Major changes to the screening environment dictate a review of this successful program
Internationally, cervical cancer prevention programs based on cytological surveillance have been among the most successful public health achievements in modern history. Almost all developed health jurisdictions have tackled the world’s second commonest cancer among women, and implemented successful screening programs. The achievements within each country have been variable, and Australia now has the lowest mortality and second lowest incidence in the developed world1,2 (see Box).
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1. Australian Health Ministers’ Advisory Council Cervical Screening Evaluation Committee. Cervical cancer screening in Australia: options for change. Canberra: AGPS, 1991. (Australian Institute of Health Prevention Program Evaluation Series No. 2.)
- 2. Ferley J, Bray F, Pisani P, Parkin DM. GLOBOCAN 2002: cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide. International Agency for Research on Cancer. CancerBase No. 5, version 2.0. Lyon: IARCPress, 2004. http://www-dep.iarc.fr/ (accessed Sep 2006).
- 3. Canfell K, Sitas F, Beral V. Cervical cancer in Australia and the United Kingdom: comparison of screening policy, uptake, cancer incidence and mortality. Med J Aust 2006; 185: 482-486. <eMJA full text>
- 4. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Cervical screening in Australia 2002-2003. Canberra: AIHW, 2005. (AIHW Cat. No. 26; Cancer Series No. 31.)
- 5. Mitchell HS. How much cervical cancer is being prevented [letter]? Med J Aust 2003; 178: 298. <MJA full text>
- 6. National Cervical Screening Program. Screening to prevent cervical cancer: guidelines for the management of asymptomatic women with screen detected abnormalities. Canberra: National Health and Medical Research Council, 2005.
- 7. Nogrady B, McLean B. Pap guidelines are dangerous. Aust Doctor 2004; 6 Aug: 1.
- 8. Wain GV, Kulasingam S, Connelly L, et al. Potential health and economic impact of an HPV in Australia. Program and abstracts of the Public Health Association of Australia 10th National Immunisation Conference. Sydney; 31 Jul 2006. Canberra: PHAA, 2006.
- 9. Binns PL, Condon JR. Participation in cervical screening by Indigenous women in the Northern Territory: a longitudinal study. Med J Aust 2006; 185: 490-494. <eMJA full text>
- 10. Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia. Submission to Australian Senate Inquiry on Gynaecological Cancer in Australia. August 2006. http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/clac_ctte/gynaecological_cancer/submissions/sub57.pdf (accessed Sep 2006).
In my capacity as member of the National Cervical Screening Program Guideline Review Committee and the CSL Limited Gardasil Advisory Board, I have received travel assistance to attend meetings.
My clinical department received research funding from Merck for participating in the initial clinical trials investigating the human papillomavirus vaccine.