Practice Guideline
. 2018 Aug 21;320(7):674-686. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.10897. Screening for Cervical Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement Susan J Curry 1 , Alex H Krist 2 3 , Douglas K Owens 4 5 , Michael J Barry 6 , Aaron B Caughey 7 , Karina W Davidson 8 , Chyke A Doubeni 9 , John W Epling Jr 10 , Alex R Kemper 11 , Martha Kubik 12 , C Seth Landefeld 13 , Carol M Mangione 14 , Maureen G Phipps 15 , Michael Silverstein 16 , Melissa A Simon 17 , Chien-Wen Tseng 18 19 , John B Wong 20Affiliations
AffiliationsItem in Clipboard
Practice Guideline
Screening for Cervical Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation StatementUS Preventive Services Task Force et al. JAMA. 2018.
Free article . 2018 Aug 21;320(7):674-686. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.10897. Authors US Preventive Services Task Force; Susan J Curry 1 , Alex H Krist 2 3 , Douglas K Owens 4 5 , Michael J Barry 6 , Aaron B Caughey 7 , Karina W Davidson 8 , Chyke A Doubeni 9 , John W Epling Jr 10 , Alex R Kemper 11 , Martha Kubik 12 , C Seth Landefeld 13 , Carol M Mangione 14 , Maureen G Phipps 15 , Michael Silverstein 16 , Melissa A Simon 17 , Chien-Wen Tseng 18 19 , John B Wong 20 AffiliationsItem in Clipboard
AbstractImportance: The number of deaths from cervical cancer in the United States has decreased substantially since the implementation of widespread cervical cancer screening and has declined from 2.8 to 2.3 deaths per 100 000 women from 2000 to 2015.
Objective: To update the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) 2012 recommendation on screening for cervical cancer.
Evidence review: The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on screening for cervical cancer, with a focus on clinical trials and cohort studies that evaluated screening with high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing alone or hrHPV and cytology together (cotesting) compared with cervical cytology alone. The USPSTF also commissioned a decision analysis model to evaluate the age at which to begin and end screening, the optimal interval for screening, the effectiveness of different screening strategies, and related benefits and harms of different screening strategies.
Findings: Screening with cervical cytology alone, primary hrHPV testing alone, or cotesting can detect high-grade precancerous cervical lesions and cervical cancer. Screening women aged 21 to 65 years substantially reduces cervical cancer incidence and mortality. The harms of screening for cervical cancer in women aged 30 to 65 years are moderate. The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that the benefits of screening every 3 years with cytology alone in women aged 21 to 29 years substantially outweigh the harms. The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that the benefits of screening every 3 years with cytology alone, every 5 years with hrHPV testing alone, or every 5 years with both tests (cotesting) in women aged 30 to 65 years outweigh the harms. Screening women older than 65 years who have had adequate prior screening and women younger than 21 years does not provide significant benefit. Screening women who have had a hysterectomy with removal of the cervix for indications other than a high-grade precancerous lesion or cervical cancer provides no benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate to high certainty that screening women older than 65 years who have had adequate prior screening and are not otherwise at high risk for cervical cancer, screening women younger than 21 years, and screening women who have had a hysterectomy with removal of the cervix for indications other than a high-grade precancerous lesion or cervical cancer does not result in a positive net benefit.
Conclusions and recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for cervical cancer every 3 years with cervical cytology alone in women aged 21 to 29 years. (A recommendation) The USPSTF recommends screening every 3 years with cervical cytology alone, every 5 years with hrHPV testing alone, or every 5 years with hrHPV testing in combination with cytology (cotesting) in women aged 30 to 65 years. (A recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against screening for cervical cancer in women younger than 21 years. (D recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against screening for cervical cancer in women older than 65 years who have had adequate prior screening and are not otherwise at high risk for cervical cancer. (D recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against screening for cervical cancer in women who have had a hysterectomy with removal of the cervix and do not have a history of a high-grade precancerous lesion or cervical cancer. (D recommendation).
Summary for patients inJin J. Jin J. JAMA. 2018 Aug 21;320(7):732. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.11365. JAMA. 2018. PMID: 30140878 No abstract available.
Moyer VA; U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Moyer VA, et al. Ann Intern Med. 2012 Jun 19;156(12):880-91, W312. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-156-12-201206190-00424. Ann Intern Med. 2012. PMID: 22711081
Kim JJ, Burger EA, Regan C, Sy S. Kim JJ, et al. JAMA. 2018 Aug 21;320(7):706-714. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.19872. JAMA. 2018. PMID: 30140882 Free PMC article.
Melnikow J, Henderson JT, Burda BU, Senger CA, Durbin S, Weyrich MS. Melnikow J, et al. JAMA. 2018 Aug 21;320(7):687-705. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.10400. JAMA. 2018. PMID: 30140883 Review.
Fontham ETH, Wolf AMD, Church TR, Etzioni R, Flowers CR, Herzig A, Guerra CE, Oeffinger KC, Shih YT, Walter LC, Kim JJ, Andrews KS, DeSantis CE, Fedewa SA, Manassaram-Baptiste D, Saslow D, Wender RC, Smith RA. Fontham ETH, et al. CA Cancer J Clin. 2020 Sep;70(5):321-346. doi: 10.3322/caac.21628. Epub 2020 Jul 30. CA Cancer J Clin. 2020. PMID: 32729638
US Preventive Services Task Force; Mangione CM, Barry MJ, Nicholson WK, Cabana M, Chelmow D, Coker TR, Davis EM, Donahue KE, JaƩn CR, Kubik M, Li L, Ogedegbe G, Pbert L, Ruiz JM, Stevermer J, Wong JB. US Preventive Services Task Force, et al. JAMA. 2022 Aug 23;328(8):746-753. doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.13044. JAMA. 2022. PMID: 35997723 Review.
Sokale IO, Thrift AP, Montealegre J, Adekanmbi V, Chido-Amajuoyi OG, Amuta A, Reitzel LR, Oluyomi AO. Sokale IO, et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Nov 1;6(11):e2343152. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.43152. JAMA Netw Open. 2023. PMID: 37955896 Free PMC article.
Batman SH, Varon ML, Daheri M, Ogburn T, Rivas SD, Guerra L, Toscano PA, Gasca M, Campos L, Foster S, Martin M, Yvette Williams-Brown M, Poindexter Y, Reininger B, Salcedo MP, Milbourne A, Fellman B, Fernandez ME, Baker E, Gowen R, Fisher-Hoch S, Rodriguez AM, Milan J, Pippin M, Hawk E, Schmeler KM. Batman SH, et al. Prev Med Rep. 2023 Oct 31;36:102486. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2023.102486. eCollection 2023 Dec. Prev Med Rep. 2023. PMID: 38021412 Free PMC article.
Stoltzfus KC, Popalis ML, Reiter PL, Moss JL. Stoltzfus KC, et al. J Rural Health. 2022 Mar;38(2):391-397. doi: 10.1111/jrh.12590. Epub 2021 May 18. J Rural Health. 2022. PMID: 34002407 Free PMC article.
Clarke CA, Mitchell BL, Putcha G, Alme E, Bach P, Beer JP, Beer TM, Beidelschies MA, Hoyos J, Klein E, Kuhn P, Krunic N, Lang K, Lee JSH, Lopez Ramos D, Morgenstern D, Quinn E, Raymond VM, Rubinstein WS, Sanchez SA, Serra R, Stewart M, Leiman LC. Clarke CA, et al. Clin Transl Sci. 2024 Sep;17(9):e70016. doi: 10.1111/cts.70016. Clin Transl Sci. 2024. PMID: 39206679 Free PMC article.
Matza LS, Howell TA, Fung ET, Janes SM, Seiden M, Hackshaw A, Nadauld L, Karn H, Chung KC. Matza LS, et al. Pharmacoecon Open. 2024 Mar;8(2):263-276. doi: 10.1007/s41669-023-00443-w. Epub 2024 Jan 8. Pharmacoecon Open. 2024. PMID: 38189869 Free PMC article.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.3