4.2 Article

Effectiveness of cervical cancer screening over cervical cancer mortality among Japanese women

Journal

JAPANESE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 36, Issue 8, Pages 511-518

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jjco/hyl060

Keywords

cervical cancer mortality; Pap smear test; cohort study; Japan

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Various studies have revealed that cervical cancer (CC) screening significantly reduces both CC incidence and mortality in developed countries. Although Japan introduced a nationwide government funded annual CC screening for the women aged 30+ in 1982, the effectiveness of CC screening on CC mortality has not yet been evaluated by any prospective cohort study. Therefore, the present study evaluated the association of CC mortality with self-reported CC screening and some other factors by a nationwide cohort study. Methods: Baseline survey of the Japan Collaborative Cohort Study for the enrollment of subjects was completed during 1988-90 and followed until 2003. This study only analyzed 63 541 women, aged 30-79 years, who were free from any cancer history at enrollment. Results: During the follow-up period, 38 CC deaths were identified. The mean age at mortality was 67.0 years, with a mortality rate of 4.2 per 100 000 person-years. Participation rate in CC screening was 46.9%. Age-adjusted Cox model indicated significantly lower CC mortality [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.12-0.74] due to CC screening. Protectiveness remained almost the same (HR = 0.30, 95% CI = 0.12-0.76) when adjusted for age, body mass index and number of deliveries. The results also revealed that CC screening could reduce at least 50% of CC deaths even after excluding the effect of possible self-selection bias. Conclusions: CC screening in Japan may reduce CC mortality significantly for women aged 30-79 years. However, further studies with more CC deaths and increased statistical power are needed to validate the findings.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available