Provider preferences for anal cancer prevention screening: Results of the International Anal Neoplasia Society survey

被引:10
|
作者
Plotzker, Rosalyn E. [1 ]
Barnell, Gregory M. [2 ]
Wiley, Dorothy J. [3 ]
Stier, Elizabeth A. [4 ]
Jay, Naomi [1 ]
机构
[1] Mt Zion Hosp & Med Ctr, UCSF ANCRE Ctr, 1600 Divisadero St,3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA 94115 USA
[2] Kaiser Permanente, Dept Surg, Oakland Med Ctr, 3600 Broadway,Suite 38, Oakland, CA 94611 USA
[3] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Sch Nursing, 700 Tiverton Ave,Factor Bldg Room 4242, Los Angeles, CA 90095 USA
[4] Boston Univ, Boston Med Ctr, Sch Med, 771 Albany St,Dowling 4, Boston, MA 02118 USA
来源
TUMOUR VIRUS RESEARCH | 2022年 / 13卷
关键词
Anal cancer; Anal neoplasm; Cancer screening; Healthcare survey; Preventive medicine; SQUAMOUS INTRAEPITHELIAL LESIONS; HIGH-RESOLUTION ANOSCOPY; PERFORMANCE; INFECTION; CYTOLOGY; MEN; SEX; PROGRESSION; WOMEN; RISK;
D O I
10.1016/j.tvr.2022.200235
中图分类号
Q93 [微生物学];
学科分类号
071005 ; 100705 ;
摘要
Objective: This study explores provider preferences regarding anal cancer screening indications, initiation age, tools, and referral threshold to high resolution anoscopy (HRA). Methods: International Anal Neoplasia Society affiliates were invited to complete an online survey. Options for initiation age and tools were delineated by sub-groups. HRA referral thresholds separately queried recommen-dations by patient immune status. Results: One hundred forty respondents participated. Although consensus was lacking with regard to specific screening initiation age, more respondents recommended younger initiation ages for men who have sex with men (MSM) living with HIV (LWH) compared with MSM not LWH (p < 0.01). "No age threshold" ranged 44-55% among sub-groups with lower genital tract disease. Cytology and digital anorectal exam (DARE) were the most frequently selected tools for all sub-groups (ranges 77-90% and 74-86%, respectively). HRA was recommended significantly more frequently for MSM LWH (58%) and patients with vulvar cancer (52%) compared to others (p < 0.01). "Any [test] abnormality" was more often selected as indication for HRA for immunocompromised (56%) and immunocompetent (46%) patients than a specific cytology test result (29%, 36% respectively). Conclusion: Cytology and DARE were preferred screening tools; screening initiation age and HRA referral threshold showed less consensus. Evidence-based guidelines are needed and may lead to more consistent screening practices.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] International Anal Neoplasia Society's consensus guidelines for anal cancer screening
    Stier, Elizabeth A.
    Clarke, Megan A.
    Deshmukh, Ashish A.
    Wentzensen, Nicolas
    Liu, Yuxin
    Poynten, I. Mary
    Cavallari, Eugenio Nelson
    Fink, Valeria
    Barroso, Luis F.
    Clifford, Gary M.
    Cuming, Tamzin
    Goldstone, Stephen E.
    Hillman, Richard J.
    Rosa-Cunha, Isabela
    La Rosa, Luciana
    Palefsky, Joel M.
    Plotzker, Rosalyn
    Roberts, Jennifer M.
    Jay, Naomi
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2024, 154 (10) : 1694 - 1702
  • [2] Comments on "International anal neoplasia society's consensus guidelines for anal cancer screening"
    Mistrangelo, Massimiliano
    Farnesi, Francesca
    Cavazzoni, Emanuel
    Morino, Mario
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2025,
  • [3] Reply to comments on: "International Anal Neoplasia Society's consensus guidelines for anal cancer screening"
    Stier, Elizabeth A.
    Clarke, Megan A.
    Deshmukh, Ashish A.
    Wentzensen, Nicolas
    Liu, Yuxin
    Poynten, I. Mary
    Cavallari, Eugenio Nelson
    Fink, Valeria
    Barroso, Luis F.
    Cuming, Tamzin
    Goldstone, Stephen E.
    Hillman, Richard J.
    Rosa-Cunha, Isabela
    Rosa, Luciana L. A.
    Palefsky, Joel M.
    Plotzker, Rosalyn
    Roberts, Jennifer M.
    Jay, Naomi
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2025,
  • [4] International Anal Neoplasia Society Guidelines for the Practice of Digital Anal Rectal Examination
    Hillman, Richard John
    Berry-Lawhorn, J. Michael
    Ong, Jason J.
    Cuming, Tamzin
    Nathan, Mayura
    Goldstone, Stephen
    Richel, Olivier
    Barrosso, Luis F.
    Darragh, Teresa M.
    Law, Carmella
    Bouchard, Celine
    Stier, Elizabeth A.
    Palefsky, Joel M.
    Jay, Naomi
    JOURNAL OF LOWER GENITAL TRACT DISEASE, 2019, 23 (02) : 138 - 146
  • [5] Anal cancer and intraepithelial neoplasia screening: A review
    Leeds, Ira L.
    Fang, Sandy H.
    WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY, 2016, 8 (01): : 41 - 51
  • [6] Anal cancer and intraepithelial neoplasia: epidemiology, screening and prevention of a sexually transmitted disease
    Medford, Richard J.
    Salit, Irving E.
    CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 2015, 187 (02) : 111 - 115
  • [7] Treatment of anal intraepithelial neoplasia and prevention of anal carcinoma
    Thornhill, J.
    Jit, M.
    Klein, K.
    Hickey, N.
    Awosika, D.
    Singh, N.
    Sheaff, M.
    Nathan, M.
    HIV MEDICINE, 2012, 13 : 32 - 32
  • [8] Surgeons’ practice and preferences for the anal fissure treatment: results from an international survey
    Andrea Balla
    Federica Saraceno
    Mostafa Shalaby
    Gaetano Gallo
    Salomone Di Saverio
    Paola De Nardi
    Roberto Perinotti
    Pierpaolo Sileri
    Updates in Surgery, 2023, 75 (8) : 2279 - 2290
  • [9] Surgeons' practice and preferences for the anal fissure treatment: results from an international survey
    Balla, Andrea
    Saraceno, Federica
    Shalaby, Mostafa
    Gallo, Gaetano
    Di Saverio, Salomone
    De Nardi, Paola
    Perinotti, Roberto
    Sileri, Pierpaolo
    UPDATES IN SURGERY, 2023, 75 (08) : 2279 - 2290
  • [10] Anal neoplasia: prevention or treatment?
    Crawford, Keith W.
    Nathan, Mayura
    AIDS, 2021, 35 (11) : 1863 - 1865