Monitoring the profile of cervical cancer in a developing city

BMC Public Health

Marise Amaral Rebouças Moreira¹  Ruffo de Freitas⁵  Maria Paula Curado³  Edésio Martins⁴  José Carlos de Oliveira⁴  Fábio Marques de Almeida² 

[1] Department of Medicine, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Federal University of Goiás, Goiânia, Brazil;Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade Federal de Goiás, Rua 235 c/ 1a avenida. s/n - S. Universitário, CEP 74605-020, Goiânia, Goiás,Brazil;International Prevention Research Institute – IPRI, Lyon, France;Population-Based Cancer Registry of Goiânia, Association Against Cancer in Goiás, Araújo Jorge Hospital, Goiânia, Brazil;Gynecology and Breast Section, Araújo Jorge Hospital, Association Against Cancer in Goiás, Goiânia, Brazil

关键词: Brazil;    Study of temporal series;    Incidence;    Tendency;    Neoplasias of the uterine cervix;   

Others  :  1162119
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2458-13-563

 received in 2012-09-13, accepted in 2013-05-31,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Medical records are frequently consulted to verify whether the treatment and guiding principles were correct. Determine incidence and mortality trends of in situ and invasive neoplasms of the uterine cervix, in the period 1988–2004 in Goiânia, Brazil.

Methods

The incident cases were identified through the Population-Based Cancer Registry of Goiânia. Population data were collected from census data of the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics. For mortality analysis, data were extracted from the Mortality Information System. The Poisson Regression was utilized to determine the annual incidence and mortality rates.

Results

A total of 4446 cases of in situ and invasive neoplasms of the uterine cervix were identified. No significant reductions were verified in invasive cervical cancer rates (p = 0.386) during the study period, while in situ carcinomas presented an annual increasing trend of 13.08% (p < 0.001). A decreasing trend was observed for mortality (3.02%, p = 0.017).

Conclusion

No reduction was observed for the incidence of invasive cancer of the uterine cervix; however, increasing trends were verified for in situ lesions with a consequent reduction in mortality rates. These increasing trends may be the result of recently-implemented screening programs or due to improvements in the notification system.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Almeida et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Sankaranarayanan R, Gaffikin L, Jacob M, Sellors J, Robles S: A critical assessment of screening methods for cervical neoplasia. International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics 2005, 89(Suppl 2):S4-S12.
• [2]Brasil: Ministério da Saúde. Instituto Nacional de Câncer José Alencar Gomes da Silva (INCA). Estimativa 2012 - Incidência de Câncer no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro, RJ: Flama; 2011.
• [3]GLOBOCAN 2008, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase. 2010. http://globocan.iarc.fr webcite
• [4]American Cancer Society. Cervical cancer: detailed guide. 2012. http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CervicalCancer/DetailedGuide/index webcite
• [5]Brasil: Ministério da Saúde. do Câncer e Fatores de Risco. Secretaria Nacional de Assistência à Saúde. Instituto Nacional de Câncer (INCA). Atlas de Mortalidade por Câncer, vol. 2013. Rio de Janeiro, RJ: Comprev; 2013.
• [6]REDE CÂNCER, on-line. Câncer do colo do útero. 2010. http://www.redecancer.org.br/wps/wcm/connect/acoes_programas/site/home/nobrasil/programa_nacional_controle_cancer_colo_utero/ webcite
• [7]Denny L: Cervical cancer: prevention and treatment. Discov Med 2012, 14(75):125-131.
• [8]Brasil: Ministério da Saúde. Secretária de Assistência à Saúde. Instituto Nacional de Câncer. Viva mulher. Câncer do cólo do útero: informações técnico-gerenciais e ações desenvolvidas, Ministério da Saúde edn. Rio de Janeiro: Ministério da Saúde; 2002.
• [9]Brasil: Ministério da Saúde: Portaria n°. 493, de 10 de março de 2006. In Aprova a Relação de Indicadores da Atenção Básica – 2006, cujos indicadores deverão ser pactuados entre municípios, estados e o Ministério da Saúde. Brasilia: Ministério da Saúde: Diário Oficial da União; 2006.
• [10]Pinho A, França Júnior I, Schraiber L, D’oliveira A: Cobertura e motivos para a realização ou não do teste de Papanicolaou no Município de São Paulo. Cad Saude Publica 2003, 19(S2):S303-S313.
• [11]Quadros C, Victora C, Dias-da-Costa J: Coverage and focus of a cervical cancer prevention program in Southern Brazil. Rev Panam Salud Publica 2004, 16(4):223-232.
• [12]Bleggi Torres LF, Werner B, Totsugui J, Collaco LM, Araujo SR, Huculak M, Boza EJ, Fischer RM, De Laat L, Sobbania LC, et al.: Cervical cancer screening program of Parana: cost-effective model in a developing country. Diagn Cytopathol 2003, 29(1):49-54.
• [13]ICCFACC. International Consensus Conference on the Fight Against Cervical Cancer: Features of successful organized screening programs. In International Consensus Conference on the Fight Against Cervical Cancer: March 22, 2000. Chicago; 2000.
• [14]Anttila A, Pukkala E, Soderman B, Kallio M, Nieminen P, Hakama M: Effect of organised screening on cervical cancer incidence and mortality in Finland, 1963–1995: recent increase in cervical cancer incidence. Int J Cancer 1999, 83(1):59-65.
• [15]Peto J, Gilham C, Fletcher O, Matthews FE: The cervical cancer epidemic that screening has prevented in the UK. Lancet 2004, 364(9430):249-256.
• [16]Sigurdsson K, Sigvaldason H: Effectiveness of cervical cancer screening in Iceland, 1964–2002: a study on trends in incidence and mortality and the effect of risk factors. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2006, 85(3):343-349.
• [17]Bray F, Carstensen B, Moller H, Zappa M, Zakelj MP, Lawrence G, Hakama M, Weiderpass E: Incidence trends of adenocarcinoma of the cervix in 13 European countries. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005, 14(9):2191-2199.
• [18]Gustafsson L, Ponten J, Zack M, Adami HO: International incidence rates of invasive cervical cancer after introduction of cytological screening. Cancer Causes Control 1997, 8(5):755-763.
• [19]Quinn M, Babb P, Jones J, Allen E: Effect of screening on incidence of and mortality from cancer of cervix in England: evaluation based on routinely collected statistics. BMJ 1999, 318(7188):904-908.
• [20]WHO - World Health Organization: Comprehensive cervical cancer control: a guide to essential practice. Switzerland: Publications of the World Health Organization; 2006.
• [21]Brenna SM, Hardy E, Zeferino LC, Namura I: Knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to the Pap smear among women with cervical cancer. Cad Saude Publica 2001, 17(4):909-914.
• [22]Freitas RA, Carvasan GA, Morais SS, Zeferino LC: Excessive Pap smears due to opportunistic cervical cancer screening. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2008, 29(5):479-482.
• [23]Kalakun L, Bozzetti MC: Evolution of uterine cervical cancer mortality from 1979 to 1998 in the State of Rio Grande do Sul. Brazil. Cad Saúde Pública 2005, 21(1):299-309.
• [24]Alves CM, Guerra MR, Bastos RR: Cervical cancer mortality trends in Minas Gerais State, Brazil, 1980–2005. Cad Saude Publica 2009, 25(8):1693-1700.
• [25]Arbyn M, Geys H: Trend of cervical cancer mortality in Belgium (1954–1994): tentative solution for the certification problem of unspecified uterine cancer. Int J Cancer 2002, 102(6):649-654.
• [26]Fonseca LA, Ramacciotti Ade S, Eluf Neto J: Mortality trends from uterine cervical cancer in the city of Sao Paulo from 1980 to 1999. Cad Saude Publica 2004, 20(1):136-142.
• [27]Monk BJ, Tewari KS, Koh WJ: Multimodality therapy for locally advanced cervical carcinoma: state of the art and future directions. J Clin Oncol 2007, 25(20):2952-2965.
• [28]Mendonça VG, Lorenzato FRB, Mendonça JG, Menezes TC, Guimarães MJB: Mortalidade por câncer do colo do útero: características sociodemográficas das mulheres residentes na cidade de Recife, Pernambuco. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2008, 30:248-255.
• [29]Negri G, Romano F, Vittadello F, Kasal A, Mazzoleni G, Colombetti V, Egarter-Vigl E: Laminin-5 gamma2 chain immunohistochemistry facilitates the assessment of invasiveness and improves the diagnostic reproducibility of glandular lesions of the cervix uteri. Hum Pathol 2006, 37(6):704-710.
• [30]Shin HR, Curado MP, Ferlay J, Heanue M, Edwards B, Storm H: Comparability and quality of data. In Cancer Incidence in Five Continents. Volume IX. 1st edition. Edited by Curado MP. Lyon, France: IARC Scientific Publications; 2007:160.
• [31]Oliveira M, Antônio M, Luciane M, Liberata C: Cobertura e fatores associados a não realização do exame preventivo de Papanicolaou em São Luís. Maranhão. Rev Bras Epidemiol 2006, 9(3):325-334.
• [32]Lazcano-Ponce E, Palacio-Mejia LS, Allen-Leigh B, Yunes-Diaz E, Alonso P, Schiavon R, Hernandez-Avila M: Decreasing cervical cancer mortality in Mexico: effect of Papanicolaou coverage, birthrate, and the importance of diagnostic validity of cytology. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008, 17(10):2808-2817.