BACKGROUND: This report represents a collaborative effort by the major cancer surveillance organizations to present the definitive US statistics for cancer incidence and mortality. METHODS: Cancer incidence data were obtained from population-based cancer registries funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Cancer Institute and compiled by the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Cancer death data were obtained from the National Center for Health Statistics' National Vital Statistics System. Statistics are reported by cancer type, sex, race and ethnicity, and age. The potential impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on incidence was assessed by using state-level changes compared with previous years, the stringency of COVID-19 policy restrictions, the magnitude of COVID-19 death rates, and changes in the use of mammography. RESULTS: Overall cancer incidence rates per 100,000 were 500 among males and 437 among females. Excluding 2020, cancer incidence rates remained stable (2013-2021) among males and increased 0.3% per year on average (2003-2021) among females. The overall cancer death rate per 100,000 was 173 among males and 126 among females. Cancer death rates decreased by 1.5% per year (2018-2022), slowing from a previous 2.1% decline. Cancer incidence in 2020 declined from prepandemic levels for all demographic groups examined. However, the magnitude of decline was not strongly associated with the study's proxies for health care capacity, health care access, or COVID-19 policies. CONCLUSIONS: Overall cancer mortality declined over 20 years, even during the COVID-19 pandemic. Disruptions in health care use early in the pandemic resulted in incidence declines in 2020, but 2021 incidence returned to prepandemic levels.

BACKGROUND: With access to cancer care services limited because of coronavirus disease 2019 control measures, cancer diagnosis and treatment have been delayed. The authors explored changes in the counts of US incident cases by cancer type, age, sex, race, and disease stage in 2020. METHODS: Data were extracted from selected US population-based cancer registries for diagnosis years 2015-2020 using first-submission data from the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. After a quality assessment, the monthly numbers of newly diagnosed cancer cases were extracted for six cancer types: colorectal, female breast, lung, pancreas, prostate, and thyroid. The observed numbers of incident cancer cases in 2020 were compared with the estimated numbers by calculating observed-to-expected (O/E) ratios. The expected numbers of incident cases were extrapolated using Joinpoint trend models. RESULTS: The authors report an O/E ratio <1.0 for major screening-eligible cancer sites, indicating fewer newly diagnosed cases than expected in 2020. The O/E ratios were lowest in April 2020. For every cancer site except pancreas, Asians/Pacific Islanders had the lowest O/E ratio of any race group. O/E ratios were lower for cases diagnosed at localized stages than for cases diagnosed at advanced stages. CONCLUSIONS: The current analysis provides strong evidence for declines in cancer diagnoses, relative to the expected numbers, between March and May of 2020. The declines correlate with reductions in pathology reports and are greater for cases diagnosed at in situ and localized stage, triggering concerns about potential poor cancer outcomes in the coming years, especially in Asians/Pacific Islanders. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: To help control the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), health care organizations suspended nonessential medical procedures, including preventive cancer screening, during early 2020. Many individuals canceled or postponed cancer screening, potentially delaying cancer diagnosis. This study examines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number of newly diagnosed cancer cases in 2020 using first-submission, population-based cancer registry database. The monthly numbers of newly diagnosed cancer cases in 2020 were compared with the expected numbers based on past trends for six cancer sites. April 2020 had the sharpest decrease in cases compared with previous years, most likely because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

As part of its data modernization initiative (DMI), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Cancer Prevention and Control is testing and implementing innovative solutions to improve cancer surveillance data quality and timeliness. We describe a consensus-based effort to create a framework to guide the evaluation of cancer surveillance modernization efforts by addressing specific context, processes, and costs related to cancer registration. We drew on prior theories, consulted with experts, and sought feedback from cancer registry staff. We developed the cancer surveillance systems, context, outcomes, and process evaluation (CS-SCOPE) framework to explain the ways in which cancer registry data quality, timeliness, and efficiency are impacted by external and internal contextual factors and interrelated process and content factors. The framework includes implementation measures to understand acceptability of process changes along with outcome measures to assess DMI initiation and ongoing sustainability. The framework's components and structures can be tailored for use in other DMI evaluations.

BACKGROUND: Cancer incidence and death rates in the United States are often published at the county or statelevels; examining cancer statistics at the congressional district (CD) level allows decision makers to better understand how cancer is impacting the specific populations they represent. METHODS: Cancer incidence data were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Program of Cancer Registries and the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. Mortality data were obtained from the National Center for Health Statistics. CD rates were estimated by assigning the county-level age-adjusted rates to the census block and weighting those by the block population proportion of the CD. Those weighted rates were then aggregated over the blocks within the CD to estimate the district rate. Incidence rate estimates for 406 CDs and death rate estimates for 436 CDs were reported according to the boundaries for the 115th Congress of the United States. Maps showing rate estimates for all cancers combined, lung/bronchus, colorectal, female breast, cervical, and prostate cancer are presented by sex and race/ethnicity. RESULTS: The distribution of cancer incidence and death rates by CDs show similar patterns to those that have been observed at the county and state levels, with the highest cancer incidence and death rates observed in CDs in the South and Eastern regions. CONCLUSION: This examination of cancer rates at the CD-level provides data that can be used to inform cancer control strategies at the local and national levels. Displaying the data with the Data Visualizations tool makes it easily accessible to the public and decision makers.

BACKGROUND: The American Cancer Society, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Cancer Institute, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries collaborate to provide annual updates on cancer occurrence and trends in the United States. METHODS: Data on new cancer diagnoses during 2001-2018 were obtained from the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries' Cancer in North America Incidence file, which is comprised of data from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-funded and National Cancer Institute-funded, population-based cancer registry programs. Data on cancer deaths during 2001-2019 were obtained from the National Center for Health Statistics' National Vital Statistics System. Five-year average incidence and death rates along with trends for all cancers combined and for the leading cancer types are reported by sex, racial/ethnic group, and age. RESULTS: Overall cancer incidence rates were 497 per 100,000 among males (ranging from 306 among Asian/Pacific Islander males to 544 among Black males) and 431 per 100,000 among females (ranging from 309 among Asian/Pacific Islander females to 473 among American Indian/Alaska Native females) during 2014-2018. The trend during the corresponding period was stable among males and increased 0.2% on average per year among females, with differing trends by sex, racial/ethnic group, and cancer type. Among males, incidence rates increased for three cancers (including pancreas and kidney), were stable for seven cancers (including prostate), and decreased for eight (including lung and larynx) of the 18 most common cancers considered in this analysis. Among females, incidence rates increased for seven cancers (including melanoma, liver, and breast), were stable for four cancers (including uterus), and decreased for seven (including thyroid and ovary) of the 18 most common cancers. Overall cancer death rates decreased by 2.3% per year among males and by 1.9% per year among females during 2015-2019, with the sex-specific declining trend reflected in every major racial/ethnic group. During 2015-2019, death rates decreased for 11 of the 19 most common cancers among males and for 14 of the 20 most common cancers among females, with the steepest declines (>4% per year) reported for lung cancer and melanoma. Five-year survival for adenocarcinoma and neuroendocrine pancreatic cancer improved between 2001 and 2018; however, overall incidence (2001-2018) and mortality (2001-2019) continued to increase for this site. Among children (younger than 15 years), recent trends were stable for incidence and decreased for mortality; and among, adolescents and young adults (aged 15-39 years), recent trends increased for incidence and declined for mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer death rates continued to decline overall, for children, and for adolescents and young adults, and treatment advances have led to accelerated declines in death rates for several sites, such as lung and melanoma. The increases in incidence rates for several common cancers in part reflect changes in risk factors, screening test use, and diagnostic practice. Racial/ethnic differences exist in cancer incidence and mortality, highlighting the need to understand and address inequities. Population-based incidence and mortality data inform prevention, early detection, and treatment efforts to help reduce the cancer burden in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Screening and timely follow-up have lowered cervical cancer incidence in the US; however, screening coverage, incidence, and death rates have remained fairly stable in recent years. Studies suggest that half of women diagnosed with cervical cancer don't receive appropriate screening prior to diagnosis; cervical cancer survivors can provide crucial insight into barriers and facilitators to screening. METHODS: Participants were cervical cancer survivors ≥21 years, identified through population-based central cancer registries (CR) in 3 US states or a social network (SN), Cervivor. CR participants completed a mailed survey on screening history, barriers, and facilitators to screening and sociodemographic data. SN participants completed the same survey online. RESULTS: CR participants (N = 480) were older, with a lower proportion of non-Hispanic white, married, and insured women compared to SN participants (N = 148). Fifty percent of CR and 79% of SN participants were screened 5 years prior to their diagnoses. Of those screened, 28% in both groups reported not following-up on abnormal results. For both groups, the most frequently identified screening barrier was that participants never imagined they would develop cervical cancer (percent agree CR = 76%; SN = 86%), and the facilitator was wanting to take care of their bodies (CR = 95%; SN = 94%). CONCLUSION: Addressing key barriers to obtaining screening and timely follow-up related to lack of knowledge of cervical cancer risk and screening tests and addressing insurance coverage in the design or modification of interventions may increase cervical cancer screening and lower cervical cancer incidence in the US.

BACKGROUND: The American Cancer Society, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Cancer Institute, and North American Association of Central Cancer Registries collaborate to provide annual updates on cancer incidence and mortality and trends by cancer type, sex, age group, and racial/ethnic group in the United States. In this report, we also examine trends in stage-specific survival for melanoma of the skin (melanoma). METHODS: Incidence data for all cancers from 2001 through 2017 and survival data for melanoma cases diagnosed during 2001-2014 and followed up through 2016 were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention- and National Cancer Institute-funded population-based cancer registry programs compiled by the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Data on cancer deaths from 2001 through 2018 were obtained from the National Center for Health Statistics' National Vital Statistics System. Trends in age-standardized incidence and death rates and 2-year relative survival were estimated by joinpoint analysis, and trends in incidence and mortality were expressed as average annual percent change (AAPC) during the most recent 5 years (2013-2017 for incidence and 2014-2018 for mortality). RESULTS: Overall cancer incidence rates (per 100,000 population) for all ages during 2013-2017 were 487.4 among males and 422.4 among females. During this period, incidence rates remained stable among males but slightly increased in females (AAPC = 0.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.1% to 0.2%). Overall cancer death rates (per 100,000 population) during 2014-2018 were 185.5 among males and 133.5 among females. During this period, overall death rates decreased in both males (AAPC = -2.2%; 95% CI = -2.5% to - 1.9%) and females (AAPC = -1.7%; 95% CI = -2.1% to - 1.4%); death rates decreased for 11 of the 19 most common cancers among males and for 14 of the 20 most common cancers among females, but increased for 5 cancers in each sex. During 2014-2018, the declines in death rates accelerated for lung cancer and melanoma, slowed down for colorectal and female breast cancers, and leveled off for prostate cancer. Among children younger than age 15 years and adolescents and young adults aged 15-39 years, cancer death rates continued to decrease in contrast to the increasing incidence rates. Two-year relative survival for distant-stage skin melanoma was stable for those diagnosed during 2001-2009 but increased by 3.1% (95% CI = 2.8% to 3.5%) per year for those diagnosed during 2009-2014, with comparable trends among males and females. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer death rates in the United States continue to decline overall and for many cancer types, with the decline accelerated for lung cancer and melanoma. For several other major cancers, however, death rates continue to increase or previous declines in rates have slowed or ceased. Moreover, overall incidence rates continue to increase among females, children, and adolescents and young adults. These findings inform efforts related to prevention, early detection, and treatment and for broad and equitable implementation of effective interventions, especially among under-resourced populations.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances to prevent and detect cervical cancer, national targets for screening have not been met in the United States. Previous studies suggested that approximately half of women who developed cervical cancer were not adequately screened. This study aimed to provide an updated examination of women's screening and diagnostic practices five years prior to an invasive cervical cancer diagnosis. METHODS: The study included women age 21 years and older diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer in 2013-2016 from three population-based state cancer registries in the United States. Medical records abstraction identified screening history and diagnostic follow-up. A mailed survey provided sociodemographic data. Screening was a Pap or human papillomavirus (HPV) test between 6 months and 5 years before diagnosis. Adequate follow-up was defined per management guidelines. RESULTS: Of the 376 women, 60% (n = 228) had not been screened. Among women who received an abnormal screening result (n = 122), 67% (n = 82) had adequate follow-up. Predictors of: (a) being screened were younger age, having a higher income, and having insurance; (b) adequate follow-up were having a higher income, and (c) stage 1 cervical cancer were being screened and younger age. CONCLUSION: Unlike other cancer patterns of care studies, this study uses data obtained from medical records supplemented with self-report information to understand a woman's path to diagnosis, her follow-up care, and the stage of her cervical cancer diagnosis. This study provides findings that could be used to reach more unscreened or under screened women and to continue lowering cervical cancer incidence in the United States.

Cancer surveillance is a field focused on collection of data to evaluate the burden of cancer and apply public health strategies to prevent and control cancer in the community. A key challenge facing the cancer surveillance community is the number of manual tasks required to collect cancer surveillance data, thereby resulting in possible delays in analysis and use of the information. To modernize and automate cancer data collection and reporting, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is planning, developing, and piloting a cancer surveillance cloud-based computing platform (CS-CBCP) with standardized electronic reporting from laboratories and health-care providers. With this system, automation of the cancer case collection process and access to real-time cancer case data can be achieved, which could not be done before. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic has illustrated the importance of continuity of operations plans, and the CS-CBCP has the potential to provide such a platform suitable for remote operations of central cancer registries.

BACKGROUND: The American Cancer Society, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Cancer Institute, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries collaborate to provide annual updates on cancer occurrence and trends in the United States. METHODS: Data on new cancer diagnoses during 2001 through 2016 were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-funded and National Cancer Institute-funded population-based cancer registry programs and compiled by the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Data on cancer deaths during 2001 through 2017 were obtained from the National Center for Health Statistics' National Vital Statistics System. Trends in incidence and death rates for all cancers combined and for the leading cancer types by sex, racial/ethnic group, and age were estimated by joinpoint analysis and characterized by the average annual percent change during the most recent 5 years (2012-2016 for incidence and 2013-2017 for mortality). RESULTS: Overall, cancer incidence rates decreased 0.6% on average per year during 2012 through 2016, but trends differed by sex, racial/ethnic group, and cancer type. Among males, cancer incidence rates were stable overall and among non-Hispanic white males but decreased in other racial/ethnic groups; rates increased for 5 of the 17 most common cancers, were stable for 7 cancers (including prostate), and decreased for 5 cancers (including lung and bronchus [lung] and colorectal). Among females, cancer incidence rates increased during 2012 to 2016 in all racial/ethnic groups, increasing on average 0.2% per year; rates increased for 8 of the 18 most common cancers (including breast), were stable for 6 cancers (including colorectal), and decreased for 4 cancers (including lung). Overall, cancer death rates decreased 1.5% on average per year during 2013 to 2017, decreasing 1.8% per year among males and 1.4% per year among females. During 2013 to 2017, cancer death rates decreased for all cancers combined among both males and females in each racial/ethnic group, for 11 of the 19 most common cancers among males (including lung and colorectal), and for 14 of the 20 most common cancers among females (including lung, colorectal, and breast). The largest declines in death rates were observed for melanoma of the skin (decreasing 6.1% per year among males and 6.3% among females) and lung (decreasing 4.8% per year among males and 3.7% among females). Among children younger than 15 years, cancer incidence rates increased an average of 0.8% per year during 2012 to 2016, and cancer death rates decreased an average of 1.4% per year during 2013 to 2017. Among adolescents and young adults aged 15 to 39 years, cancer incidence rates increased an average of 0.9% per year during 2012 to 2016, and cancer death rates decreased an average of 1.0% per year during 2013 to 2017. CONCLUSIONS: Although overall cancer death rates continue to decline, incidence rates are leveling off among males and are increasing slightly among females. These trends reflect population changes in cancer risk factors, screening test use, diagnostic practices, and treatment advances. Many cancers can be prevented or treated effectively if they are found early. Population-based cancer incidence and mortality data can be used to inform efforts to decrease the cancer burden in the United States and regularly monitor progress toward goals.

PURPOSE: Given the reach, breadth, and volume of data collected from multiple clinical settings and systems, US central cancer registries (CCRs) are uniquely positioned to test and advance cancer health information exchange. This article describes a current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR) cancer informatics data exchange initiative. METHODS: CDC is using an established cloud-based platform developed by the Association of Public Health Laboratories (APHL) for national notifiable disease reporting to enable direct transmission of standardized electronic pathology (ePath) data from laboratories to CCRs in multiple states. RESULTS: The APHL Informatics Messaging Services (AIMS) Platform provides an infrastructure to enable a large national laboratory to submit data to a single platform. State health departments receive data from the AIMS Platform through a secure portal, eliminating separate data exchange routes with each CCR. CONCLUSION: Key factors enabling ePath data exchange from laboratories to CCRs are having established cancer registry data standards and using a single platform/portal to reduce data streams. NPCR plans to expand this approach in alignment with ongoing cancer informatics efforts in clinical settings. The 50 CCRs supported by NPCR provide a variety of scenarios to develop and disseminate cancer data informatics initiatives and have tremendous potential to increase the implementation of cancer data exchange.

OBJECTIVES: This review summarizes past and current informatics activities at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Program of Cancer Registries to inform readers about efforts to improve, standardize, and automate reporting to public health cancer registries. TARGET AUDIENCE: The target audience includes cancer registry experts, informaticians, public health professionals, database specialists, computer scientists, programmers, and system developers who are interested in methods to improve public health surveillance through informatics approaches. SCOPE: This review provides background on central cancer registries and describes the efforts to standardize and automate reporting to these registries. Specific topics include standardized data exchange activities for physician and pathology reporting, software tools for cancer reporting, development of a natural language processing tool for processing unstructured clinical text, and future directions of cancer surveillance informatics.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Cancer Society, the National Cancer Institute, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries collaborate to provide annual updates on cancer occurrence and trends in the United States and to address a special topic of interest. Part I of this report focuses on national cancer statistics, and part 2 characterizes progress in achieving select Healthy People 2020 cancer objectives. METHODS: For this report, the authors selected objectives-including death rates, cancer screening, and major risk factors-related to 4 common cancers (lung, colorectal, female breast, and prostate). Baseline values, recent values, and the percentage change from baseline to recent values were examined overall and by select sociodemographic characteristics. Data from national surveillance systems were obtained from the Healthy People 2020 website. RESULTS: Targets for death rates were met overall and in most sociodemographic groups, but not among males, blacks, or individuals in rural areas, although these groups did experience larger decreases in rates compared with other groups. During 2007 through 2017, cancer death rates decreased 15% overall, ranging from -4% (rural) to -22% (metropolitan). Targets for breast and colorectal cancer screening were not yet met overall or in any sociodemographic groups except those with the highest educational attainment, whereas lung cancer screening was generally low (<10%). Targets were not yet met overall for cigarette smoking, recent smoking cessation, excessive alcohol use, or obesity but were met for secondhand smoke exposure and physical activity. Some sociodemographic groups did not meet targets or had less improvement than others toward reaching objectives. CONCLUSIONS: Monitoring trends in cancer risk factors, screening test use, and mortality can help assess the progress made toward decreasing the cancer burden in the United States. Although many interventions to reduce cancer risk factors and promote healthy behaviors are proven to work, they may not be equitably applied or work well in every community. Implementing cancer prevention and control interventions that are sustainable, focused, and culturally appropriate may boost success in communities with the greatest need, ensuring that all Americans can access a path to long, healthy, cancer-free lives.

Background: Despite advances in cervical cancer screening, a significant number of women in the United States have not received adequate screening. Studies have suggested that approximately half of the women who developed cervical cancer were not adequately screened. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Case Investigation of Cervical Cancer (CICC) Study took a unique approach to reconstruct the time before a woman's cervical cancer diagnosis and understand the facilitators and barriers to screening and care. This article provides an overview of the study. Methods: This study included all cervical cancer survivors diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer aged 21 years and older in three U.S. states from 2014-2016. The study design consisted of three different data collection methods, including comprehensive registry data, a mailed survey, and medical chart abstraction. This overview compares the characteristics of cervical cancer survivors in the three states by study participation and eligibility status. Results: Registries identified 2,748 women diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer. Of these, 1,730 participants were eligible for participation, 28% (n = 481) enrolled in the study and 23% (n = 400) consented to the medical chart abstraction. Conclusion: The CICC Study is unique in that it addresses, with medical record verification, the medical history of woman 5 years before their cervical cancer diagnosis as well as provides information from the woman on her health care behaviors. This study provides data on a general population of cervical cancer survivors in three states that could be used to guide interventions to increase cervical cancer screening.

Uterine cancer is one of the few cancers with increasing incidence and mortality in the United States, reflecting, in part, increases in the prevalence of overweight and obesity since the 1980s (1). It is the fourth most common cancer diagnosed and the seventh most common cause of cancer death among U.S. women (1). To assess recent trends in uterine cancer incidence and mortality by race and ethnicity, CDC analyzed incidence data from CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR) and the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program and mortality data from the National Vital Statistics System (2). Most recent data available are through 2015 for incidence and through 2016 for mortality. Uterine cancer incidence rates increased 0.7% per year during 1999-2015, and death rates increased 1.1% per year during 1999-2016, with smaller increases observed among non-Hispanic white (white) women than among women in other racial/ethnic groups. In 2015, a total of 53,911 new uterine cancer cases, corresponding to 27 cases per 100,000 women, were reported in the United States, and 10,733 uterine cancer deaths (five deaths per 100,000 women) were reported in 2016. Uterine cancer incidence was higher among non-Hispanic black (black) and white women (27 cases per 100,000) than among other racial/ethnic groups (19-23 per 100,000). Uterine cancer deaths among black women (nine per 100,000) were higher than those among other racial/ethnic groups (four to five per 100,000). Public health efforts to help women achieve and maintain a healthy weight and obtain sufficient physical activity can reduce the risk for developing cancer of the endometrium (the lining of the uterus), the most common uterine cancer. Abnormal vaginal bleeding, including bleeding between periods or after sex or any unexpected bleeding after menopause, is an important symptom of uterine cancer (3). Through programs such as CDC's Inside Knowledge* campaign, promoting awareness among women and health care providers of the need for timely evaluation of abnormal vaginal bleeding can increase the chance that uterine cancer is detected early and treated appropriately.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a known cause of cervical cancer, as well as some oropharyngeal, vulvar, vaginal, penile, and anal cancers. To assess trends, characterized by average annual percent change (AAPC), in HPV-associated cancer incidence during 1999-2015, CDC analyzed data from cancer registries covering 97.8% of the U.S. POPULATION: A total of 30,115 new cases of HPV-associated cancers were reported in 1999 and 43,371 in 2015. During 1999-2015, cervical cancer rates decreased 1.6% per year; vaginal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) rates decreased 0.6% per year; oropharyngeal SCC rates increased among both men (2.7%) and women (0.8%); anal SCC rates also increased among both men (2.1%) and women (2.9%); vulvar SCC rates increased (1.3%); and penile SCC rates remained stable. In 2015 oropharyngeal SCC (15,479 cases among men and 3,438 among women) was the most common HPV-associated cancer. Continued surveillance through high-quality cancer registries is important to monitor cancer incidence and trends in these potentially preventable cancers.

BACKGROUND: Overall, cervical cancer survival in the United States has been reported to be among the highest in the world, despite slight decreases over the last decade. Objective of the current study was to describe cervical cancer survival trends among US women and examine differences by race and stage. METHODS: This study used data from the CONCORD-2 study to compare survival among women (aged 15-99 years) diagnosed in 37 states covering 80% of the US population. Survival was adjusted for background mortality (net survival) with state- and race-specific life tables and was age-standardized with the International Cancer Survival Standard weights. Five-year survival was compared by race (all races, blacks, and whites). Two time periods, 2001-2003 and 2004-2009, were considered because of changes in how the staging variable was collected. RESULTS: From 2001 to 2009, 90,620 women were diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer. The proportion of cancers diagnosed at a regional or distant stage increased over time in most states. Overall, the 5-year survival was 63.5% in 2001-2003 and 62.8% in 2004-2009. The survival was lower for black women versus white women in both calendar periods and in most states; black women had a higher proportion of distant-stage cancers. CONCLUSIONS: The stability of the overall survival over time and the persistent differences in survival between white and black women in all US states suggest that there is a need for targeted interventions and improved access to screening, timely treatment, and follow-up care, especially among black women. Cancer 2017;123:5119-37. Published 2017. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer incidence in the US-Affiliated Pacific Islands (USAPIs) is double that of the US mainland. American Samoa, Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), Guam and the Republic of Palau receive funding from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) to implement cervical cancer screening to low-income, uninsured or under insured women. The USAPI grantees report data on screening and follow-up activities to the CDC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined cervical cancer screening and follow-up data from the NBCCEDP programs in the four USAPIs from 2007 to 2015. We summarized screening done by Papanicolaou (Pap) and oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) tests, follow-up and diagnostic tests provided, and histology results observed. RESULTS: A total of 22,249 Pap tests were conducted in 14,206 women in the four USAPIs programs from 2007-2015. The overall percentages of abnormal Pap results (low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or worse) was 2.4% for first program screens and 1.8% for subsequent program screens. Histology results showed a high proportion of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (57%) among women with precancers and cancers. Roughly one-third (32%) of Pap test results warranting follow-up had no data recorded on diagnostic tests or follow-up done. CONCLUSION: This is the first report of cervical cancer screening and outcomes of women served in the USAPI through the NBCCEDP with similar results for abnormal Pap tests, but higher proportion of precancers and cancers, when compared to national NBCCEDP data. The USAPI face significant challenges in implementing cervical cancer screening, particularly in providing and recording data on diagnostic tests and follow-up. The screening programs in the USAPI should further examine specific barriers to follow-up of women with abnormal Pap results and possible solutions to address them.

INTRODUCTION: Leading professional organizations recommend cervical cancer screening for average-risk women aged 21-65 years. For average-risk women aged >65 years, routine screening may be discontinued if "adequate" screening with negative results is documented. Screening is recommended after age 65 years for women who do not meet adequate prior screening criteria or are at special risk. METHODS: Authors examined the most recent cervical cancer incidence data from two federal cancer surveillance programs for all women by age and race, corrected for hysterectomy status. The 2013 and 2015 National Health Interview Surveys were analyzed in 2016 to examine the proportion of women aged 41-70 years without a hysterectomy who reported that they never had a Pap test or that their most recent Pap test was >5 years ago (not recently screened). RESULTS: The incidence rate for cervical cancer among older women, corrected for hysterectomy status, did not decline until age ≥85 years. The proportion not recently screened increased with age, from 12.1% for women aged 41-45 years to 18.4% for women aged 61-65 years. CONCLUSIONS: Even among women within the recommended age range for routine screening, many are not up to date, and a substantial number of women approach the "stopping" age for cervical cancer screening without an adequate prior screening history. Efforts are needed to reach women who have not been adequately screened, including women aged >65 years, to prevent invasive cervical cancer cases and deaths among older women.

Importance: A substantial effect of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines on reducing HPV-related cervical disease is essential before modifying clinical practice guidelines in partially vaccinated populations. Objective: To determine the population-based cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) trends when adjusting for changes in cervical screening practices that overlapped with HPV vaccination implementation. Design, Setting, and Participants: The New Mexico HPV Pap Registry, which captures population-based estimates of both cervical screening prevalence and CIN, was used to compute CIN trends from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2014. Under New Mexico Administrative Code, the New Mexico HPV Pap Registry, a statewide public health surveillance program, receives mandatory reporting of all cervical screening (cytologic and HPV testing) and any cervical, vulvar, and vaginal histopathological findings for all women residing in New Mexico irrespective of outcome. Main Outcome Measures: Prespecified outcome measures included low-grade CIN (grade 1 [CIN1]) and high-grade CIN (grade 2 [CIN2] and grade 3 [CIN3]). Results: From 2007 to 2014, a total of 13520 CIN1, 4296 CIN2, and 2823 CIN3 lesions were diagnosed among female individuals 15 to 29 years old. After adjustment for changes in cervical screening across the period, reductions in the CIN incidence per 100000 women screened were significant for all grades of CIN among female individuals 15 to 19 years old, dropping from 3468.3 to 1590.6 for CIN1 (annual percentage change [APC], -9.0; 95% CI, -12.0 to -5.8; P < .001), from 896.4 to 414.9 for CIN2 (APC, -10.5; 95% CI, -18.8 to -1.2; P = .03), and from 240.2 to 0 for CIN3 (APC, -41.3; 95% CI, -65.7 to 0.3; P = .05). Reductions in the CIN2 incidence were also significant for women 20 to 24 years old, dropping from 1027.7 to 627.1 (APC, -6.3; 95% CI, -10.9 to -1.4; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: Population-level decreases in CIN among cohorts partially vaccinated for HPV may be considered when clinical practice guidelines for cervical cancer screening are reassessed. Evidence is rapidly growing to suggest that further increases in raising the age to start screening are imminent, one step toward integrating screening and vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Current cervical cancer screening guidelines include the option of lengthening the screening interval to 5 years for average-risk women aged 30-65 years when screened with Pap and human papillomavirus (HPV) test (co-test). Because many providers are reluctant to extend screening intervals, we launched an educational intervention to promote recommended screening practices. The study objective was to assess changes in provider attitudes and beliefs to extending screening intervals among low-income women. METHODS: The study was conducted in 15 clinics in Federally Qualified Health Centers in Illinois. Providers in the intervention arm received a multicomponent educational intervention. Fifty-six providers (n = 29 intervention and n = 27 control) completed baseline and 12-month follow-up surveys assessing beliefs and intentions about extending screening intervals. RESULTS: The 12-month assessment showed providers in the intervention arm were significantly more likely than those in the control arm to recommend a 3-year screening interval (guideline recommendation at time of study) with a normal co-test result. Providers who received the intervention were significantly more likely to agree that routine co-testing is the best way to screen for cervical cancer, that extending the screening interval would be good, easy, and beneficial, and to disagree that the increased screening interval would cause patients to lose contact with the medical system. CONCLUSION: Educating providers on the natural history of HPV infection and cervical cancer and the benefits of extended intervals increased their willingness to follow guidelines. This study provides evidence that an educational intervention delivered with HPV testing materials may be effective in encouraging appropriate cervical screening intervals.

INTRODUCTION: Women have been reluctant to adopt longer than annual intervals for cervical cancer screening, despite guidelines recommending screening every 3 to 5 years. Our study assessed patient knowledge and beliefs about human papillomavirus (HPV) and cervical cancer screening after exposure to an educational intervention, and whether there was a change in time regarding knowledge and beliefs among all study participants in an underserved population. METHOD: The study was conducted in 15 clinics associated with 6 Federally Qualified Health Centers in Illinois, USA. Cervical cancer screening patients (n = 644) completed a baseline and postintervention follow-up survey. The intervention included an HPV test and an educational pamphlet. Significance testing of changes in knowledge and beliefs was conducted with multilevel, mixed-effects models adjusting for repeated measures of patients and clustering within clinics. RESULTS: No significant differences in study outcomes were found between the intervention and control groups. Among all women, knowledge of HPV significantly improved over time. At follow-up, fewer women reported that having a co-test is good, wise, will give you peace of mind, will tell you whether you need to worry if Pap is abnormal, is something your doctor thinks you should have, and will give you the best care available. More women said it would be bad, useless, or worrying to wait 3 years for a Pap test at follow-up. CONCLUSION: HPV knowledge improved over time, but the educational intervention utilized in this study was not successful in improving attitudes and beliefs about co-testing and longer screening intervals, and beliefs about HPV co-testing and 3-year screening intervals were less favorable. Having health care providers discuss the consequences of overscreening and the natural history of HPV and cervical cancer with their patients may help increase adherence to longer screening intervals. Further examination of the essential components for educational intervention in this population is warranted.

Reasons for racial/ethnic disparities in HPV infection are unclear. This study assessed racial/ethnic differences in and risk factors for HPV positivity among low-income women. Data were collected from 984 low-income women visiting Federally Qualified Health Centers across Illinois (2009-2011). Logistic regression analyses were used to examine associations with HPV positivity. Our results showed Mexican-born Hispanics had the lowest HPV positivity (16%), followed by non-Hispanic whites (29%), US-born Hispanics (35%), and non-Hispanic blacks (39%). Mexican-born Hispanics reported fewer risk behaviors for HPV positivity, including first sexual intercourse before age 16years (9% versus 27%), multiple sexual partners in lifetime (48% versus 90%), and current cigarette smoking status (10% versus 35%) when compared to non-Hispanic whites (p<0.001). In multivariate-adjusted logistic regression, being non-Hispanic black, first sexual intercourse before age 16 years, increasing numbers of recent or lifetime sexual partners and current cigarette smoking status were associated with a higher likelihood of HPV positivity. Our findings highlight racial/ethnic differences in HPV positivity and risk factors in a population of women with similar socioeconomic characteristics. When measuring HPV risk factors within the Hispanic population, foreign-born status and other mediating factors, such as social norms and cultural characteristics, may be relevant to assess the intragroup heterogeneity.

BACKGROUND: Among providers who serve low-income and uninsured women, resistance to extending the cervical cancer screening interval following normal Pap and co-test results has been documented. Our objective was to examine provider characteristics and beliefs associated with guideline-consistent screening interval recommendations. METHOD: We collected cross-sectional survey data between 2009 and 2010 from 82 primary care providers in six Federally Qualified Health Centers in Illinois, USA. The relationships between characteristics, beliefs, and screening interval recommendations (1. year vs. 3. years) were tested with Pearson chi-square, negative binomial and ordered logistic regression. RESULTS: Compared to providers who recommended annual intervals after a normal co-test, providers who recommended a guideline-consistent (i.e., 3. years) screening interval were significantly more likely to report the goodness, ease, and benefit of their recommendation and perceived encouragement for a 3-year interval from professional organizations and journals (p < .05). Providers who recommended a 3-year interval were also less likely to report that longer intervals increase patient risk for cervical cancer (p < .05). Interval recommendations were not associated with provider specialty, gender, or years in practice. CONCLUSION: Messages that promote the benefits of longer screening intervals after a normal co-test, the natural history of human papillomavirus and cervical cancer, and low risk of developing cancer with a longer interval may be useful to promote evidence-based screening in this population of Federally Qualified Health Center providers. Dissemination of targeted messages through professional journals and specialty organizations should be considered.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the information providers share with patients when ordering a co-test, or combined human papillomavirus (HPV) and Papanicolaou (Pap) test, for cervical cancer screening. We assessed provider perceptions of such communication practices with female patients aged 30-60. years. METHODS: We analyzed data from 98 providers in 15 Federally Qualified Health Center clinics across Illinois (2009-2010). RESULTS: About 70% of the providers reported that when ordering a co-test, they would usually or always communicate information about the HPV test to their patients, explain the test detects a sexually transmitted infection, and discuss how the test results may determine their next screening interval. Most (> 85%) reported that they were comfortable discussing co-test results. Compared with concordant positive results (HPV positive/Pap positive), providers were more likely to perceive that discordant results (HPV positive/Pap negative) would be too complex for patients to understand (25% vs. 15%, p = 0.006), and make patients feel less assured that they were getting the best standard of care (67% vs. 88%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: As HPV testing plays a more prominent role in cervical cancer screening, more attention should be given to communications between providers and patients about the benefits and harms of different screening options.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a policy supporting early detection and prevention of cervical cancer among low-income and uninsured women by comparing women who reported never or rarely being screened (last screen >5 years) to those who reported screening in the past ≤5 years. METHODS: We analyzed data from 1,485,251 women who received their first Pap test in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) from July 2002 through June 2012. Of these, 461,893 women (31 %) reported being never or rarely screened and 1,023,358 (69 %) reported being screened in the past 5 years. Demographic (age, race/ethnicity, residence, and region) and clinic (cytologic and histologic results) characteristics were examined for the two groups. RESULTS: Women who were aged ≥50 years, Asian and Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaska Native, multiracial, living in non-metro areas, or living in the South or a territory were more likely to report being never or rarely screened. The percentage of abnormal Pap tests and the rate of precancer and cancer (combined) was higher in the never or rarely screened group compared with the screened group (abnormal percentage: 2.9 vs 2.6 %, p value < 0.01; rate of precancer and cancer: 6.9 vs 3.7 per 1,000 women, p value < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The priority of reaching never or rarely screened women should continue since those women who entered the NBCCEDP not adequately screened had a greater prevalence of high-grade histological lesions and invasive cervical cancers at later stages than women screened more recently.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer screening is one of the greatest cancer prevention achievements, yet some women still develop or die from this disease. OBJECTIVE: To assess recent trends in cervical cancer incidence and mortality, current screening percentages, and factors associated with higher incidence and death rates and inadequate screening. METHODS: Percentages of women who had not been screened for cervical cancer in the past 5 years were estimated using data from the 2012 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey. State-specific cervical cancer incidence data from the United States Cancer Statistics and mortality data from the National Vital Statistics System were used to calculate incidence and death rates for 2011 by state. Incidence and death rates and annual percentage changes from 2007 to 2011 were calculated by state and U.S. Census region. RESULTS: In 2012, the percentage of women who had not been screened for cervical cancer in the past 5 years was estimated to be 11.4%; the percentage was larger for women without health insurance (23.1%) and for those without a regular health care provider (25.5%). From 2007 to 2011, the cervical cancer incidence rate decreased by 1.9% per year while the death rate remained stable. The South had the highest incidence rate (8.5 per 100,000), death rate (2.7 per 100,000), and percentage of women who had not been screened in the past 5 years (12.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Trends in cervical cancer incidence rates have decreased slightly while death rates have been stable over the last 5 years. The proportion of inadequately screened women is higher among older women, Asians/Pacific Islanders, and American Indians/Alaska Natives. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH PRACTICE: There continue to be women who are not screened as recommended, and women who die from this preventable cancer. Evidence-based public health approaches are available to increase women's access to screening and timely follow-up of abnormal results.

BACKGROUND: Since 2003, U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines recommend against Pap testing for women without a cervix following a hysterectomy and those aged >65 years. Few population-based studies have investigated factors associated with overuse of Pap testing in the U.S. PURPOSE: To evaluate patient characteristics associated with overuse of Pap testing. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted using data from the 2010 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) for women aged ≥30 years. NHIS is a nationally representative survey that employs a random, stratified, multi-stage cluster sampling design. In 2010, the NHIS administered a Cancer Control Supplement with questions on cervical cancer screening and hysterectomy status. Conducted in 2011-2013, all analyses account for the stratification and clustering of data within the complex NHIS survey design. Multivariate logistic regression models were used in all analyses. RESULTS: Among women who have undergone a hysterectomy, younger age, Hispanic and black race/ethnicity, exceeding 400% of poverty level, and private health insurance coverage were significantly associated with receipt of a recent Pap test since hysterectomy. Among women aged >65 years, non-Hispanic white ethnicity, higher education level, exceeding 400% of poverty level, and no hysterectomy were significantly associated with receipt of a recent Pap test. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted efforts to reduce unnecessary testing among older women and women with a hysterectomy in compliance with clinical recommendations for cervical cancer prevention are needed. Specific attention should be paid to privately insured women with incomes above 400% of the federal poverty level.

INTRODUCTION: In the United States, Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) are safety-net clinics that provide cervical cancer screening and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination to medically underserved women, some of whom may be at risk for developing cervical cancer. National guidelines recommend against using screening test results or sexual history to determine vaccine eligibility. Documenting HPV vaccine recommendations and beliefs of primary care providers in FQHCs may aid in promoting evidence-based practices and prioritizing health interventions for vulnerable populations. METHODS: Between 2009 and 2010, we collected data from 98 primary care providers in 15 FQHC clinics in IL, USA using a cross-sectional survey. Questions assessed provider and practice characteristics, HPV vaccine recommendations, and provider's belief about whether their screening and management procedures would change for women who were vaccinated. RESULTS: 93% of providers recommended the HPV vaccine, most frequently for females aged 13-26 years (98%). Some providers reported sometimes to always using HPV test results (12%), Pap test results (7%), and number of sexual partners (33%) to determine vaccine eligibility. More than half of providers (55%) reported they will not change their screening and management practices for vaccinated females, yet believe vaccination will yield fewer abnormal Pap tests (71%) and referrals for colposcopy (74%). CONCLUSION: Study providers routinely recommended the HPV vaccine for their patients. However, providers made fewer recommendations to vaccinate females ages 9-12 years (which includes the target age for vaccination) compared to older females, and used pre-vaccination assessments not recommended by U.S. guidelines, such as screening test results and number of sexual partners. In order to maximize the public health benefit of the HPV vaccine to prevent cervical cancer, adherence to guidelines is necessary, especially in settings that provide care to medically underserved women.

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study were to evaluate the quality of national data generated by the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP); to assess variables collected through the program that are appropriate to use for program management, evaluation, and data analysis; and to identify potential data-quality issues. METHODS: Information was abstracted randomly from 5603 medical records selected from 6 NBCCEDP-funded state programs, and 76 categorical variables and 11 text-based breast and cervical cancer screening and diagnostic variables were collected. Concordance was estimated between abstracted data and the data collected by the NBCCEDP. Overall and outcome-specific concordance was calculated for each of the key variables. Four screening performance measures also were estimated by comparing the program data with the abstracted data. RESULTS: Basic measures of program outcomes, such as the percentage of women with cancer or with abnormal screening tests, had a high concordance rate. Variables with poor or inconsistent concordance included reported breast symptoms, receipt of fine-needle aspiration, and receipt of colposcopy with biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: The overall conclusion from this comprehensive validation project of the NBCCEDP is that, with few exceptions, the data collected from individual program sites and reported to the CDC are valid and consistent with sociodemographic and clinical data within medical records.