Search

The proportion of women dying from cervical cancer in middle- and low-income countries is over 60%, twice that of their high-income counterparts. A primary screening strategy to eliminate this burden is cervix visualization and application of 3-5% acetic acid, inducing contrast in potential lesions. Recently, machine learning tools have emerged to aid visual diagnosis. As low-cost visualization tools expand, it is important to maximize image quality at the time of the exam or of images used in algorithms., Objective: We present the use of an object detection algorithm, the YOLOv5 model, to localize the cervix and describe blur within a multi-device image database., Methods: We took advantage of the Fourier domain to provide pseudo-labeling of training and testing images. A YOLOv5 model was trained using Pocket Colposcope, Mobile ODT EVA, and standard of care digital colposcope images., Results: When tested on all devices, this model achieved a mean average precision score, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.9, 0.89, and 0.89, respectively. Mobile ODT EVA and Pocket Colposcope hold out sets yielded mAP score of 0.81 and 0.83, respectively, reflecting the generalizability of the algorithm. Compared to physician annotation, it yielded an accuracy of 0.72., Conclusion: This method provides an informed quantitative, generalizable analysis of captured images that is highly concordant with expert annotation., Significance: This quality control framework can assist in the standardization of colposcopy workflow, data acquisition, and image analysis and in doing so increase the availability of usable positive images for the development of deep learning algorithms.

There is significant disparity in the prevalence of cervical cancer globally, with low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) shouldering a disproportionate share of disease incidence and an even greater proportion of morbidity and mortality. Available resources for diagnosis, treatment and palliation of cervical cancer are inversely related to per capita income. While prevention and screening remain public health priorities, given the large number of women affected by cervical cancer, expanding treatment capacity should be included in any evidence-based intervention plan. Uganda, a country with a high incidence of cervical cancer, serves as a representative case study in terms of the challenges of diagnosis and access to treatment in sub-Saharan Africa. Providers and patients in Uganda are challenged by late presentation to care, limited training opportunities, cost-prohibitive diagnostic studies, insufficient access to gold-standard treatment, and under-utilized palliative care services. This review highlights the ways in which Uganda's experience is typical of the continent at large, as well as areas where Uganda is unique. We describe the ways in which a small but dedicated group of gynecologists carefully use limited evidence and available resources creatively to provide the best possible care for their patients. We show that improvisation, albeit evidence-based, is central to the nature and success of oncology care in Africa (Livingston, 2012). We argue that a "recalibrated global response" (Farmer et al., 2010), particularly stressing the expansion of radiotherapy capabilities, could dramatically improve cancer care and outcomes for women in Uganda as well as in LMICs globally.

Objective: Cervical cancer screening uptake may be influenced by inadequate knowledge in resource-limited settings. This randomized trial evaluated a health talk's impact on cervical cancer knowledge, attitudes, and screening rates in rural Kenya., Methods: 419 women attending government clinics were randomized to an intervention (N=207) or control (N=212) group. The intervention was a brief health talk on cervical cancer. Participants completed surveys at enrollment (all), immediately after the talk (intervention arm), and at three-months follow-up (all). The primary outcomes were the change in knowledge scores and the final screening rates at three-months follow-up. Secondary outcomes were changes in awareness about cervical cancer screening, perception of personal cervical cancer risk, cervical cancer and HIV stigma, and screening acceptability., Results: Mean Knowledge Scores increased by 26.4% (8.7 points increased to 11.0 points) in the intervention arm compared to only 17.6% (8.5 points increased to 10.0 points) in the control arm (p<0.01). Screening uptake was moderate in both the intervention (58.9%; N=122) and control (60.9%; N=129) arms, with no difference between the groups (p=0.60)., Conclusion: A brief health talk increased cervical cancer knowledge, although it did not increase screening over simply informing women about free screening., Practical Implications: Screening programs can increase patient understanding with just a brief educational intervention., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Our objective was to assess the sensitivity and specificity of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical cancer screening in randomized trials. We conducted a systematic literature search of the following databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and Cochrane. Eligible studies were randomized trials comparing HPV-based to cytology-based screening strategies, with disease status determined by colposcopy/biopsy for participants with positive results. Disease rates (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia [CIN]2 or greater and CIN3 or greater), sensitivity, and positive predictive value were abstracted or calculated from the articles. Six studies met inclusion criteria. Relative sensitivities for detecting CIN3 or greater of HPV testing-based strategies vs cytology ranged from 0.8 to 2.1. The main limitation of our study was that testing methodologies and screening/management protocols were highly variable across studies. Screening strategies in which a single initial HPV-positive test led to colposcopy were more sensitive than cytology but resulted in higher colposcopy rates. These results have implications for cotesting with HPV and cytology as recommended in the United States., (Copyright © 2013 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)