medigraphic.com
Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública

2016, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

salud publica mex 2016; 58 (2)

Triage strategies in cervical cancer detection in Mexico: methods of the FRIDA Study

Torres-Ibarra L, Lazcano-Ponce E, Franco EL, Cuzick J, Hernández-Ávila M, Lorincz A, Rivera B, Ramírez P, Mendiola-Pastrana I, Rudolph SE, León-Maldonado L, Hernández R, Barrios E, Gravitt, P, Moscicki AB, Schmeler KM, Flores YN, Méndez-Hernández P, Salmerón J

Language: English
References: 39
Page: 197-210
PDF size: 367.49 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective. This paper describes the study design and baseline characteristics of the study population, including the first 30 829 women who enrolled in the Forwarding Research for Improved Detection and Access for Cervical Cancer Screening and Triage (FRIDA Study). This is a large population based study that is evaluating the performance and cost-effectiveness of different triage strategies for high-risk HPV (hrHPV) positive women in Mexico. Materials and methods. The target population is more than 100 000 women aged 30 to 64 years who attend the Cervical Cancer Screening Program in 100 health centers in the state of Tlaxcala, Mexico. Since August 2013, all women in the region have been invited to enroll in the study. The study participants are evaluated to determine hrHPV infection using the Cobas 4800 HPV test. The HPV-16/18 genotyping and cytology triage strategies are performed as reflex tests in all hrHPV-positive participants. Women with a positive HPV-16/18 test and/or abnormal cytology (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse, ASCUS+) are referred for colposcopy evaluation, where a minimum of four biopsies and an endocervical sample are systematically collected. Histologic confirmation is performed by a standardized panel of pathologists. Results. Among the 30 829 women who have been screened, the overall prevalence of hrHPV is 11.0%. The overall prevalence of HPV16 and HPV18 are 1.5% and 0.7%, respectively. Cytological abnormalities (ASCUS+) were detected in 11.8% of the hrHPV-positive women. A total of 27.0% (920/3,401) of the hrHPV-positive women were referred to colposcopy because of a positive HPV16/18 test and/or abnormal reflex cytology, (31.6% had only ASCUS+, 53.6% were HPV16/18 positive with a normal cytology result, and 9.5% were positive to both triage tests). Conclusion. The results of this study will help policy makers and health service providers establish the best practices for triage in cervical cancer screening in Mexico and other countries.


REFERENCES

  1. Beal CM, Salmerón J, Flores YN, Torres L, Granados-García V, Dugan E, et al. Cost analysis of different cervical cancer screening strategies in Mexico. Salud Publica Mex 2014;56:429-501.

  2. Torres-Sánchez LE, Rojas-Martinez R, Escamilla-Núñez C, de la Vara- Salazar E, Lazcano-Ponce E. Cancer mortality trends in Mexico, 1980-2011. Salud Publica Mex 2014;56:473-91.

  3. Wright TC, Stoler MH, Behrens CM, Sharma A, Zhang G, Wright TL. Primary cervical cancer screening with human papillomavirus: end of study results from the ATHENA study using HPV as the first-line screening test. Gynecol Oncol 2015;136:189-197.

  4. Tota JE, Chevarie-Davis M, Richardson LA, Devries M, Franco EL. Epidemiology and burden of HPV infection and related diseases: implications for prevention strategies. Prev Med 2011; 53:S12-S21.

  5. Schiffman M, Castle PE, Jerónimo J, Rodriguez AC, Wacholder S. Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. Lancet 2007;370:890-907.

  6. Rodriguez AC, Schiffman M, Herrero R, Wacholder S, Hildesheim A, Castle PE, et al. Rapid clearance of human papillomavirus and implications for clinical focus on persistent infections. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008;100:513-517.

  7. Wright TC, Jr., Stoler MH, Sharma A, Zhang G, Behrens C, Wright TL, ATHENA (Addressing THE Need for Advanced HPV Diagnostics) Study Group. Evaluation of HPV-16 and HPV-18 genotyping for the triage of women with high-risk HPV+ cytology-negative results. Am J Clin Pathol 2011;136:578-586.

  8. Massad LS, Einstein MH, Huh WK, Katki HA, Kinney WK, Schiffman M, et al. 2012 updated consensus guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2013;17:S1-S27.

  9. Dufresne S, Sauthier P, Mayrand MH, Petignat P, Provencher D, Drouin P, et al. Human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA triage of women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance with Amplicor HPV and Hybrid Capture 2 assays for detection of high-grade lesions of the uterine cervix. J Clin Microbiol 2011;49:48-53.

  10. Bosch FX. Epidemiology of human papillomavirus infections: new options for cervical cancer prevention. Salud Publica Mex 2003;45:S326-S339.

  11. de Sanjose S, Quint WGV, Alemany L, Geraets DT, Klaustermeier JE, Lloveras B, et al. Human papillomavirus genotype attribution in invasive cervical cancer: a retrospective cross-sectional worldwide study. The Lancet Oncol 2010;11:1048-1056.

  12. Zhao FH, Jeronimo J, Qiao YL, Schweizer J, Chen W, Valdez M, et al. An evaluation of novel, lower-cost molecular screening tests for human papillomavirus in rural China. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2013;6:938-948.

  13. Possati-Resende JC, Fregnani JH, Kerr LM, Mauad EC, Longatto-Filho A, Scapulatempo-Neto C. The Accuracy of p16/Ki-67 and HPV Test in the Detection of CIN2/3 in Women Diagnosed with ASC-US or LSIL. PloS one 2015;10:e0134445.

  14. Bergeron C, Ikenberg H, Sideri M, Denton K, Bogers J, Schmidt D, et al. Prospective evaluation of p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology for managing women with abnormal Papanicolaou cytology: PALMS study results. Cancer Cytopathol 2015;123: 373-381.

  15. Lazcano-Ponce E, Alonso P, Ruiz-Moreno JA, Hernandez-Avila M. Recommendations for cervical cancer screening programs in developing countries. The need for equity and technological development. Salud Publica Mex 2003;45:S449-S462.

  16. Waller J, Marlow LA, Wardle J. The association between knowledge of HPV and feelings of stigma, shame and anxiety. Sex Transm Infect 2007;83:155-159.

  17. Pretorius RG, Belinson JL, Burchette RJ, Hu S, Zhang X, Qiao YL. Regardless of skill, performing more biopsies increases the sensitivity of colposcopy. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2011;15:180-188.

  18. Porras C, Wentzensen N, Rodriguez AC, Morales J, Burk RD, Alfaro M, et al. Switch from cytology-based to human papillomavirus test-based cervical screening: implications for colposcopy. Int J Cancer 2012;130:1879-1887.

  19. Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática. Perspectiva estadística Tlaxcala. México, DF: INEGI, 2012.

  20. Consejo Nacional de Evaluación de la Política de Desarrollo Social. Informe de pobreza y evaluación en el estado de Tlaxcala 2012. México: CONEVAL, 2012 [accessed on 2012 March]. Available at: http://www. coneval.gob.mx/coordinacion/entidades/Documents/Informes%20de%20 pobreza%20y%20evaluaci%C3%B3n%202010-2012_Documentos/Informe% 20de%20pobreza%20y%20evaluaci%C3%B3n%202012_Tlaxcala.pdf

  21. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, Moriatry A, O´Connor D, Prey M, et al. The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002;287:2114-2019.

  22. Bergeron C. The 2001 Bethesda System. Salud Publica Mex 2003;45(suppl 3):S340-S344.

  23. Modificación a la Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-014-SSA2-1994 para la prevención, detección, diagnóstico, tratamiento, control y vigilancia epidemiológica del cáncer cervicouterino. Mexico:Diario Oficial de la Federación, May 31 2007.

  24. Centro Nacional de Equidad de Género y Salud Reproductiva. [internet] Programa de acción específico. Cáncer de cuello uterino. [accessed on 2015 September] Available at: http://cnegsr.salud.gob.mx/contenidos/ Programas_de_Accion/CancerdelaMujer/CaCu/PrevDetOport.html

  25. Szarewski A, Mesher D, Cadman L, Austin J, Ashdown-Barr L, Ho L, et al. Comparison of seven tests for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in women with abnormal smears: the Predictors 2 study. J Clin Microbiol 2012;50:1867-1873.

  26. Schweizer J, Lu PS, Mahoney CW, Berard-Bergery M, Ho M, Ramasamy V, et al. Feasibility study of a human papillomavirus E6 oncoprotein test for diagnosis of cervical precancer and cancer. J Clin Microbiol 2010;48:4646-4648.

  27. Smith RA, Cokkinides V, Brooks D, Saslow D, Shah M, Brawley OW. Cancer screening in the United States, 2011: A review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin 2011;61:8-30.

  28. Lazcano-Ponce E, Lorincz AT, Torres L, Salmeron J, Cruz A, Rojas R, et al. Specimen self-collection and HPV DNA screening in a pilot study of 100,242 women. Int J Cancer 2014;135:109-116.

  29. Salmeron J, Lazcano-Ponce E, Lorincz A, Hernandez M, Hernandez P, Leyva A, et al. Comparison of HPV-based assays with Papanicolaou smears for cervical cancer screening in Morelos State, Mexico. Cancer Causes Control 2003;14:505-512.

  30. Flores Y, Bishai D, Lazcano E, Shah K, Lorincz A, Hernandez M, et al. Improving cervical cancer screening in Mexico: results from the Morelos HPV Study. Salud Publica Mex 2003;45:S388-S398.

  31. Lazcano-Ponce E, Lorincz AT, Salmeron J, Fernandez I, Cruz A, Hernandez P, et al. A pilot study of HPV DNA and cytology testing in 50,159 women in the routine Mexican Social Security Program. Cancer Causes Control 2010;21:1693-1700.

  32. Wright TC Jr, Stoler MH, Behrens CM, Apple R, Derion T, Wright TL. The ATHENA human papillomavirus study: design, methods, and baseline results. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012;206:46e1- 46e11.

  33. Muñoz N, Mendez F, Posso H, Molano M, van den Brule AJ, Ronderos M, et al. Incidence, duration, and determinants of cervical human papillomavirus infection in a cohort of Colombian women with normal cytological results. J Infect Dis 2004;190:2077-2087.

  34. Herrero R, Castle PE, Schiffman M, Bratti MC, Hildesheim A, Morales J, et al. Epidemiologic profile of type-specific human papillomavirus infection and cervical neoplasia in Guanacaste, Costa Rica. J Infect Dis 2005;191:1796-1807.

  35. Agorastos T, Chatzistamatiou K, Katsamagkas T, Koliopoulos G, Daponte A, Constantinidis T, et al. Primary screening for cervical cancer based on high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) detection and HPV 16 and HPV 18 genotyping, in comparison to cytology. PloS one 2015;10(3):e0119755.

  36. Lazcano-Ponce EC, Moss S, Alonso de Ruiz P, Salmerón-Castro J, Hernandez-Avila M. Cervical cancer screening in developing countries: why is it ineffective? The case of Mexico. Arch Med Res 1999;30:240-250.

  37. Monsonego J, Cox JT, Behrens C, Sandri M, Franco EL, Yap PS, et al. Prevalence of high-risk human papilloma virus genotypes and associated risk of cervical precancerous lesions in a large U.S. screening population: data from the ATHENA trial. Gynecol Oncol 2015;137:47-54.

  38. Nam K, Chung S, Kwak J, Cha S, Kim J, Jeon S, et al. Random biopsy after colposcopy-directed biopsy improves the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2010;14:346-351.

  39. Gage JC, Hanson VW, Abbey K, Dippery S, Gardner S, Kubota J, et al. Number of cervical biopsies and sensitivity of colposcopy. Obstet Gynecol 2006;108:264-272.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com