Table 3 –
Setting | Disruptions include | Women predicted to miss screening visits1 | Cervical cancer cases (2020–2030)1 | Predicted additional deaths due to additional/upstaged cancers in 2020–20301 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Expected (no disruptions) | Additional due to disruptions | % increase | Detected at higher stage | ||||
Australia | Primary Scr (S5): | 107,130.0 | 791.5 | 8.7 | 1.1 | 3.1 | 1.8 – 2.7 |
Surveillance (S6): | 116,019.2 | 14.4 | 1.8 | 6.8 | 3.4 – 4.9 | ||
Colp/Tx (S7): | 116,019.8 | 20.6 | 2.6 | 10.2 | 5.1 – 7.2 | ||
Netherlands | Primary Scr (S5): | 67,340.3 | 1,144.1 | 4.0 | 0.4 | 1.4 | |
Norway (cytology)* | Primary Scr (S5): | 178,046.6 | 1,510.1 | 6.1 | 0.4 | 3.7 | 5.2 |
Surveillance (S6): | 178,046.6 | 19.6 | 1.3 | 8.8 | 13.3 | ||
Colp/Tx (S7): | 178,046.6 | 23.1 | 1.5 | 9.2 | 14.6 | ||
Norway (primary HPV)* | Primary Scr (S5): | 130,191.9 | 1,321.6 | 5.3 | 0.4 | 2.8 | 3.6 |
Surveillance (S6): | 130,191.9 | 22.9 | 1.7 | 9.6 | 14.9 | ||
Colp/Tx (S7): | 130,191.9 | 27.0 | 2.0 | 10.2 | 16.6 | ||
USA (cytology) Harvard* | Primary Scr (S5): | 215,086.1 | 788.7 | 5.3 | 0.7 | 1.7 | 0.1 |
Surveillance (S6): | 215,086.1 | 9.3 | 1.2 | 2.6 | 0.1 | ||
Colp/Tx (S7): | 215,086.1 | 14.1 | 1.8 | 3.7 | 0.1 | ||
USA (co-testing) Harvard* | Primary Scr (S5): | 214,200.7 | 236.3 | 1.3 | 0.6 | 0.0 | - |
Surveillance (S6): | 214,200.7 | 7.5 | 3.2 | 1.1 | - | ||
Colp/Tx (S7): | 214,200.7 | 11.3 | 4.8 | 1.8 | 0.1 | ||
USA (cytology) Policy1* | Primary Scr (S5): | 198,171.6 | 606.8 | 7.3 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 1.1 – 1.8 |
Surveillance (S6): | 214,630.0 | 14.8 | 2.4 | 3.8 | 2.4 – 4.2 | ||
Colp/Tx (S7): | 214,630.0 | 19.2 | 3.2 | 5.2 | 3.1 – 5.5 | ||
USA (co-testing) Policy1* | Primary Scr (S5): | 184,924.3 | 384.9 | 4.8 | 1.2 | 1.0 | 0.8 – 1.3 |
Surveillance (S6): | 227,511.4 | 14.7 | 3.8 | 3.8 | 2.3 – 4.1 | ||
Colp/Tx (S7): | 227,511.4 | 20.4 | 5.3 | 4.7 | 3.1 – 5.5 |
na = not available
Values are per million women aged 20+ in 2020. Lower disease level in Harvard US model in the no disruption scenario is partially due to the model reflecting squamous cell carcinoma only. Results for 6-month disruption scenarios are presented in Table A5.