National organization of uterine cervical cancer screening and social inequality in France.


Journal

European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP)
ISSN: 1473-5709
Titre abrégé: Eur J Cancer Prev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9300837

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
09 2020
Historique:
entrez: 3 8 2020
pubmed: 3 8 2020
medline: 31 8 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Some of the inequality in uterine cervical cancer (UCC) screening uptake are due to the socioeconomic deprivation of women. A national organized screening programme has proven to be effective in increasing the uptake, but may increase socioeconomic inequality. Therefore, we compared inequality in uptake of UCC screening between two French departments, one of which is experimenting an organized screening programme. We used reimbursement data from the main French health insurance scheme to compare screening rates in the municipalities of the two departments over a three-year period. The experimental department had higher screening rates, but the increase in deprivation in municipalities had a greater effect on the decrease in participation in this department. Moreover, while screening rates were higher in urban areas, the negative effect of deprivation on participation was greater in rural areas. Although these departments were compared at the same time under different conditions, socioeconomic inequality between them may have been greater before the experimentation started. However, screening may have led to an increase in socioeconomic inequality between women screened. Special attention must be paid to changes in socioeconomic and geographic inequality in the uptake of UCC screening when the programme is rolled out nationally.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32740172
doi: 10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000557
pii: 00008469-202009000-00011
doi:

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

458-465

Références

Anderson RA, Brewster DH, Wood R, Nowell S, Fischbacher C, Kelsey TW, Wallace WHB. The impact of cancer on subsequent chance of pregnancy: a population-based analysis. Hum Reprod. 2018; 33:1281–1290
Andrae B, Andersson TM, Lambert PC, Kemetli L, Silfverdal L, Strander B, et al. Screening and cervical cancer cure: population based cohort study. BMJ. 2012; 344:e900
Arbyn M, Castellsagué X, de Sanjosé S, Bruni L, Saraiya M, Bray F, Ferlay J. Worldwide burden of cervical cancer in 2008. Ann Oncol. 2011; 22:2675–2686
Arbyn M, Simoens C, Buntinx F, Martin-Hirsch PP, Paraskevaidis E, Prendiville WJ. Arbyn M. Triage with human papillomavirus (HPV) testing versus repeat cytology for underlying high-grade cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia in women with minor cytological lesions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, The Cochrane Collaboration. 2009, Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
Barré S, Massetti M, Leleu H, De Bels F. Organised screening for cervical cancer in France: a cost-effectiveness assessment. BMJ Open. 2017; 7:e014626
Beltzer N, Hamers FF, Duport N. Résultats finaux de l’évaluation du dépistage du cancer du col de l’utérus organisé dans 13 départements en France, 2010-2014. Bull Epidémiol Hebd. 201726–31
Bennett KJ, Probst JC, Bellinger JD. Receipt of cancer screening services: surprising results for some rural minorities. J Rural Health. 2012; 28:63–72
Bryere J, Dejardin O, Bouvier V, Colonna M, Guizard AV, Troussard X, et al. Socioeconomic environment and cancer incidence: a French population-based study in Normandy. BMC Cancer. 2014; 14:87
Chorley AJ, Marlow LA, Forster AS, Haddrell JB, Waller J. Experiences of cervical screening and barriers to participation in the context of an organised programme: a systematic review and thematic synthesis. Psychooncology. 2017; 26:161–172
Davies EA, Renshaw C, Dixon S, Møller H, Coupland VH. Socioeconomic and ethnic inequalities in screen-detected breast cancer in London. J Public Health (Oxf). 2013; 35:607–615
Deborde T, Chatignoux E, Quintin C, Beltzer N, Hamers FF, Rogel A. Breast cancer screening programme participation and socioeconomic deprivation in France. Prev Med. 2018; 115:53–60
DREES. Direction de la Recherche, des Etudes, de l’Evaluation et des Statistiques. L’état De Santé De La Population En France - Edition 2015. 2015, Santé Publique France: Saint-Maurice
Duport N. Données épidémiologiques sur le cancer du col de l’utérus. 2008, Saint-Maurice: Institut de veille sanitaire
Duport N, Haguenoer K, Ancelle-Park R, Bloch J. Dépistage organisé du cancer du col de l’utérus. Evaluation épidémiologique des quatre départements ‘pilotes’. 2007, Saint-Maurice: Institut de veille sanitaire
Duport N, Heard I, Barré S, Woronoff AS. Focus. Le cancer du col de l’utérus: état des connaissances en 2014. Bull Epidémiol Hebd. 2014220–221
Everett T, Bryant A, Griffin MF, Martin-Hirsch PP, Forbes CA, Jepson RG. Everett T. Interventions targeted at women to encourage the uptake of cervical screening. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, The Cochrane Collaboration. 2011, Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
Feller A, Schmidlin K, Bordoni A, Bouchardy C, Bulliard JL, Camey B, et al.; SNC and the NICER Working Group. Socioeconomic and demographic disparities in breast cancer stage at presentation and survival: a swiss population-based study. Int J Cancer. 2017; 141:1529–1539
Fokom Domgue J, Schmeler KM. Conservative management of cervical cancer: current status and obstetrical implications. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2019; 55:79–92
Gakidou E, Nordhagen S, Obermeyer Z. Coverage of cervical cancer screening in 57 countries: low average levels and large inequalities. Plos Med. 2008; 5:e132
Giorgi Rossi P, Baldacchini F, Ronco G. The possible effects on socio-economic inequalities of introducing HPV testing as primary test in cervical cancer screening programs. Front Oncol. 2014; 4:20
Guillaume E, Launay L, Dejardin O, Bouvier V, Guittet L, Déan P, et al. Could mobile mammography reduce social and geographic inequalities in breast cancer screening participation? Prev Med. 2017; 100:84–88
Haguenoer K, Sengchanh S, Gaudy-Graffin C, Boyard J, Fontenay R, Marret H, et al. Vaginal self-sampling is a cost-effective way to increase participation in a cervical cancer screening programme: a randomised trial. Br J Cancer. 2014; 111:2187–2196
Haute Autorité de Santé. État des lieux et recommandations pour le dépistage du cancer du col de l’utérus en France. 2010. Saint-Denis La Plaine
Haute Autorité de Santé. Dépistage et prévention du cancer du col de l’utérus - Actualisation du référentiel de pratiques de l’examen périodique de santé (EPS). 2013. Saint-Denis La Plaine
Institut National du Cancer. Taux de participation départemental au dépistage du cancer du sein en 2017. 2017. https://lesdonnees.e-cancer.fr/Themes/Depistage/Le-depistage-organise-du-cancer-du-sein/Participation-au-depistage-du-cancer-du-sein. [Accessed 10 July 2019]
Kristensson JH, Sander BB, von Euler-Chelpin M, Lynge E. Predictors of non-participation in cervical screening in Denmark. Cancer Epidemiol. 2014; 38:174–180
Linos A, Riza E. Comparisons of cervical cancer screening programmes in the European Union. Eur J Cancer. 2000; 36:2260–2265
Mackenbach JP, Roskam AJR, Schaap MM, Menvielle G. Socioeconomic inequalities in health in 22 European Countries. N Engl J Med. 2008; 358:2468–2481
Marmot M, Goldblatt P, Allen J. Fair Society Healthy Lives. (The Marmot Review). 2010, London: IHE (Institute of Health Equity)
Martikainen P, Valkonen T. Bias related to the exclusion of the economically inactive in studies on social class differences in mortality. Int J Epidemiol. 1999; 28:899–904
Moser K, Patnick J, Beral V. Inequalities in reported use of breast and cervical screening in Great Britain: analysis of cross sectional survey data. BMJ. 2009; 338:b2025
NHS. Cervical Screening Programme. 2015, England: National Health Service
Ouédraogo S, Dabakuyo-Yonli TS, Roussot A, Pornet C, Sarlin N, Lunaud P, et al. European transnational ecological deprivation index and participation in population-based breast cancer screening programmes in France. Prev Med. 2014; 63:103–108
Palència L, Espelt A, Rodríguez-Sanz M, Puigpinós R, Pons-Vigués M, Pasarín MI, et al. Socio-economic inequalities in breast and cervical cancer screening practices in Europe: influence of the type of screening program. Int J Epidemiol. 2010; 39:757–765
Peto J, Gilham C, Fletcher O, Matthews FE. The cervical cancer epidemic that screening has prevented in the UK. Lancet. 2004; 364:249–256
Pornet C, Dejardin O, Morlais F, Bouvier V, Launoy G. Socioeconomic and healthcare supply statistical determinants of compliance to mammography screening programs: a multilevel analysis in calvados, France. Cancer Epidemiol. 2010a; 34:309–315
Pornet C, Dejardin O, Morlais F, Bouvier V, Launoy G. Socioeconomic determinants for compliance to colorectal cancer screening. A multilevel analysis. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2010b; 64:318–324
Pornet C, Delpierre C, Dejardin O, Grosclaude P, Launay L, Guittet L, et al. Construction of an adaptable European transnational ecological deprivation index: the french version. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2012; 66:982–989
Racey CS, Withrow DR, Gesink D. Self-collected HPV testing improves participation in cervical cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Public Health. 2013; 104:e159–e166
Rees I, Jones D, Chen H, Macleod U. Interventions to improve the uptake of cervical cancer screening among lower socioeconomic groups: a systematic review. Prev Med. 2018; 111:323–335
Rigal L, Saurel-Cubizolles MJ, Falcoff H, Bouyer J, Ringa V. Do social inequalities in cervical cancer screening persist among patients who use primary care? The Paris prevention in general practice survey. Prev Med. 2011; 53:199–202
Rodvall Y, Kemetli L, Tishelman C, Törnberg S. Factors related to participation in a cervical cancer screening programme in urban Sweden. Eur J Cancer Prev. 2005; 14:459–466
Rondet C, Lapostolle A, Soler M, Grillo F, Parizot I, Chauvin P. Are immigrants and nationals born to immigrants at higher risk for delayed or no lifetime breast and cervical cancer screening? The results from a population-based survey in Paris metropolitan area in 2010. Plos One. 2014; 9:e87046
Sano H, Goto R, Hamashima C. Does lack of resources impair access to breast and cervical cancer screening in Japan? Plos One. 2017; 12:e0180819
Spadea T, Bellini S, Kunst A, Stirbu I, Costa G. The impact of interventions to improve attendance in female cancer screening among lower socioeconomic groups: a review. Prev Med. 2010; 50:159–164
Tabuchi T, Hoshino T, Nakayama T, Ito Y, Ioka A, Miyashiro I, Tsukuma H. Does removal of out-of-pocket costs for cervical and breast cancer screening work? A quasi-experimental study to evaluate the impact on attendance, attendance inequality and average cost per uptake of a Japanese government intervention. Int J Cancer. 2013; 133:972–983
Visanuyothin S, Chompikul J, Mongkolchati A. Determinants of cervical cancer screening adherence in urban areas of nakhon ratchasima province, thailand. J Infect Public Health. 2015; 8:543–552
von Wagner C, Baio G, Raine R, Snowball J, Morris S, Atkin W, et al. Inequalities in participation in an organized national colorectal cancer screening programme: results from the first 2.6 million invitations in England. Int J Epidemiol. 2011; 40:712–718
Walboomers JM, Jacobs MV, Manos MM, Bosch FX, Kummer JA, Shah KV, et al. Human papillomavirus is a necessary cause of invasive cervical cancer worldwide. J Pathol. 1999; 189:12–19
Wood B, Russell VL, El-Khatib Z, McFaul S, Taljaard M, Little J, Graham I D. ‘They should be asking us’: a qualitative decisional needs assessment for women considering cervical cancer screening. Glob Qual Nurs Res. 2018; 5:2333393618783632
Zahnd WE, James AS, Jenkins WD, Izadi SR, Fogleman AJ, Steward DE, et al. Rural-urban differences in cancer incidence and trends in the united states. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2018; 27:1265–1274

Auteurs

Thibaut Raginel (T)

Department of General Practice.
Normandie University, Unicaen, Inserm, Anticipe, Caen.

Rémy de Mil (R)

Normandie University, Unicaen, Inserm, Anticipe, Caen.

Anne Garnier (A)

Regional Coordination Center for Cancer Screening, Auvergne Rhone Alpes - Isere, Meylan, France.

Guy Launoy (G)

Normandie University, Unicaen, Inserm, Anticipe, Caen.

Lydia Guittet (L)

Normandie University, Unicaen, Inserm, Anticipe, Caen.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH