CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 95Cervical Cancer and HPV ResearchWomen's cancer prevention and managementGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening

Prevention of Invasive Cervical Cancer in the United States: Past, Present, and Future

Open access
Pierce Campbell, Christine M., Menezes, Lynette J., Paskett, Electra D., Giuliano, Anna R.·2012·Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
DOI 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-11-1158PMC PMC3556792
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Over the past several decades, invasive cervical cancer (ICC) incidence in the United States has declined dramatically. Much of this decline has been attributed to widespread use of cytology screening followed by treatment of precancerous lesions. Despite available technologies to prevent ICC and screening programs targeting high-risk women, certain populations in the United States experience disproportionately high rates of ICC (e.g., racial/ethnic minorities and rural women). Limited access to and use of screening/follow-up services underlie this disparity. The licensure of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine in 2006 introduced an additional method of ICC prevention. Unfortunately, dissemination of the vaccine to age-eligible females has been lower than expected (32% have received all 3 recommended doses). Decreasing the burden of HPV infection and HPV-related diseases in the United States will require greater dissemination of the HPV vaccine to adolescents and young adults, along with successful implementation of revised ICC screening guidelines that incorporate HPV and cytology cotesting. While a future without ICC is possible, we will need a comprehensive national health care program and innovative approaches to reduce ICC burden and disparities.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-11-1158

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In developed countries where screening programmes are in place, most cervical cancers are seen in women who have never been screened.

    “In the developed countries where screening programmes are in place, most cervical cancers are seen in women who have never been screened [17].”

    From Performance of HPV Self-Sample Collected by a Novel Kit in Comparison with Clinician Collected Sample for Cervical Cancer Screening (2024) · cites this paper as [17]

    The Disparities and the Excess Burden of Cervical Cancer section (page unavailable) says that more than 60% of U.S. cases occur in underserved populations, who are less likely to undergo screening. The Cervical Cancer Screening section also links excess cancer burden to screening underuse. Neither passage says that most patients have never been screened, or establishes that pattern across developed countries. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 47 · Cited by 95

Research works printed but not linked: 42

  1. [2]Kohler BA Ward E McCarthy BJ Schymura MJ Ries LA Eheman C Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2007, featuring tumors of the brain and other nervous system J Natl Cancer Inst 2011 103 714 736 21454908 PMC3086878
  2. [3]Scarinci IC Garcia FA Kobetz E Partridge EE Brandt HM Bell MC Cervical cancer prevention: new tools and old barriers Cancer 2010 116 2531 2542 20310056 PMC2876205
  3. [5]Patel NR Rollison DE Barnholtz-Sloan J Mackinnon J Green L Giuliano AR Racial and ethnic disparities in the incidence of invasive cervical cancer in Florida Cancer 2009 115 3991 4000 19544552
  4. [6]Watson M Saraiya M Benard V Coughlin SS Flowers L Cokkinides V Burden of cervical cancer in the United States, 1998–2003 Cancer 2008 113 2855 2864 18980204
  5. [7]Leyden WA Manos MM Geiger AM Weinmann S Mouchawar J Bischoff K Cervical cancer in women with comprehensive health care access: attributable factors in the screening process J Natl Cancer Inst 2005 97 675 683 15870438
  6. [8]Spence AR Goggin P Franco EL Process of care failures in invasive cervical cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis Prev Med 2007 45 93 106 17651792
  7. [11]Newmann SJ Garner EO Social inequities along the cervical cancer continuum: a structured review Cancer Causes Control 2005 16 63 70 15750859
  8. [12]Nuno T Castle PE Harris R Estrada A Garcia F Breast and cervical cancer screening utilization among Hispanic women living near the United States-Mexico border J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2011 20 685 693 21428792
  9. [13]Akers AY Newmann SJ Smith JS Factors underlying disparities in cervical cancer incidence, screening, and treatment in the United States Curr Probl Cancer 2007 31 157 181 17543946
  10. [14]Johnson CE Mues KE Mayne SL Kiblawi AN Cervical cancer screening among immigrants and ethnic minorities: a systematic review using the health belief model J Low Genit Tract Dis 2008 12 232 241 18596467
  11. [16]Battaglia TA Santana MC Bak S Gokhale M Lash TL Ash AS Predictors of timely follow-up after abnormal cancer screening among women seeking care at urban community health centers Cancer 2010 116 913 921 20052731 PMC2819638
  12. [17]Daley MF Crane LA Markowitz LE Black SR Beaty BL Barrow J Human papillomavirus vaccination practices: a survey of US physicians 18 months after licensure Pediatrics 2010 126 425 433 20679306
  13. [18]McPhee SJ Bird JA Davis T Ha NT Jenkins CN Le B Barriers to breast and cervical cancer screening among Vietnamese-American women Am J Prev Med 1997 13 205 213 9181209
  14. [19]Percac-Lima S Aldrich LS Gamba GB Bearse AM Atlas SJ Barriers to follow-up of an abnormal Pap smear in Latina women referred for colposcopy J Gen Intern Med 2010 25 1198 1204 20652647 PMC2947627
  15. [21]Tangka FK O'Hara B Gardner JG Turner J Royalty J Shaw K Meeting the cervical cancer screening needs of underserved women: the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, 2004–2006 Cancer Causes Control 2010 21 1081 1090 20361353
  16. [22]Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National and state vaccination coverage among adolescents aged 13 through 17 years–United States, 2010 MMWRMorb Mortal Wkly Rep 2011 60 1117 1123 21866084
  17. [23]Anhang Price R Koshiol J Kobrin S Tiro JA Knowledge and intention to participate in cervical cancer screening after the human papillomavirus vaccine Vaccine 2011 29 4238 4243 21473953 PMC3105777
  18. [24]Caskey R Lindau ST Alexander GC Knowledge and early adoption of the HPV vaccine among girls and young women: results of a national survey J Adolesc Health 2009 45 453 462 19837351
  19. [25]Cates JR Brewer NT Fazekas KI Mitchell CE Smith JS Racial differences in HPV knowledge, HPV vaccine acceptability, and related beliefs among rural, southern women J Rural Health 2009 25 93 97 19166567
  20. [26]Hughes J Cates JR Liddon N Smith JS Gottlieb SL Brewer NT Disparities in how parents are learning about the human papillomavirus vaccine Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009 18 363 372 19190161
  21. [27]Dorell CG Yankey D Santibanez TA Markowitz LE Human papillomavirus vaccination series initiation and completion, 2008–2009 Pediatrics 2011 128 830 839 22007006
  22. [28]Head KJ Cohen EL Young women's perspectives on cervical cancer prevention in Appalachian Kentucky Qual Health Res 2011 22 476 487 22068039
  23. [29]Stokley S Cohn A Dorell C Hariri S Yankey D Messonnier N Adolescent vaccination-coverage levels in the United States, 2006– 2009 Pediatrics 2011 128 1078 1086 22084326
  24. [30]Allen JD Othus MK Shelton RC Li Y Norman N Tom L Parental decision making about the HPV vaccine Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2010 19 2187 2198 20826829
  25. [31]Katz ML Reiter PL Heaner S Ruffin MT Post DM Paskett ED Acceptance of the HPV vaccine among women, parents, community leaders, and healthcare providers in Ohio Appalachia Vaccine 2009 27 3945 3952 19389447 PMC2700122
  26. [32]Abdelmutti N Hoffman-Goetz L Risk messages about HPV, cervical cancer, and the HPV vaccine Gardasil: a content analysis of Canadian and U.S. national newspaper articles Women Health 2009 49 422 440 19851946
  27. [33]Crosby RA Casey BR Vanderpool R Collins T Moore GR Uptake of free HPV vaccination among young women: a comparison of rural versus urban rates J Rural Health 2011 27 380 384 21967381 PMC4753792
  28. [34]Conroy K Rosenthal SL Zimet GD Jin Y Bernstein DI Glynn S Human papillomavirus vaccine uptake, predictors of vaccination, and self-reported barriers to vaccination J Womens Health 2009 18 1679 1686 19785564
  29. [35]Taylor LD Hariri S Sternberg M Dunne EF Markowitz LE Human papillomavirus vaccine coverage in the United States, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2007–2008 Prev Med 2011 52 398 400 21108962
  30. [36]Wong CA Berkowitz Z Dorell CG Price RA Lee J Saraiya M Human papillomavirus vaccine uptake among 9- to 17-year-old girls: National Health Interview Survey, 2008 Cancer 2011 117 5612 5620 21692069 PMC3179804
  31. [37]Vadaparampil ST Kahn JA Salmon D Lee JH Quinn GP Roetzheim R Missed clinical opportunities: provider recommendations for HPV vaccination for 11–12 year old girls are limited Vaccine 2011 29 8634 8641 21924315 PMC3200426
  32. [38]Kahn JA Rosenthal SL Tissot AM Bernstein DI Wetzel C Zimet GD Factors influencing pediatricians' intention to recommend human papillomavirus vaccines Ambul Pediatr 2007 7 367 373 17870645
  33. [41]Giuliano AR Human papillomavirus vaccination in males Gynecol Oncol 2007 107 S24 S26 17938015
  34. [42]Elbasha EH Dasbach EJ Insinga RP Model for assessing human papillomavirus vaccination strategies Emerg Infect Dis 2007 13 28 41 17370513 PMC2725801
  35. [43]Giuliano AR Salmon D The case for a gender-neutral (universal) human papillomavirus vaccination policy in the United States: Point Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008 17 805 808 18398020
  36. [44]Moyer VA Screening for cervical cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement Ann Intern Med 2012 3 14 [Epub ahead of print] 22711081
  37. [45]Saslow D Solomon D Lawson HW Killackey M Kulasingam SL Cain J American Cancer Society, American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and American Society for Clinical Pathology screening guidelines for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer CA Cancer J Clin 2012 137 516 542 22431528
  38. [47]Cuzick J Arbyn M Sankaranarayanan R Tsu V Ronco G Mayrand MH Overview of human papillomavirus-based and other novel options for cervical cancer screening in developed and developing countries Vaccine 2008 26 Suppl 10 K29 K41 18847555
  39. [48]Cuzick J Clavel C Petry KU Meijer CJ Hoyer H Ratnam S Overview of the European and North American studies on HPV testing in primary cervical cancer screening Int J Cancer 2006 119 1095 1101 16586444
  40. [49]Kitchener HC Gilham C Sargent A Bailey A Albrow R Roberts C A comparison of HPV DNA testing and liquid based cytology over three rounds of primary cervical screening: extended follow up in the ARTISTIC trial Eur J Cancer 2011 47 864 871 21334200
  41. [50]Leinonen M Nieminen P Kotaniemi-Talonen L Malila N Tarkkanen J Laurila P Age-specific evaluation of primary human papillomavirus screening vs conventional cytology in a randomized setting J Natl Cancer Inst 2009 101 1612 1623 19903804
  42. [51]Schiffman M Wentzensen N Wacholder S Kinney W Gage JC Castle PE Human papillomavirus testing in the prevention of cervical cancer J Natl Cancer Inst 2011 103 368 383 21282563 PMC3046952

Authors
Pierce Campbell, C. M., Menezes, L. J., Paskett, E. D., & Giuliano, A. R.
Affiliations
  • Authors' Affiliations: 1Department of Cancer Epidemiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute; 2Division of Infectious Disease and International Medicine, University of South Florida College of Medicine, Tampa, Florida; and 3Department of Medicine and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
  • University of South Florida (US)
Corresponding author
Giuliano, Anna R.
ORCID
Venue
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
Publisher
American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)
Published
2012-09-01
Volume
21
Issue
9
Pages
1402-1408
ISSN
  • 1055-9965 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-7755
DOI
10.1158/1055-9965.epi-11-1158
PMC
PMC3556792
OpenAlex
W2167058479
Cited by
95
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR000090)
  • National Cancer Institute (R25CA147832, R25T CA147832)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
Keywords
invasive cervical cancer, cervical cancer prevention, cervical cancer screening, HPV vaccine, HPV vaccination coverage, precancerous lesions, racial and ethnic disparities, rural women, access to screening, screening guidelines, incidence trends
MeSH terms
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Social Class, United States, Vaccination, Cost of Illness, Papillomavirus Vaccines

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review