Комплексный подход к профилактике рака шейки матки

DOI: https://doi.org/10.29296/25877305-2023-08-04
Номер журнала: 
8
Год издания: 
2023

Т.В. Клинышкова(1), доктор медицинских наук, профессор,
Н.Б. Фролова(2), кандидат медицинских наук
1-Омский государственный медицинский университет Минздрава России
2-Клиническая больница «РЖД-Медицина», Омск
E-mail: klin_tatyana@mail.ru

Рак шейки матки (РШМ) является четвертым по распространенности видом рака среди женщин в мире. В России заболеваемость РШМ находится на второй позиции в структуре раков гениталий. В Глобальной стратегии ВОЗ по ускорению ликвидации РШМ как проблемы общественного здравоохранения рекомендован комплексный подход к профилактике РШМ и борьбе с ним, объединяющий вакцинацию, скрининг, лечение. Представлен обзор и анализ современных данных по данной проблеме за последнее десятилетие. Расширение масштабов вакцинации против вируса папилломы человека, повышение уровня цервикального скрининга и охвата ими женского населения, разработанный постскрининговый менеджмент и своевременное лечение предрака направлены на снижение заболеваемости и смертности, связанных с РШМ.
Ключевые слова: 
онкология
вакцинация
цервикальный скрининг
ВПЧ-тест
ко-тест
triage
р16/Ki67
цервикальная интраэпителиальная неоплазия
лечение.
Для цитирования
Клинышкова Т.В., Фролова Н.Б. Комплексный подход к профилактике рака шейки матки . Врач, 2023; (8): 22-26 https://doi.org/10.29296/25877305-2023-08-04

Список литературы: 
  1. Sung H., Ferlay J., Siegel R.L. et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021; 71: 209–49. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21660
  2. Каприн А.Д., Старинский В.В., Шахзадова А.О. Состояние онкологической помощи населению России в 2021 году. М.: МНИОИ им. П.А. Герцена – филиал ФГБУ «НМИЦ радиологии» Минздрава России, 2022; 239 с. [Kaprin A.D., Starinsky V.V., Shakhzadova A.O. The state of oncological care to the population of Russia in 2021. M.: MNIOI im. P.A. Gertsena – filial FGBU "NMITs radiologii" Minzdrava Rossii, 2022; 239 s. (in Russ.)]. URL: https://oncology-association.ru/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/sostoyanie-onkologicheskoj-pomoshhi-naseleniyu-rossii-v-2021-godu.pdf
  3. Bruni L., Diaz M., Castellsagué X. et al. Cervical human papillomavirus prevalence in 5 continents: meta-analysis of 1 million women with normal cytological findings. Infect Dis. 2010; 202 (12): 1789–99. DOI: 10.1086/657321
  4. Castellsagué X., Paavonen J., Jaisamrarn U. et al. Risk of first cervical HPV infection and pre-cancerous lesions after onset of sexual activity: analysis of women in the control arm of the randomized, controlled PATRICIA trial. BMC Infect Dis. 2014; 14: 551. DOI: 10.1186/s12879-014-0551-y
  5. Gilham C., Sargent A., Kitchener H.C. et al. HPV testing compared with routine cytology in cervical screening: long-term follow-up of ARTISTIC RCT. Health Technol Assess. 2019; 23 (28): 1–44. DOI: 10.3310/hta23280
  6. Zhang Z., Zhang J., Xia N. et al. Expanded strain coverage for a highly successful public health tool: Prophylactic 9-valent human papillomavirus vaccine. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2017; 13 (10): 2280–91. DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2017.1346755
  7. Petrosky E., Bocchini J.A. Jr., Hariri S. et al. Use of 9-valent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine: updated HPV vaccination recommendations of the advisory committee on immunization practices. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015; 64 (11): 300–4.
  8. Genovese C., La Fauci V., Squeri A. et al. HPV vaccine and autoimmune diseases: systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. J Prev Med Hyg. 2018; 59 (3): E194–E199. DOI: 10.15167/2421-4248/jpmh2018.59.3.998
  9. Burger E.A., Campos N.G., Sy S. et al. Health and economic benefits of single-dose HPV vaccination in a Gavi-eligible country. Vaccine. 2018; 36 (32 Pt A): 4823–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.04.061
  10. Burger E.A., Campos N.G., Sy S. et al. Sustained efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety of the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine: final analysis of a long-term follow-up study up to 9.4 years post-vaccination. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2014; 10 (8): 2147–62. DOI: 10.4161/hv.29532
  11. Адамян Л.В., Аполихина И.А., Артымук Н.В. и др. Цервикальная интраэпителиальная неоплазия, эрозия и эктропион шейки матки. Клинические рекомендации. М., 2020; 59 с. [Adamyan L.V., Apolihina I.A., Artymuk N.V et al. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, erosion and ectropion of the cervix. Clinical recommendations. M., 2020; 59 p. (in Russ.)]. URL: https://www.dzhmao.ru/spez/klin_recom/akushGinekol/2020/KR_597_CINeoplaziyaMatki.pdf
  12. Cuschieri K., Ronco G., Lorincz A. et al. Eurogin 2017 Roadmap: Triage strategies for the management of HPV-positive women in cervical screening programs. Int J Cancer. 2018; 143 (4): 735–45. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.31261
  13. Клинышкова Т.В., Турчанинов Д.В., Самосудова И.Б. Эпидемиологические аспекты цервикального предрака у женского населения г. Омска (по материалам выборочного исследования). Российский вестник акушера-гинеколога. 2013; 13 (4): 13–7 [Klinyshkova T.V., Turchaninov D.V. Epidemiological aspects of cervical precancerous disease in the female population of Omsk (based on the materials of a sample study). Russian Bulletin of Obstetrician-Gynecologist. 2013; 13 (4): 13–7 (in Russ.)].
  14. Arbyn M., Simon M., de Sanjosé S. et al. Accuracy and effectiveness of HPV mRNA testing in cervical cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2022; 23 (7): 950–60. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00294-7
  15. Guan P., Howell-Jones R., Li N. et al. Human papillomavirus types in 115,789 HPV-positive women: a meta-analysis from cervical infection to cancer. Int J Cancer. 2012; 131: 2349–59. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.27485
  16. Wentzensen N., Arbyn M., Berkhof J. et al. Eurogin 2016 Roadmap: how HPV knowledge is changing screening practice. Int J Cancer. 2017; 140 (10): 2192–200. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.30579
  17. Ronco G., Dillner J., Elfström K.M. et al. Efficacy of HPV-based screening for prevention of invasive cervical cancer: follow-up of four European randomised controlled trials. Lancet. 2014; 383 (9916): 524–32. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62218-7
  18. Arbyn M., Smith S.B., Temin S. et al. Detecting cervical precancer and reaching underscreened women by using HPV testing on self samples: updated meta-analyses. BMJ. 2018; 363: k4823. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.k4823
  19. Клинышкова Т.В., Турчанинов Д.В., Буян М.С. Эпидемиологические аспекты рака шейки матки. Российский вестник акушера-гинеколога. 2018; 18 (2): 22–6 [Klinyshkova T.V., Turchaninov D.V., Buyan M.S. Epidemiological aspects of cervical cancer. Russian Bulletin of Obstetrician-Gynecologist. 2018; 18 (2): 22–6 (in Russ.)]. DOI: 10.17116/rosakush201818222-26
  20. Klug S.J., Neis K.J., Harlfinger W. et al. A randomized trial comparing conventional cytology to liquid-based cytology and computer assistance. Int J Cancer. 2013; 132: 2849–57. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.27955
  21. Pankaj S., Nazneen S., Kumari S. et al. Comparison of conventional Pap smear and liquid-based cytology: A study of cervical cancer screening at a tertiary care center in Bihar. Indian J Cancer. 2018; 55 (1): 80–3. DOI: 10.4103/ijc.IJC_352_17
  22. Strander B., Andersson-Ellström A., Milsom I. et al. Liquid-based cytology versus conventional Papanicolaou smear in an organized screening program: a prospective randomized study. Cancer. 2007; 111: 285–91. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.22953
  23. Liang L.A., Einzmann T., Franzen A. et al. Cervical Cancer Screening: Comparison of Conventional Pap Smear Test, Liquid-Based Cytology, and Human Papillomavirus Testing as Stand-alone or Cotesting Strategies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2021; 30 (3): 474–84. DOI: 1055-9965.EPI-20-1003
  24. Gage J.C., Schiffman M., Katki H.A. et al. Reassurance against future risk of precancer and cancer conferred by a negative human papillomavirus test. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014; 106 (8): dju153. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dju153
  25. Khan M.J., Werner C.L., Darragh T.M. et al. ASCCP Colposcopy Standards: Role of Colposcopy, Benefits, Potential Harms, and Terminology for Colposcopic Practice. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2017; 21 (4): 223–9. DOI: 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000338
  26. Baasland I., Hagen B., Vogt C. et al. Colposcopy and additive diagnostic value of biopsies from colposcopy-negative areas to detect cervical dysplasia. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2016; 95 (11): 1258–63. DOI: 10.1111/aogs.13009
  27. Ruan Y., Liu M., Guo J. et al. Evaluation of the accuracy of colposcopy in detecting high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion and cervical cancer. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2020; 302 (6): 1529–38. DOI: 10.1007/s00404-020-05740-x
  28. Bai A., Wang J., Li Q. et al. Assessing colposcopic accuracy for high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion detection: a retrospective, cohort study. BMC Womens Health. 2022; 22 (1): 9. DOI: 10.1186/s12905-022-01592-6
  29. Wei B., Zhang B., Xue P. et al. Improving colposcopic accuracy for cervical precancer detection: a retrospective multicenter study in China. BMC Cancer. 2022; 22 (1): 388. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-022-09498-0
  30. Клинышкова Т.В., Миронова О.Н. Влияние инозин пранобекса на экспрессию р16, Ki67 у больных с ВПЧ-ассоциированными цервикальными интраэпителиальными неоплазиями. Гинекология. 2018; 20 (4): 29–34 [Klinyshkova T.V., Mironova O.N. Effect of inosine pranobex on p16, Ki-67 expression in patients with HPV-associated cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Gynecology. 2018; 20 (4): 29–34 (in Russ.)]. DOI: 10.26442/2079-5696_2018.4.29-34
  31. Wright T.C. Jr., Behrens C.M., Ranger-Moore J. et al. Triaging HPV-positive women with p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology: Results from a sub-study nested into the ATHENA trial. Gynecol Oncol. 2017; 144 (1): 51–6. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.10.031
  32. Wentzensen N., Clarke M.A., Bremer R. et al. Clinical Evaluation of Human Papillomavirus Screening With p16/Ki-67 Dual Stain Triage in a Large Organized Cervical Cancer Screening Program. JAMA Intern Med. 2019; 179 (7): 881–8. DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.0306
  33. Han Q., Guo H., Geng L. et al. p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology used for triage in cervical cancer opportunistic screening. Chin J Cancer Res. 2020; 32 (2): 208–17. DOI: 10.21147/j.issn.1000-9604.2020.02.08
  34. Сухих Г.Т., Ашрафян Л.А. Киселев В.И. и др. Исследование эффективности и безопасности препарата на основе дииндолметана у пациенток с цервикальной интраэпителиальной неоплазией (CIN 1–2). Акушерство и гинекология. 2018; 9: 91–8 [Sukhikh G.T., Ashrafyan L.A., Kiselev V.I. et al. Investigation of the efficacy and safety of a diindolylmethane-based drug in patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grades 1-2 (CIN 1-2). Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2018; 9: 91–8 (in Russ.)]. DOI: 10.18565/aig.2018.9.91-98
  35. Elit L., Levine M.N., Julian J.A. et al. Expectant management versus immediate treatment for low-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a randomized trial in Canada and Brazil. Cancer. 2011; 117 (7): 1438–45. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.25635
  36. Costa-Fagbemi M., Yakubu M., Meggetto O. et al. Risk of Cervical Dysplasia After Colposcopy Care and Risk-Informed Return to Population-Based Screening: A Systematic Revie. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2020; 42 (5): 607–24. DOI: 10.1016/j.jogc.2019.05.017
  37. Arbyn M., Redman C.W.E., Verdoodt F. et al. Incomplete excision of cervical precancer as a predictor of treatment failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2017; 12: 1665–79. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30700
  38. Alder S., Megyessi D., Sundström K. et al. Incomplete excision of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia as a predictor of the risk of recurrent disease-a 16-year follow-up study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020; 222 (2): 172.e1–172.e12. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.08.042
  39. Andersson S., Megyessi D., Belkić K. et al. Age, margin status, high-risk human papillomavirus and cytology independently predict recurrent high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia up to 6 years after treatment. Oncol Lett. 2021; 22 (3): 684. DOI: 10.3892/ol.2021.12945
  40. Fan A., Wang C., Han C. et al. Factors affecting residual/recurrent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia after cervical conization with negative margins. J Med Virol. 2018; 90 (9): 1541–8. DOI: 10.1002/jmv.25208