Incomplete follow-up of positive HPV tests: overview of randomised controlled trials on primary cervical screening

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Standard

Incomplete follow-up of positive HPV tests: overview of randomised controlled trials on primary cervical screening. / Rebolj, M; Lynge, E.

In: British Journal of Cancer, Vol. 103, No. 3, 2010, p. 310-4.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Rebolj, M & Lynge, E 2010, 'Incomplete follow-up of positive HPV tests: overview of randomised controlled trials on primary cervical screening', British Journal of Cancer, vol. 103, no. 3, pp. 310-4. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6605771

APA

Rebolj, M., & Lynge, E. (2010). Incomplete follow-up of positive HPV tests: overview of randomised controlled trials on primary cervical screening. British Journal of Cancer, 103(3), 310-4. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6605771

Vancouver

Rebolj M, Lynge E. Incomplete follow-up of positive HPV tests: overview of randomised controlled trials on primary cervical screening. British Journal of Cancer. 2010;103(3):310-4. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6605771

Author

Rebolj, M ; Lynge, E. / Incomplete follow-up of positive HPV tests: overview of randomised controlled trials on primary cervical screening. In: British Journal of Cancer. 2010 ; Vol. 103, No. 3. pp. 310-4.

Bibtex

@article{68a763a09bc411df928f000ea68e967b,
title = "Incomplete follow-up of positive HPV tests: overview of randomised controlled trials on primary cervical screening",
abstract = "Background:It has been suggested that adjustment for incomplete compliance with follow-up in women with positive human papillomavirus (HPV) tests would be appropriate for estimating the true sensitivity of cervical screening with HPV testing. We assessed the compliance and its impact on >/=CIN3 detection in all eight randomised controlled trials (RCT) with published baseline-round data.Methods:We extracted data on recommended follow-up procedures, follow-up compliance, and >/=CIN3 detection for both arms of each RCT, and assessed their correlation.Results:Compliance with a direct referral for colposcopy was around 90% in all RCTs, whereas compliance with repeated testing among HPV-positive/cytology-negative women was around 60% in three RCTs and 73% in one RCT. Detection of >/=CIN3 was significantly increased in two out of six RCTs with reported data. The correlation between compliance with follow-up in HPV-positive women and relative >/=CIN3 detection was 0.48 (P=0.33).Conclusion:There is at present scant evidence to support the view that the measured sensitivity of HPV screening is a simple reflection of compliance with follow-up. Adjustment of measured cervical intraepithelial neoplasia detection on the basis of compliance data may not always be justifiable, and if adjustment is made, it should be used very judiciously.",
author = "M Rebolj and E Lynge",
year = "2010",
doi = "10.1038/sj.bjc.6605771",
language = "English",
volume = "103",
pages = "310--4",
journal = "The British journal of cancer. Supplement",
issn = "0007-0920",
publisher = "nature publishing group",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Incomplete follow-up of positive HPV tests: overview of randomised controlled trials on primary cervical screening

AU - Rebolj, M

AU - Lynge, E

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - Background:It has been suggested that adjustment for incomplete compliance with follow-up in women with positive human papillomavirus (HPV) tests would be appropriate for estimating the true sensitivity of cervical screening with HPV testing. We assessed the compliance and its impact on >/=CIN3 detection in all eight randomised controlled trials (RCT) with published baseline-round data.Methods:We extracted data on recommended follow-up procedures, follow-up compliance, and >/=CIN3 detection for both arms of each RCT, and assessed their correlation.Results:Compliance with a direct referral for colposcopy was around 90% in all RCTs, whereas compliance with repeated testing among HPV-positive/cytology-negative women was around 60% in three RCTs and 73% in one RCT. Detection of >/=CIN3 was significantly increased in two out of six RCTs with reported data. The correlation between compliance with follow-up in HPV-positive women and relative >/=CIN3 detection was 0.48 (P=0.33).Conclusion:There is at present scant evidence to support the view that the measured sensitivity of HPV screening is a simple reflection of compliance with follow-up. Adjustment of measured cervical intraepithelial neoplasia detection on the basis of compliance data may not always be justifiable, and if adjustment is made, it should be used very judiciously.

AB - Background:It has been suggested that adjustment for incomplete compliance with follow-up in women with positive human papillomavirus (HPV) tests would be appropriate for estimating the true sensitivity of cervical screening with HPV testing. We assessed the compliance and its impact on >/=CIN3 detection in all eight randomised controlled trials (RCT) with published baseline-round data.Methods:We extracted data on recommended follow-up procedures, follow-up compliance, and >/=CIN3 detection for both arms of each RCT, and assessed their correlation.Results:Compliance with a direct referral for colposcopy was around 90% in all RCTs, whereas compliance with repeated testing among HPV-positive/cytology-negative women was around 60% in three RCTs and 73% in one RCT. Detection of >/=CIN3 was significantly increased in two out of six RCTs with reported data. The correlation between compliance with follow-up in HPV-positive women and relative >/=CIN3 detection was 0.48 (P=0.33).Conclusion:There is at present scant evidence to support the view that the measured sensitivity of HPV screening is a simple reflection of compliance with follow-up. Adjustment of measured cervical intraepithelial neoplasia detection on the basis of compliance data may not always be justifiable, and if adjustment is made, it should be used very judiciously.

U2 - 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605771

DO - 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605771

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 20628384

VL - 103

SP - 310

EP - 314

JO - The British journal of cancer. Supplement

JF - The British journal of cancer. Supplement

SN - 0007-0920

IS - 3

ER -

ID: 21087068