4.3 Review

Human papillomavirus as a cause of anal cancer and the role of screening

期刊

CURRENT OPINION IN INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 30, 期 1, 页码 87-92

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/QCO.0000000000000337

关键词

anal cancer; HIV; human papillomavirus; screening

资金

  1. Department of Infectious Diseases, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
  2. Department of Dermatology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose of review Anal cancer is a serious health problem in HIV-positive men who have sex with men, and precursor lesions, anal intraepithelial neoplasia, are well defined. Given the similarities with cervical cancer, screening for and treatment of anal intraepithelial neoplasia might prevent anal cancer. Screening programmes should meet the Wilson and Jungner criteria. We used these criteria to evaluate the current body of evidence supporting a screening programme for anal dysplasia. Recent findings The natural history of anal intraepithelial neoplasia is gradually becoming more clear, and three prospective studies are now being performed to conclusively address this issue. High-resolution anoscopy stays the gold standard to diagnose anal intraepithelial neoplasia. The International Anal Neoplasia Society has recently published Practice Standards in the Detection of Anal Cancer Precursors. The main issue, however, is treatment. Although response rates are reasonable at early evaluation, the majority of patients has a recurrence. Summary At present, an anal cancer screening programme for HIV-positive men who have sex with men meets most of the Wilson and Jungner criteria. Given that high-resolution anoscopy is the gold standard for screening, important issues that need addressing are the need for a less invasive screening procedure and the cost-effectiveness of screening. The main issue is treatment. Development and evaluation of new treatment strategies are essential for an effective and sustainable screening programme.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据