One-year results of the national breast and cervical cancer screening program: Giresun province in the black sea region

Breast and cervical cancer screening results

Abstract

Background/Aim: Increasing the survival rate of patients with breast and cervical cancers is possible by early diagnosis through screening individuals for cancer in the asymptomatic period. Especially during the COVID-19 pandemic period, the possibility of early diagnosis in breast and cervical cancers has decreased due to the decrease in cancer screening applications. The aim of cancer screening is to increase the survival of patients by detecting precancerous lesions early. The purpose of our study is to evaluate the application and results of breast and cervical cancer screening in the Black Sea region’s Giresun province.

Methods: This is a cross-sectional and descriptive study. The results of patients who were admitted to the Giresun Early Diagnosis Cancer Screening and Education Center between July 1, 2021, and June 28, 2022, were examined. The mammography report results of women aged 40–69 years who applied to the cancer screening center for breast cancer screening, and the HPV and Pap smear results of the patients aged 30–65 years who applied for cervical cancer screening, were evaluated retrospectively through the public health management system. Mammography results were evaluated with BIRADS (Breast Imaging Reporting and Dated System) scoring. The type of HPV and the cytology results from cervical swab samples were analyzed for cervical cancer screening.

Results: A total of 3567 people underwent mammography. Per the mammography results, the percentage of those with BIRADS 0 was 7.7% (n=278), the percentage of those with BIRADS 1–2 was 91% (n=3256), the percentage of those with BIRADS 4 was 0.7% (n=25), and the percentage of those with BIRADS 5 was 0.14% (n=5). HPV-DNA and cervical cytology examinations were performed for cervical cancer screening in 2326 patients. As a result of cervical cancer screening, HPV positivity was found in 6.44% (n=150) patients, and 14 different HPV types were found in the positive samples. When HPV types were examined, the two most common types were HPV type 16 (13.6%) and type 56 (11.9%). When the HPV types were examined in the positive samples, the two most common types were HPV type 16 (13.6%) and type 56 (11.9%). HPV type 18 was the least detected HPV type in patients (3.7%). When the Pap smear screening results of the 150 cases with positive screening results were examined, 3.33% were ASC-US (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance), 22% were reported as infection, and 62.6% were normal.

Conclusion: The role of primary care physicians directing patients registered in their coverage area to cancer screening programs is especially effective in raising society’s awareness and education on the issue. As a result, it is important that primary care physicians and related specialist physicians, together with cancer early detection and screening centers, adopt a supportive stance towards these programs in order for them to be implemented effectively.