Regional and country-level trends in cervical cancer screening coverage in sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic analysis of population-based surveys (2000-2020).
Journal
PLoS medicine
ISSN: 1549-1676
Titre abrégé: PLoS Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101231360
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2023
01 2023
Historique:
received:
31
07
2022
accepted:
18
11
2022
revised:
27
01
2023
pubmed:
13
1
2023
medline:
1
2
2023
entrez:
12
1
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has the highest cervical cancer (CC) burden globally-worsened by its HIV epidemics. In 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) introduced a CC elimination strategy with goals for vaccination, screening, and treatment. To benchmark progress, we examined temporal trends in screening coverage, percent screened at least twice by the age of 45, screening coverage among women living with HIV (WLHIV), and pre-cancer treatment coverage in SSA. We conducted a systematic analysis of cross-sectional population-based surveys. It included 52 surveys from 28 countries (2000 to 2020) with information on CC screening among women aged 25 to 49 years (N = 151,338 women). We estimated lifetime and past 3-year screening coverage by age, year, country, and HIV serostatus using a Bayesian multilevel model. Post-stratification and imputations were done to obtain aggregate national, regional, and SSA-level estimates. To measure re-screening by age 45, a life table model was developed. Finally, self-reported pre-cancer treatment coverage was pooled across surveys using a Bayesian meta-analysis. Overall, an estimated 14% (95% credible intervals [95% CrI]: 11% to 21%) of women aged 30 to 49 years had ever been screened for CC in 2020, with important regional and country-level differences. In Eastern and Western/Central Africa, regional screening coverages remained constant from 2000 to 2020 and WLHIV had greater odds of being screened compared to women without HIV. In Southern Africa, however, screening coverages increased and WLHIV had equal odds of screening. Notably this region was found to have higher screening coverage in comparison to other African regions. Rescreening rates were high among women who have already been screened; however, it was estimated that only 12% (95% CrI: 10% to 18%) of women had been screened twice or more by age 45 in 2020. Finally, treatment coverage among 4 countries with data was 84% (95% CrI: 70% to 95%). Limitations of our analyses include the paucity of data on screening modality and the few countries that had multiple surveys. Overall, CC screening coverage remains sub-optimal and did not improve much over the last 2 decades, outside of Southern Africa. Action is needed to increase screening coverage if CC elimination is to be achieved.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has the highest cervical cancer (CC) burden globally-worsened by its HIV epidemics. In 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) introduced a CC elimination strategy with goals for vaccination, screening, and treatment. To benchmark progress, we examined temporal trends in screening coverage, percent screened at least twice by the age of 45, screening coverage among women living with HIV (WLHIV), and pre-cancer treatment coverage in SSA.
METHODS AND FINDINGS
We conducted a systematic analysis of cross-sectional population-based surveys. It included 52 surveys from 28 countries (2000 to 2020) with information on CC screening among women aged 25 to 49 years (N = 151,338 women). We estimated lifetime and past 3-year screening coverage by age, year, country, and HIV serostatus using a Bayesian multilevel model. Post-stratification and imputations were done to obtain aggregate national, regional, and SSA-level estimates. To measure re-screening by age 45, a life table model was developed. Finally, self-reported pre-cancer treatment coverage was pooled across surveys using a Bayesian meta-analysis. Overall, an estimated 14% (95% credible intervals [95% CrI]: 11% to 21%) of women aged 30 to 49 years had ever been screened for CC in 2020, with important regional and country-level differences. In Eastern and Western/Central Africa, regional screening coverages remained constant from 2000 to 2020 and WLHIV had greater odds of being screened compared to women without HIV. In Southern Africa, however, screening coverages increased and WLHIV had equal odds of screening. Notably this region was found to have higher screening coverage in comparison to other African regions. Rescreening rates were high among women who have already been screened; however, it was estimated that only 12% (95% CrI: 10% to 18%) of women had been screened twice or more by age 45 in 2020. Finally, treatment coverage among 4 countries with data was 84% (95% CrI: 70% to 95%). Limitations of our analyses include the paucity of data on screening modality and the few countries that had multiple surveys.
CONCLUSION
Overall, CC screening coverage remains sub-optimal and did not improve much over the last 2 decades, outside of Southern Africa. Action is needed to increase screening coverage if CC elimination is to be achieved.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36634119
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004143
pii: PMEDICINE-D-22-02613
pmc: PMC9882915
doi:
Types de publication
Meta-Analysis
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e1004143Subventions
Organisme : CIHR
Pays : Canada
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/R015600/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2023 Yang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Pan Afr Med J. 2021 Jun 25;39:149
pubmed: 34527165
CA Cancer J Clin. 2021 May;71(3):209-249
pubmed: 33538338
Nat Cancer. 2021 Feb;2(2):133-134
pubmed: 35122078
Lancet. 2020 Feb 22;395(10224):591-603
pubmed: 32007142
Gynecol Oncol. 2020 Feb;156(2):498-502
pubmed: 31848025
Lancet Glob Health. 2020 Feb;8(2):e191-e203
pubmed: 31812369
BMC Public Health. 2015 Jan 29;15:28
pubmed: 25630218
Prev Med. 2021 Mar;144:106399
pubmed: 33388322
BMJ. 2018 Dec 5;363:k4823
pubmed: 30518635
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022 Jun 1;22(1):159
pubmed: 35650530
Eur J Cancer. 2009 Oct;45(15):2640-8
pubmed: 19695864
Lancet Glob Health. 2021 Feb;9(2):e161-e169
pubmed: 33212031
Lancet HIV. 2021 May;8(5):e284-e293
pubmed: 33667411
Int J Cancer. 2015 Mar 1;136(5):E359-86
pubmed: 25220842
PLoS One. 2017 Jul 21;12(7):e0181156
pubmed: 28732037
Curr Opin Immunol. 2021 Aug;71:21-26
pubmed: 33857884
Eur J Cancer Prev. 2019 Jul;28(4):338-343
pubmed: 30020115
Int J Cancer. 2017 Aug 15;141(4):664-670
pubmed: 28369882
JAMA. 2020 Oct 20;324(15):1532-1542
pubmed: 33079153
S Afr Med J. 1993 Mar;83(3):172-6
pubmed: 8511683
Lancet. 2021 Dec 4;398(10316):2084-2092
pubmed: 34741816
Lancet. 2016 Dec 10;388(10062):e19-e23
pubmed: 27371184
BMC Public Health. 2012 Nov 16;12:992
pubmed: 23158654
Gynecol Oncol Rep. 2020 Jun 22;33:100605
pubmed: 32637528