Burden of cervical cancer and role of screening in India

Saurabh Bobdey; Jignasa Sathwara; Aanchal Jain; Ganesh Balasubramaniam

doi:10.4103/0971-5851.195751

Indian Journal of Medical and Paediatric Oncology, Inhaltsverzeichnis

CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol 2016; 37(04): 278-285
DOI: 10.4103/0971-5851.195751

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Burden of cervical cancer and role of screening in India

Autoren

Saurabh Bobdey

Department of Medical Records, Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
Jignasa Sathwara

Department of Medical Records, Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
Aanchal Jain

Department of Medical Records, Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
Ganesh Balasubramaniam

Department of Medical Records, Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Abstract

als PDF herunterladen

Abstract

Background: Cervical cancer is a major cause of cancer mortality in women and more than a quarter of its global burden is contributed by developing countries. In India, in spite of alarmingly high figures, there is no nationwide government-sponsored screening program. This study was conducted to assess the burden of cervical cancer in India and review the performance characteristics of available cervical cancer screening tools, so as to provide evidence-based recommendations for application of most practically suited screening test to be used in resource-poor field settings. Materials and Methods: MEDLINE and Web of Science electronic database were searched from January 1990 to December 2015, using the keywords such as “cervical cancer”, “screening”, “early detection”, “cervical cytology” and “visual inspection”, and their corresponding MeSH terms in combination with Boolean operators “OR, AND.” Two authors independently selected studies that are published in English and conducted in India. A total of 11 studies were found to be relevant and eligible to be included in the present study. Results: In India, cervical cancer contributes to approximately 6–29% of all cancers in women. The age-adjusted incidence rate of cervical cancer varies widely among registries; highest is 23.07/100,000 in Mizoram state and the lowest is 4.91/100,000 in Dibrugarh district. The pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity of visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), magnified VIA, visual inspection with Lugol's iodine (VILI), cytology (Pap smear), and human papillomavirus DNA were found to be 67.65% and 84.32%, 65.36% and 85.76%, 78.27% and 87.10%, 62.11% and 93.51%, and 77.81% and 91.54%, respectively. Conclusions: In developing countries because of lack of necessary infrastructure and quality control, high-quality cytology screening may not be feasible for wide-scale implementation. Hence, cervical cancer screening program based on visual screening test such as VIA/VILI should be adopted as an integral part of primary health-care setup in resource-poor countries like India.

Keywords

Cervical cancer - cytology - human papillomavirus DNA - screening - visual inspection

PDF (568 kb)

Referenzen

References
1 Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Forman D, Bray F, Dixit R, et al. GLOBOCAN 2012, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide in 2012: Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2012. Available from: http://www.globocan.iarc.fr. [Last accessed on 2015 Dec 03].
2 Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. The Challenge Ahead: Progress in Breast and Cervical Cancer. Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation; 2011. Available from: http://www.healthmetricsandevaluation.org/publications/policyreport/challenge-ahead-progress-and-setbacks-breastand-cervical-cancer. [Last accessed on 2016 Jan 21].
3 Morrison AS. Introduction. Screening in Chronic Disease. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 1992. p. 3-42.
4 Welch HG, Black WC. Evaluating randomized trials of screening. J Gen Intern Med 1997;12:118-24.
5 Incidence, Distribution, Trends in Incidence Rates and Projections of Burden of Cancer. In: Three-Year Report of Population Based Cancer Registries 2012-2014. National Centre for Disease Informatics and Research, National Cancer Registry Program (ICMR): Bengaluru; March, 2016. p. 1-15.
6 An Assessment of the Burden and Care of Cancer Patients. In: Consolidated Report of Hospital Based Cancer Registries 2012-2014. National Centre for Disease Informatics and Research, National Cancer Registry Program (ICMR): Bengaluru; March, 2016. p. 1-15.
7 Sankaranarayanan R, Swaminathan R, Lucas E. Cancer Survival in Africa, Asia, Caribbean and Central America: Survcan. Lyon: IARC Scientific Publication International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2010.
8 Sankaranarayanan R, Swaminathan R, Brenner H, Chen K, Chia KS, Chen JG, et al. Cancer survival in Africa, Asia, and Central America: a population-based study. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:165-73.
9 Krishnan S, Madsen E, Porterfield D, Varghese B. Advancing cervical cancer prevention in India: Implementation science priorities. Oncologist 2013;18:1285-97.
10 Denny L, Quinn M, Sankaranarayanan R. Chapter 8: Screening for cervical cancer in developing countries. Vaccine 2006;24 Suppl 3:S3/71-7.
11 World Health Organization. Cervical Cancer Screening in Developing Countries: Report of WHO Consultation; 2002. Available from: http://www.whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2002/9241545720.pdf. [Last accessed on 2013 Jan 21].
12 Sankaranarayanan R, Gaffikin L, Jacob M, Sellors J, Robles S. A critical assessment of screening methods for cervical neoplasia. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2005;89 Suppl 2:S4-12.
13 Sankaranarayanan R, Wesley RS. A Practical Manual on Visual Screening for Cervical Neoplasia. IARC Technical Publication No. 41. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2003.
14 Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, Moriarty A, O'Connor D, Prey M, et al. The 2001 Bethesda system: Terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002;287:2114-9.
15 Bobdey S, Balasubramanium G, Kumar A, Jain A. Cancer screening: Should cancer screening be essential component of primary health care in developing countries? Int J Prev Med 2015;6:56.
16 Basu PS, Sankaranarayanan R, Mandal R, Roy C, Das P, Choudhury D, et al. Visual inspection with acetic acid and cytology in the early detection of cervical neoplasia in Kolkata, India. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2003;13:626-32.
17 Sankaranarayanan R, Shastri SS, Basu P, Mahé C, Mandal R, Amin G, et al. The role of low-level magnification in visual inspection with acetic acid for the early detection of cervical neoplasia. Cancer Detect Prev 2004;28:345-51.
18 Sankaranarayanan R, Chatterji R, Shastri SS, Wesley RS, Basu P, Mahe C, et al. Accuracy of human papillomavirus testing in primary screening of cervical neoplasia: Results from a multicenter study in India. Int J Cancer 2004;112:341-7.
19 Shastri SS, Dinshaw K, Amin G, Goswami S, Patil S, Chinoy R, et al. Concurrent evaluation of visual, cytological and HPV testing as screening methods for the early detection of cervical neoplasia in Mumbai, India. Bull World Health Organ 2005;83:186-94.
20 Sodhani P, Gupta S, Sharma JK, Parashari A, Halder K, Singh V, et al. Test characteristics of various screening modalities for cervical cancer: A feasibility study to develop an alternative strategy for resource-limited settings. Cytopathology 2006;17:348-52.
21 Bhatla N, Mukhopadhyay A, Kriplani A, Pandey RM, Gravitt PE, Shah KV, et al. Evaluation of adjunctive tests for cervical cancer screening in low resource settings. Indian J Cancer 2007;44:51-5.
22 Bhatla N, Gulati A, Mathur SR, Rani S, Anand K, Muwonge R, et al. Evaluation of cervical screening in rural North India. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009;105:145-9.
23 Gravitt PE, Paul P, Katki HA, Vendantham H, Ramakrishna G, Sudula M, et al. Effectiveness of VIA, Pap, and HPV DNA testing in a cervical cancer screening program in a peri-urban community in Andhra Pradesh, India. PLoS One 2010;5:e13711.
24 Bhatla N, Puri K, Kriplani A, Iyer VK, Mathur SR, Mani K, et al. Adjunctive testing for cervical cancer screening in low resource settings. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2012;52:133-9.
25 Deodhar K, Sankaranarayanan R, Jayant K, Jeronimo J, Thorat R, Hingmire S, et al. Accuracy of concurrent visual and cytology screening in detecting cervical cancer precursors in rural India. Int J Cancer 2012;131:E954-62.
26 Ghosh P, Gandhi G, Kochhar PK, Zutshi V, Batra S. Visual inspection of cervix with Lugol's iodine for early detection of premalignant and malignant lesions of cervix. Indian J Med Res 2012;136:265-71.
27 Sankaranarayanan R, Budukh AM, Rajkumar R. Effective screening programmes for cervical cancer in low– and middle-income developing countries. Bull World Health Organ 2001;79:954-62.
28 Murthy NS, Chaudhry K, Saxena S. Trends in cervical cancer incidence – Indian scenario. Eur J Cancer Prev 2005;14:513-8.
29 Joshi S, Sankaranarayanan R. Opportunities for cervical cancer prevention in India. JKIMSU 2015;4:8-16.
30 Tailor HJ, Patel MM, Italiya SL. Breast or cervical cancer screening programme: Which one needs to stress in changing trend? Why? Natl J Community Med 2016;7:338-42.
31 Yeole BB, Kumar AV, Kurkure A, Sunny L. Population-based survival from cancers of breast, cervix and ovary in women in Mumbai, India. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2004;5:308-15.
32 WHO. IARC Handbooks on Cancer Prevention. Volume 10. Cervix Cancer Screening. Lyon: IARC Press; 2004.
33 Sankaranarayanan R. Screening for cervical and oral cancers in India is feasible and effective. Natl Med J India 2005;18:281-4.
34 Sankaranarayanan R, Esmy PO, Rajkumar R, Muwonge R, Swaminathan R, Shanthakumari S, et al. Effect of visual screening on cervical cancer incidence and mortality in Tamil Nadu, India: A cluster-randomised trial. Lancet 2007;370:398-406.
35 Shastri SS, Mittra I, Mishra GA, Gupta S, Dikshit R, Singh S, et al. Effect of visual inspection with acetic acid (via) screening by primary health workers: Randomized controlled study in Mumbai, India. J Natl Cancer Inst 2014;106:dju009.