Elsevier

European Journal of Cancer

Volume 45, Issue 15, October 2009, Pages 2671-2678
European Journal of Cancer

The challenges of organising cervical screening programmes in the 15 old member states of the European Union

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2009.07.016Get rights and content

Abstract

Cervical cancer incidence and mortality can be reduced substantially by organised cytological screening at 3 to 5 year intervals, as was demonstrated in the Nordic countries, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and parts of Italy. Opportunistic screening, often proposed at yearly schedules, has also reduced the burden of cervical cancer in some, but not all, of the other old member states (belonging to the European Union since 1995) but at a cost that is several times greater. Well organised screening programmes have the potential to achieve greater participation of the target population at regular intervals, equity of access and high quality.

Despite the consistent evidence that organised screening is more efficient than non-organised screening, and in spite of the Cancer Screening Recommendations of the European Council, health authorities of eight old member states (Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Luxembourg, Portugal and Spain) have not yet started national organised implementation of screening for cervical cancer. A decision was made by the Irish government to extend their pilot programme nationally while new regional programmes commenced in Portugal and Spain.

Introduction of new methods of prevention, such as HPV screening and prophylactic HPV vaccination, can reduce the burden further, but this will require a high level of organisation with particular attention needed for the maximisation of population coverage, compliance with evidence-based guidelines, monitoring of data enabling continued evaluation and improvement of the preventive programmes.

Introduction

Among all malignant tumours, cervical cancer is the one which can be most effectively controlled by screening. Detection of cytological abnormalities by microscopic examination of Pap smears, and subsequent treatment of women with high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), avoids the development of cancer.1 In 1986, the high effectiveness of cervical cancer screening using Pap smears was established through the expert review of case-control and cohort studies as well as by comparisons between areas or periods with different population coverage.2 Further evidence has been generated from more recent studies,3, 4, 5, 6 confirming the conclusion that well organised cytological screening, every 3 to 5 years in the age range 35–64 years reduces the incidence of cervical cancer by 80% or more among screened women.7

In 1993, when the European Union (EU) comprised 12 member states (Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Denmark, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom), the first edition of the European Guidelines for Cervical Cancer Screening was published in this journal.8 Two years later, Austria, Finland and Sweden joined the Union. In the 1990s, cytological screening was well organised in only a few countries, such as the Nordic countries, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and parts of Italy.9 In the other countries, screening was mainly opportunistic, depending on the initiative of the individual woman or her doctor. The first edition of the European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Cervical Cancer Screening established the principles of organised screening. It was pivotal in initiating some new pilot projects in Europe and pioneering in launching the concept of quality assurance.10 Nevertheless, the 1993 version has had limited impact on opportunistic screening in countries with a ‘liberal’ health care system.11 In 2003, the national ministers of health of all member states endorsed the European Council Recommendation on Cancer Screening and proposed that screening for breast, colorectal and cervical cancer should be offered only in organised settings.12 In 2008, the European guidelines were updated in a 2nd edition, which corroborated the principles of organised screening and assessed the level of evidence regarding the effectiveness of new methods of cervical cancer prevention.13

In the current paper we demonstrate that well organised screening programmes have a greater impact than opportunistic screening because they have the potential to achieve greater participation of the target population at regular intervals, equity of access and high quality. In the second part, we discuss the challenges for health authorities and health professionals in implementing recommendations to organise screening where it is not yet standard. The current paper is restricted to screening in the 15 old member states of the EU in 1995, with some relevant references to Iceland and Norway, which are not EU members. Cervical cancer prevention in the new member states, where the burden of cervical cancer is of a higher order of magnitude,14, 15 is discussed separately.16

Section snippets

Trends in Nordic countries

Trend analyses in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden have revealed a strong correlation between the decline in the burden of cervical cancer and the geographical extent and the population coverage of organised cytological screening.17 In Norway, with only 5% of the population covered by organised screening, the cumulative mortality rates (0–74 years) fell by only 10% between the late 1950s and the early 1980s, whereas in Finland and Iceland, with nationwide implementation of organised

Imperfections of organised programmes

Organised screening is more effective than non-organised screening but is not free from imperfections and achieved effects are not permanent if attention wanes. However, an intrinsic characteristic of organised screening is that imperfections come to the fore more easily and can be corrected in due time.

In England, since the year 2000, overall screening attendance has remained at a high level (80% screened <5 years ago, in the age group 25–64 years) but a continuing slow but steady fall-off has

Challenges for the future

Despite evidence indicating greater effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of organised screening and in spite of the European Council Recommendation,12 detection of cervical cancer precursors remains mainly opportunistic in eight of the 15 old member states. It should be considered as a compelling responsibility for national or regional health authorities of these countries to set up organised programmes preferably extending over the whole country in agreement with current European Guidelines

Conclusions

The major take-home message for policy makers is that screening must be well organised with optimal screening coverage and follow-up of women with a positive screening test. The quality of screening should be assured and monitored at each stage of the screening process.

Achieving a high coverage for HPV vaccination is expected to reduce the burden of disease substantially which will require modification of screening policies, in the mid- to long-term. Meanwhile, cervical screening will need to

Conflict of interest statement

None declared.

Acknowledgements

Financial support was received from (1) the European Commission (Directorate of SANCO, Luxembourg, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg), through the networks EUNICE (European Network for Information on Cancer) and ECCG (European Cooperation on development and implementation of Cancer screening and prevention Guidelines), via IARC (Lyon, France); (2) IWT (Institute for the Promotion of Innovation by Science and Technology in Flanders, project number 060081 (Brussels, Belgium)); and (3) the National Cancer

References (76)

  • J. Dillner

    Cervical cancer screening in Sweden

    Eur J Cancer

    (2000)
  • M. Arbyn et al.

    Cervical cancer screening in Belgium

    Eur J Cancer

    (2000)
  • G. Breitenecker et al.

    Cervical cancer screening in Austria

    Eur J Cancer

    (2000)
  • E. Riza et al.

    Cervical cancer screening in Greece

    Eur J Cancer

    (2000)
  • B. Strander et al.

    Does HPV-status 6–12 months after treatment of high grade dysplasia in the uterine cervix predict long term recurrence?

    Eur J Cancer

    (2007)
  • M. Arbyn et al.

    Review of current knowledge on HPV vaccination: an appendix to the European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Cervical Cancer Screening

    J Clin Virol

    (2007)
  • M. Kyrgiou et al.

    Obstetric outcomes after conservative treatment for intra-epithelial or early invasive cervical lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature

    Lancet

    (2006)
  • M. Arbyn et al.

    International agreement to join forces in synthesizing evidence on new methods for cervical cancer prevention

    Cancer Lett

    (2009)
  • J. Cuzick et al.

    Overview of human papillomavirus-based and other novel options for cervical cancer screening in developed and developing countries

    Vaccine

    (2008)
  • E. Lynge et al.

    What’s next? Perspectives and future needs of cervical screening in Europe in the era of molecular testing and vaccination

    Eur J Cancer

    (2009)
  • Miller AB. Cervical cancer screening programmes. Managerial guidelines. Geneva: World Health Organisation;...
  • Hakama M, Miller AB, Day NE. In: Hakama M, Miller AB, Day NE, editors. Screening for cancer of the uterine cervix....
  • P. Sasieni et al.

    Benefit of cervical screening at different ages: evidence from the UK audit of screening histories

    Br J Cancer

    (2003)
  • M.E. van Marle et al.

    Low risk of cervical cancer during a long period after negative screening in the Netherlands

    Br J Cancer

    (2003)
  • M. Zappa et al.

    Lower protection of cytological screening for adenocarcinomas and shorter protection for younger women: the results of a case-control study in Florence

    Br J Cancer

    (2004)
  • B. Andrae et al.

    Screening-preventable cervical cancer risks: evidence from a nationwide audit in Sweden

    J Natl Cancer Inst

    (2008)
  • IARC. Cervix Cancer Screening. IARC handbooks of cancer prevention, vol. 10. Lyon: IARC Press;...
  • D. Coleman et al.

    European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening. Europe against cancer programme

    Eur J Cancer

    (1993)
  • A. Anttila et al.

    Cervical cancer screening programmes and policies in 18 European countries

    Br J Cancer

    (2004)
  • Council of the European Union

    Council recommendation of 2 December 2003 on cancer screening

    Off J Eur Union

    (2003)
  • European Commission. European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening (2nd ed.) In: Arbyn M,...
  • M. Arbyn et al.

    Burden of cervical cancer in the 27 member states of the European Union: estimates for 2004

    Ann Oncol

    (2007)
  • Arbyn M, Antoine J, Valerianova Z, et al. Trends in cervical cancer incidence and mortality in the Baltic Countries,...
  • Working Group on the Registration and Monitoring of Cervical Cancer Screening Programmes in the European Union; within...
  • Anttila A, Nieminen P. Cervical cancer screening programme in Finland with an example on implementing alternative...
  • P. Nieminen et al.

    Organised vs. spontaneous Pap-smear screening for cervical cancer: a case-control study

    Int J Cancer

    (1999)
  • E. Lynge et al.

    What happens when organization of cervical cancer screening is delayed or stopped?

    J Med Screen

    (2006)
  • J.F. Nygard et al.

    The cervical cancer screening programme in Norway, 1992–2000: changes in Pap smear coverage and incidence of cervical cancer

    J Med Screen

    (2002)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text