CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 254Cervical Cancer and HPV ResearchWomen's cancer prevention and managementGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening

Burden of cervical cancer and role of screening in India

Open access
Bobdey, Saurabh, Sathwara, Jignasa, Jain, Aanchal, Balasubramaniam, Ganesh·2016·Indian Journal of Medical and Paediatric Oncology
DOI 10.4103/0971-5851.195751PMC PMC5234166
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is a major cause of cancer mortality in women and more than a quarter of its global burden is contributed by developing countries. In India, in spite of alarmingly high figures, there is no nationwide government-sponsored screening program. This study was conducted to assess the burden of cervical cancer in India and review the performance characteristics of available cervical cancer screening tools, so as to provide evidence-based recommendations for application of most practically suited screening test to be used in resource-poor field settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE and Web of Science electronic database were searched from January 1990 to December 2015, using the keywords such as "cervical cancer", "screening", "early detection", "cervical cytology" and "visual inspection", and their corresponding MeSH terms in combination with Boolean operators "OR, AND." Two authors independently selected studies that are published in English and conducted in India. A total of 11 studies were found to be relevant and eligible to be included in the present study. RESULTS: In India, cervical cancer contributes to approximately 6-29% of all cancers in women. The age-adjusted incidence rate of cervical cancer varies widely among registries; highest is 23.07/100,000 in Mizoram state and the lowest is 4.91/100,000 in Dibrugarh district. The pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity of visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), magnified VIA, visual inspection with Lugol's iodine (VILI), cytology (Pap smear), and human papillomavirus DNA were found to be 67.65% and 84.32%, 65.36% and 85.76%, 78.27% and 87.10%, 62.11% and 93.51%, and 77.81% and 91.54%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In developing countries because of lack of necessary infrastructure and quality control, high-quality cytology screening may not be feasible for wide-scale implementation. Hence, cervical cancer screening program based on visual screening test such as VIA/VILI should be adopted as an integral part of primary health-care setup in resource-poor countries like India.

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 · 10.4103/0971-5851.195751

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Sensitivity and specificity of each screening strategy and colposcopy, and efficacy of HPV vaccine, were based on published meta-analysis studies.

    “Sensitivity and specificity of each of the screening strategy and colposcopy and efficacy of HPV vaccine was based on the published meta-analysis studies (Table 1). [29, 33, 34]”

    From Cost effectiveness of strategies for cervical cancer prevention in India (2020) · cites this paper as [33]

    The Results section (page unavailable) reports pooled sensitivity and specificity for several cervical screening methods, based on Indian studies. It does not provide sensitivity or specificity for colposcopy or efficacy estimates for HPV vaccination, and it describes its evidence as a review of studies rather than published meta-analyses. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Following the standard guidelines of an economic evaluation, the effectiveness estimates in terms of sensitivity and specificity of the screening strategies were based on the recently published meta-analysis of Indian studies.

    “Following the standard guidelines of an economic evaluation, the effectiveness estimates in terms of sensitivity and specificity of the screening strategies was based on the recently published meta-analysis of Indian studies. [33]”

    From Cost effectiveness of strategies for cervical cancer prevention in India (2020) · cites this paper as [33]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 27

  1. [3]Morrison AS Introduction Screening in Chronic Disease 1992 2nd ed New York Oxford University Press 3 42
  2. [4]Welch HG Black WC Evaluating randomized trials of screening J Gen Intern Med 1997 12 118 24 9051562 PMC1497070
  3. [7]Sankaranarayanan R Swaminathan R Lucas E Cancer Survival in Africa, Asia, Caribbean and Central America: Survcan 2010 Lyon IARC Scientific Publication International Agency for Research on Cancer 21675403
  4. [8]Sankaranarayanan R Swaminathan R Brenner H Chen K Chia KS Chen JG Cancer survival in Africa, Asia, and Central America: a population-based study Lancet Oncol 2010 11 165 73 20005175
  5. [9]Krishnan S Madsen E Porterfield D Varghese B Advancing cervical cancer prevention in India: Implementation science priorities Oncologist 2013 18 1285 97 24217555 PMC3868423
  6. [10]Denny L Quinn M Sankaranarayanan R Chapter 8: Screening for cervical cancer in developing countries Vaccine 2006 24 Suppl 3 S3/71 7 16950020
  7. [12]Sankaranarayanan R Gaffikin L Jacob M Sellors J Robles S A critical assessment of screening methods for cervical neoplasia Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2005 89 Suppl 2 S4 12 15823266
  8. [14]Solomon D Davey D Kurman R Moriarty A O'Connor D Prey M The 2001 Bethesda system: Terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology JAMA 2002 287 2114 9 11966386
  9. [15]Bobdey S Balasubramanium G Kumar A Jain A Cancer screening: Should cancer screening be essential component of primary health care in developing countries? Int J Prev Med 2015 6 56 26236443 PMC4505397
  10. [16]Basu PS Sankaranarayanan R Mandal R Roy C Das P Choudhury D Visual inspection with acetic acid and cytology in the early detection of cervical neoplasia in Kolkata, India Int J Gynecol Cancer 2003 13 626 32 14675346
  11. [17]Sankaranarayanan R Shastri SS Basu P Mahé C Mandal R Amin G The role of low-level magnification in visual inspection with acetic acid for the early detection of cervical neoplasia Cancer Detect Prev 2004 28 345 51 15542259
  12. [18]Sankaranarayanan R Chatterji R Shastri SS Wesley RS Basu P Mahe C Accuracy of human papillomavirus testing in primary screening of cervical neoplasia: Results from a multicenter study in India Int J Cancer 2004 112 341 7 15352050
  13. [19]Shastri SS Dinshaw K Amin G Goswami S Patil S Chinoy R Concurrent evaluation of visual, cytological and HPV testing as screening methods for the early detection of cervical neoplasia in Mumbai, India Bull World Health Organ 2005 83 186 94 15798842 PMC2624199
  14. [20]Sodhani P Gupta S Sharma JK Parashari A Halder K Singh V Test characteristics of various screening modalities for cervical cancer: A feasibility study to develop an alternative strategy for resource-limited settings Cytopathology 2006 17 348 52 17168917
  15. [21]Bhatla N Mukhopadhyay A Kriplani A Pandey RM Gravitt PE Shah KV Evaluation of adjunctive tests for cervical cancer screening in low resource settings Indian J Cancer 2007 44 51 5 17938481
  16. [22]Bhatla N Gulati A Mathur SR Rani S Anand K Muwonge R Evaluation of cervical screening in rural North India Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009 105 145 9 19200539
  17. [23]Gravitt PE Paul P Katki HA Vendantham H Ramakrishna G Sudula M Effectiveness of VIA, Pap, and HPV DNA testing in a cervical cancer screening program in a peri-urban community in Andhra Pradesh, India PLoS One 2010 5 e13711 21060889 PMC2965656
  18. [24]Bhatla N Puri K Kriplani A Iyer VK Mathur SR Mani K Adjunctive testing for cervical cancer screening in low resource settings Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2012 52 133 9 22276847
  19. [25]Deodhar K Sankaranarayanan R Jayant K Jeronimo J Thorat R Hingmire S Accuracy of concurrent visual and cytology screening in detecting cervical cancer precursors in rural India Int J Cancer 2012 131 E954 62 22581670
  20. [26]Ghosh P Gandhi G Kochhar PK Zutshi V Batra S Visual inspection of cervix with Lugol's iodine for early detection of premalignant and malignant lesions of cervix Indian J Med Res 2012 136 265 71 22960894 PMC3461739
  21. [27]Sankaranarayanan R Budukh AM Rajkumar R Effective screening programmes for cervical cancer in low– and middle-income developing countries Bull World Health Organ 2001 79 954 62 11693978 PMC2566667
  22. [28]Murthy NS Chaudhry K Saxena S Trends in cervical cancer incidence – Indian scenario Eur J Cancer Prev 2005 14 513 8 16284495
  23. [31]Yeole BB Kumar AV Kurkure A Sunny L Population-based survival from cancers of breast, cervix and ovary in women in Mumbai, India Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2004 5 308 15 15373712
  24. [32]WHO IARC Handbooks on Cancer Prevention Cervix Cancer Screening 2004 Volume 10 Lyon IARC Press
  25. [33]Sankaranarayanan R Screening for cervical and oral cancers in India is feasible and effective Natl Med J India 2005 18 281 4 16483024
  26. [34]Sankaranarayanan R Esmy PO Rajkumar R Muwonge R Swaminathan R Shanthakumari S Effect of visual screening on cervical cancer incidence and mortality in Tamil Nadu, India: A cluster-randomised trial Lancet 2007 370 398 406 17679017
  27. [35]Shastri SS Mittra I Mishra GA Gupta S Dikshit R Singh S Effect of visual inspection with acetic acid (via) screening by primary health workers: Randomized controlled study in Mumbai, India J Natl Cancer Inst 2014 106 dju009 24563518 PMC3982783

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bobdey, S., Sathwara, J., Jain, A., & Balasubramaniam, G.
Affiliations
Tata Memorial Hospital (IN)
Corresponding author
Bobdey, Saurabh
ORCID
Venue
Indian Journal of Medical and Paediatric Oncology
Publisher
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Published
2016-10
Volume
37
Issue
04
Pages
278-285
ISSN
  • 0971-5851 (ISSN-L)
  • 0975-2129
DOI
10.4103/0971-5851.195751
PMC
PMC5234166
OpenAlex
W2566110348
Cited by
254
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 41 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 6
FWCI
13.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Indian Journal of Medical and Paediatric Oncology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
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
cervical cancer, cervical cancer screening, India, cancer incidence, visual inspection with acetic acid, visual inspection with Lugol's iodine, Pap smear, human papillomavirus DNA testing, screening sensitivity and specificity, resource-limited settings, primary care, developing countries

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