMiddle AgedModels, BiologicalPapillomavirus Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID32007142
PMCPMC7043006
OpenAlexW3003227613

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.