Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2018; 40(06): 347-353
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1660841
Original Article
Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Cervical Cancer Registered in Two Developed Regions from Brazil: Upper Limit of Reachable Results from Opportunistic Screening

Câncer de colo de útero registrado em duas regiões desenvolvidas do Brasil: limite superior de resultados alcançáveis a partir do rastreamento oportunístico
Julio Cesar Teixeira
1   Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Carlos Afonso Maestri
2   Service of Lower Genital Tract Pathology, Hospital Erasto Gaertner, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil
,
Helymar da Costa Machado
1   Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Luiz Carlos Zeferino
1   Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Newton Sérgio de Carvalho
3   Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

27 July 2017

16 April 2018

Publication Date:
20 June 2018 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study was to assess the time trends and pattern of cervical cancer diagnosed in the period from 2001 to 2012 by means of an opportunistic screening program from two developed regions in Brazil.

Methods An observational study analyzing 3,364 cancer records (n = 1,646 from Campinas and n = 1,718 from Curitiba region) available in hospital-based cancer registries was done. An additional 1,836 records of CIN3/AIS from the region of Campinas was analyzed. The statistical analysis assessed the pooled data and the data by region considering the year of diagnosis, age-group, cancer stage, and histologic type. The Cochran-Armitage trend test was applied and p-values < 0.05 were considered significant.

Results The total annual cervical cancer registered from 2001 to 2012 showed a slight drop (273–244), with an age average of 49.5 y, 13 years over the average for CIN3/AIS (36.8 y). A total of 20.6% of the diagnoses (1.6% under 25 y) were done out of the official screening age-range. The biennial rate of diagnoses by age group for the region of Campinas showed an increase trend for the age groups under 25 y (p = 0.007) and 25 to 44 y (p = 0.003). Stage III was the most recorded for both regions, with an annual average of 43%, without any trend modification. There was an increasing trend for stage I diagnoses in the region of Campinas (p = 0.033). The proportion of glandular histologic types registered had an increased trend over time (p = 0.002), higher for the region of Campinas (21.1% versus 12.5% for the region of Curitiba).

Conclusion The number, pattern and trends of cervical cancer cases registered had mild and slow modifications and reflect the limited effectivity of the opportunistic screening program, even in developed places.

Resumo

Objetivo Avaliar as tendências temporais e padrão de diagnóstico de câncer de colo de útero (CCU) através de programa de rastreamento oportunístico em duas regiões brasileiras desenvolvidas, no período de 2001 a 2012.

Métodos Estudo observacional com 3.364 registros de câncer (n = 1.646 da região de Campinas e n = 1.718 da região de Curitiba) obtidos de sistemas de registro hospitalar de câncer. Para a região de Campinas foram analisados 1.836 registros adicionais de CIN3/AIS. A análise estatística avaliou os dados agrupados e por região considerando o ano de diagnóstico, grupo etário, estágio de câncer e tipo histológico, e utilizou o teste de tendência Cochran-Armitage com valor p < 0,05.

Resultados O total anual de CCU registrado no período de 2001 a 2012 apresentou uma ligeira queda (273 para 244), com idade média de 49,5 anos, 13 a mais que a idade média (36,8 anos) para CIN3/AIS. O total de diagnósticos realizados fora da faixa etária oficial de rastreamento foi 20,6% (1,6% abaixo de 25 anos). Houve uma tendência de aumento de casos nas faixas etárias inferior a 25 anos (p = 0,007) e de 25 a 44 anos (p = 0,003) para a região de Campinas. Ambas as regiões apresentaram maior proporção diagnósticos de câncer em estágio III (43% em média), sem modificação de tendência. Houve tendência crescente para diagnóstico em estágio I na região de Campinas (p = 0,033) e da proporção de tipos histológicos glandulares em ambas regiões (p = 0,002), 21,1% para a região de Campinas e 12,5% para Curitiba.

Conclusão O número, o padrão e as tendências dos casos registrados de câncer de colo de útero apresentaram modificações pequenas e lentas ao longo do tempo, reflexo da efetividade limitada do programa de rastreio oportunista, mesmo em locais desenvolvidos.

Keywords

cervical cancer - cervical intraepithelial neoplasia - preventive medicine - public health - epidemiology

Palavras-chave

câncer de colo de útero - neoplasia intraepitelial cervical - medicina preventiva - saúde pública - epidemiologia

Contributions

Teixeira J. C., Maestri C. A., Machado HC, Zeferino L. C. and Carvalho N. S. contributed with the project and interpretation of data, writing of the article, critical review of the intellectual content and final approval of the version to be published.


 

  • References

  • 1 Zeferino LC, Derchain SF. Cervical cancer in the developing world. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2006; 20 (03) 339-354 . Doi: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2006.01.018
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Ministry of Health. Brazilian National Cancer José Alencar Gomes da Silva Institute. [Brazilian Guidelines for the Screening of Cervical Cancer]. 2nd ed. Rio de Janeiro, RJ: INCA; 2016
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Costa RF, Longatto-Filho A, Pinheiro C, Zeferino LC, Fregnani JH. Historical analysis of the Brazilian cervical cancer screening program from 2006 to 2013: a time for reflection. PLoS One 2015; 10 (09) e0138945 . Doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138945
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Ministry of Health. Brazilian National Cancer José Alencar Gomes da Silva Institute. [Estimate 2016: Incidence of Cancer in Brazil]. Rio de Janeiro, RJ: INCA; 2015. http://santacasadermatoazulay.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/estimativa-2016-v11.pdf . Accessed May 5, 2016
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Vale DB, Sauvaget C, Muwonge R. , et al. Disparities in time trends of cervical cancer mortality rates in Brazil. Cancer Causes Control 2016; 27 (07) 889-896 . Doi: 10.1007/s10552-016-0766-x
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Ministry of Health. Brazilian National Cancer Institute. [Hospital Registry of Cancer - Annual Report: 1994/1998]. http://www1.inca.gov.br/rhc/docs/apresentacao.pdf . Accessed May 5, 2016
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 United Nations Development Programme. Human Development Index (HDI). 2010. http://www.undp.org/content/brazil/pt/home/idh0.html . Accessed May 5, 2016
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 State Secretary of Health. [State of São Paulo According to Health Departments, 2012]. http://www.saude.sp.gov.br/ses/institucional/departamentos-regionais-de-saude/regionais-de-saude . Accessed May 5, 2016
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Secretary of Health. [State of Parana Regional Health]. http://www.saude.pr.gov.br/modules/conteudo/conteudo.php?conteudo=2752 . Accessed on May 5, 2016
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 World Health Organization. International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 10th Revision: ICD-10 version 2015 . http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd10/browse/2015/en#/ . Accessed May 5, 2016
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 World Health Organization. International Agency for Research on Cancer. International Classification of Diseases for Oncology (ICD-O). 3rd ed. Geneva: WHO; 2013. http://codes.iarc.fr/ . Accessed May 5, 2016
    Google Scholar
  • 12 FIGO Committee on Gynecologic Oncology. FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and corpus uteri. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2014; 125 (02) 97-98 . Doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2014.02.003
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Boyle P, Parkin DM. Cancer registration: principles and methods. Statistical methods for registries. IARC Sci Publ 1991; 95 (95) 126-158
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Miller AB, Nazeer S, Fonn S. , et al. Report on consensus conference on cervical cancer screening and management. Int J Cancer 2000; 86 (03) 440-447 . Doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0215(20000501)86:3<440:AID-IJC22>3.0.CO;2-A
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 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 . Doi: 10.1136/bmj.318.7188.904
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Gonzaga CM, Freitas-Junior R, Barbaresco AA, Martins E, Bernardes BT, Resende AP. Cervical cancer mortality trends in Brazil: 1980-2009. Cad Saude Publica 2013; 29 (03) 599-608 . Doi: 10.1590/S0102-311 × 2013000700017
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Roteli-Martins CM, de Carvalho NS, Naud P. , et al. Prevalence of human papillomavirus infection and associated risk factors in young women in Brazil, Canada, and the United States: a multicenter cross-sectional study. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2011; 30 (02) 173-184 . Doi: 10.1097/PGP.0b013e3181f38dfe
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Anttila A, Ronco G. ; Working Group on the Registration and Monitoring of Cervical Cancer Screening Programmes in the European Union; within the European Network for Information on Cancer (EUNICE). Description of the national situation of cervical cancer screening in the member states of the European Union. Eur J Cancer 2009; 45 (15) 2685-2708 . Doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2009.07.017
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Watson M, Saraiya M, Benard V. , et al. Burden of cervical cancer in the United States, 1998-2003. Cancer 2008; 113 (10, Suppl) 2855-2864 . Doi: 10.1002/cncr.23756
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 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 (10) 954-962
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Freitas RAP, Carvasan GAF, Morais SS, Zeferino LC. Excessive Pap smears due to opportunistic cervical cancer screening. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2008; 29 (05) 479-482
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Derchain S, Teixeira JC, Zeferino LC. Organized, population-based cervical cancer screening program: it would be a good time for Brazil now. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2016; 38 (04) 161-163 . Doi: 10.1055/s-0036-1582399
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar