The case for stopping cervical screening at age 50

被引:35
|
作者
Cruickshank, ME [1 ]
Angus, V [1 ]
Kelly, M [1 ]
McPhee, S [1 ]
Kitchener, HC [1 ]
机构
[1] ST MARYS HOSP,DEPT OBSTET & GYNAECOL,MANCHESTER M13 0JH,LANCS,ENGLAND
来源
关键词
D O I
10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997.tb11537.x
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Objective To determine the pattern of abnormal cervical cytology in women aged 50 to 60 years and to determine whether the development of cervical neoplasia in this age group is confined to women who have been inadequately screened. Design Retrospective case analysis study. Population An 11-year birth cohort of women in Grampian Region born between 2/10/33 and 1/10/44, and those who had significant cytological abnormalities in the 5 year period 1/10/89 to 30/9/94. Main outcome measures Cytological and histological outcome for women with significant cytological abnormalities between 50 to 60 years of age and the interval between three consecutive smears taken up to 50 years of age for those women. Results Of 23,440 women aged 50 to 60 years ever screened in Grampian Region, 229 (1%) had significant cytological abnormalities. Seventy had CIN 3 and 15 had invasive disease of the cervix. Among approximately 9000 women with adequate smear histories prior to age 50, one case of CM 3 and one case of invasion were detected. The prevalence of invasive disease in the whole cohort during this five year period was 59/100,000. Among the previously well screened women the prevalence was 11/100,000. Conclusion The incidence of preinvasive disease of the cervix is low over the age of 50 and is seen almost exclusively in inadequately screened women. There would appear to be little benefit in continuing cervical screening over the age of 50 in women who have had regular negative smears. The release of this low risk group from the cervical screening programme could alleviate anxiety and could enable reallocation of resources to target better high risk women who default from regular screening and to reduce screening intervals where necessary to three years.
引用
收藏
页码:586 / 589
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] RATIONALE FOR STOPPING CERVICAL SCREENING IN WOMEN OVER 50
    VANWIJNGAARDEN, WJ
    DUNCAN, ID
    BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1993, 306 (6883): : 967 - 971
  • [2] Cervical Cancer Screening and Incidence by Age: Unmet Needs Near and After the Stopping Age for Screening
    White, Mary C.
    Shoemaker, Meredith L.
    Benard, Vicki B.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, 2017, 53 (03) : 392 - 395
  • [3] RATIONALE FOR STOPPING CERVICAL SCREENING IN WOMEN OVER 50 (VOL 306, PG 967, 1993)
    VANWIJNGAARDEN, WJ
    DUNCAN, ID
    BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1993, 306 (6889): : 1373 - 1373
  • [4] Cervical Screening at Age 50-64 Years and the Risk of Cervical Cancer at Age 65 Years and Older: Population-Based Case Control Study
    Castanon, Alejandra
    Landy, Rebecca
    Cuzick, Jack
    Sasieni, Peter
    PLOS MEDICINE, 2014, 11 (01)
  • [5] Age-restricted cervical screening: HPV testing at age 50 identifies a high risk group for cervical disease
    Cruickshank, ME
    Chambers, G
    Murray, G
    McKenzie, L
    Donaldson, C
    Andrew, J
    Campbell, MK
    Kitchener, HC
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2002, 12 (06) : 735 - 740
  • [6] AGE FOR CERVICAL SCREENING
    JONES, WR
    LANCET, 1966, 2 (7474): : 1187 - &
  • [7] AGE FOR CERVICAL SCREENING
    MACGREGO.JE
    LANCET, 1966, 2 (7472): : 1081 - &
  • [8] AGE FOR CERVICAL SCREENING
    KELLAR, R
    ANDERSON, AF
    WAY, S
    HENNIGAN, M
    LANCET, 1966, 2 (7471): : 1030 - &
  • [9] The value of cervical screening in women over 50 years of age - Time for a multicentre audit
    McKenzie, CA
    Duncan, ID
    SCOTTISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1998, 43 (01) : 19 - 20
  • [10] Challenges and opportunities for cervical screening in women over the age of 50 years: a qualitative study
    Bravington, Alison
    Chen, Hong
    Dyson, Judith
    Jones, Lesley
    Dalgliesh, Christopher
    Bryan, Amee
    Patnick, Julietta
    Macleod, Una
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF GENERAL PRACTICE, 2022, 72 (725): : E873 - E881