Modelling risk assessment for cervical cancer in symptomatic Saudi women

Abstract

Objectives: To assess whether the utility of cervical cancer screening could be improved by combining multiple factors in addition to the pap test. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of 300 symptomatic women who were suspected to have cervical cancer and referred for biopsy examination at King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia between February 2017 and December 2017. Results: A high risk of cervical cancer in Saudi women was associated with 4 risk factors: family history (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 4.216; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 1.433–12.400), vaginal bleeding (aOR, 3.959; 95% CI, 1.272–12.318), hypertension (aOR, 4.554; 95% CI, 1.606–12.912), and an abnormal pap smear test (aOR, 13.985; 95% CI, 5.108–38.284). The model yields an adequate utility (area under the curve, 87.5%, 95% CI, 80.9-94.0%) with acceptable goodness-of-fit ( p =0.6915). Conclusion: The pap smear test alone is inadequate to assess high risk for cervical cancer in our center. Early detection of cervical cancer may require consideration of a combination of factors including the pap test. This study has shown that using a combination of abnormal family history, vaginal bleeding, hypertension, and the pap smear test improved the effectiveness of cervical cancer screening.

Comprehensive Identification of the Human Secretome as Potential Indicators in Treatment Outcome of HPV-Positive and -Negative Cervical Cancer Patients

“…Cervical cancer is one of the most common malignancies in women worldwide [1, 2]. Because of its large population with geographical and socioeconomic inequities, China has a high burden of cervical cancer and important disparities among different regions [2, 3].…”

Association of Hypertension and Organ-Specific Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

“…After conducting a hand search specifically for studies from 2017 to 2021, 22 studies were identified. In total 47 studies were identified without the use of machine learning [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 ]. Of these 47 studies, 22 were published after 2017, as one of our focuses was to obtain more recent publications as new data have been introduced over the past 5 years since the previous meta-analysis was conducted [ 5 ].…”

A Clinical Decision Support System for Assessing the Risk of Cervical Cancer: Development and Evaluation Study

“…Therefore, the risk assessment of diseases has been the focus of many research studies in recent years [ 10 ]. As there are different risk factors for a disease, information technology and risk assessment models are used to quantify the risk level [ 21 , 25 ]. Regarding cervical cancer, it is possible to identify at-risk women by determining the risk factors and measuring the effect of these factors on the risk of cancer.…”

“…The first phase of the study included determining the essential parameters for assessing the risk of cervical cancer. Initially, a list of these parameters was provided based on literature reviews [4,15,[20][21][22][23][24]. Subsequently, 20 gynecologists completed a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire (very important=5, important=4, moderately important=3, slightly important=2, and unimportant=1) to determine the most important parameters included on the list.…”