Home | Life & Style

Life & Style

Cervical screening can defeat cancer

Dr Katrina Herren, medical director of health and wellbeing at Bupa, has urged women to undergo cervical screening

It's a cancer that can be stopped in its tracks – but women must take advantage of screening to have the best chance of beating it, as Sarah Dunn discovers

“We have the power to stop ourselves getting this disease – it's about women taking charge of their own health,” says Dr Katrina Herren, medical director of health and wellbeing at Bupa.

This is because cervical screening – or a smear test – can detect abnormal changes in the cells of the cervix before they even turn cancerous.

Treatment to remove the cells can take just minutes. In younger women, it also provides a better chance of preserving their ability to have children since intrusive surgery can be avoided.

Alarmingly - despite the fact that three women a day die of the disease and screening saving around 5,000 lives a year - women continue to dismiss the offer of a check. The latest figures released by Bupa show 48 per cent of people in the North West have never attended any type of health screening.

The plight of former Big Brother star Jade Goody, who died from cervical cancer aged just 27 in March 2009, led to a rise in the number of women coming forward.

But Dr Herren is concerned women are now forgetting her story.

“She brought to the forefront what can happen if you don't attend screening,” she says.

“But now it's started to fade from people's minds.

“It's an absolute tragedy for any woman to develop cervical cancer at the level Jade Goody suffered. To get to a very advanced stage like that is extremely rare – if you avoid screening, that's what can happen.”

Dr Herren, who used to work in accident and emergency at Manchester Royal Infirmary, admits the procedure can be unpleasant, but stresses it is worth it.

“It's not a nice experience,” she says.

“It's cold and uncomfortable, and then you have the worry of waiting for the results.

“It can be easy to say, 'I'm just not going to deal with this'. But a short period of discomfort is an awful lot better than leaving it.”

In England women aged 25 to 64 are routinely offered cervical screening every three years.

But the Jo's Cervical Cancer Trust charity is worried about the disappointing turn-out - particularly in women over 50 - following the results of a YouGov poll conducted on their behalf.

The research found that single, separated or divorced women were most likely to say screening was 'irrelevant', with 31 per cent of women between 50 and 70 not considering the test necessary for all women.

It also found 51 per cent of women in the age group believed cervical cancer was caused by having multiple sexual partners.

The disease is linked to intimate relations, since most cervical cancers are caused by the human papilloma virus (HPV) which can be caught as soon as you start having sexual contact, but it can come from just one sexual partner.

It is usually cleared – without treatment – by the body's immune system.

But the infection can also lie dormant for years before leading to the development of abnormal cells and possibly cancer – emphasising that although someone might be single or divorced now, they could still be at risk and need to get checked out.

Dr Herren says: “It's as important as eating five fruit and veg a day, or exercising regularly.

“It's uncomfortable, but in comparison to quitting smoking or losing weight it's relatively easy, and can have a big impact on your health.”

Visit www.bupa.co.uk  for more information.

Louise's Story

Louise Hassall's experiences of cervical cancer are perhaps not the norm, but they have inspired her to raise awareness of the condition and support others as they fight their own battles against the disease.

She was treated at The Christie hospital in Manchester – undergoing chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgery which has left her with a permanent urostomy bag because her bladder had to be removed.

Hers was an unusual case since she had previously undergone a subtotal hysterectomy – involving the removal of the uterus but not the cervix – in 2002.

She resorted to the drastic surgery after suffering with endometriosis, a condition where cells like the ones lining the womb appear elsewhere in the body causing inflammation, pain and scar tissue.

Louise says her previous procedures meant it did not 'click' that she needed to undergo regular smear tests.

And it was only when she started suffering symptoms including bleeding that she went to her GP. Other potential indicators include pain during and after sex, unusual discharge, post menopausal bleeding and lower back pain.

Louise, who is married to Steven, was referred back to her gynaecologist, who ordered a colposcopy to examine the cervix in greater detail. A biopsy was also sent away for tests.

The 38-year-old said: “They said I should prepare myself for cervical cancer. I just felt numb.”

The initial suspicions were confirmed and a referral to The Christie – which she describes as 'fantastic' – followed. She started gruelling treatment there in July 2010.

From the start of her battle, Louise, a training design consultant at Lloyds TSB who lives in Cheshire, sought support through the online forum of Jo's Cervical Cancer Trust, where she got in contact with other women in similar situations.

“It was so uplifting and reassuring knowing there were other people going down the same road I was,” she remembers.

Louise says she has learned to adapt both 'psychologically and practically' to life after the operation.

Now she and Diane Thornton, a gynaecological nurse specialist at the private BMI Alexandra Hospital in Cheadle, are setting up a support group in Manchester for cervical cancer patients, with the help of Jo's Trust.

“I would have liked a group like this to go to,” Louise says.

“When information is down in black and white on a page, it's not so personal. When you speak to someone you think, this is okay, I can live with this.”

She's also keen to raise awareness of potential symptoms – since she did not know she was suffering them at the time - and push the message that prevention is better than the cure.

“Screening is only five minutes out of your time,” she says.

“But it could save your life.”

Visit www.jostrust.org.uk/support for more details about the Manchester support group, which will launch in the spring at a venue and date to be confirmed.

Comments

Login or Register to comment

It is important to attend for cytology. I have always attended for my screening and it has always been normal until my last one. Fortunately the cancer was in its early stage and after having an hysterectomy I have been decared cancer free.

Report This Reply

Actually our program is excessive, harmful and inefficient, no woman needs an absurd 26+ pap tests, it just greatly increases the risk of a false positive and potentially harmful over-treatment. I'm not sure what we're doing in this country, but it concerns me that there is virtually no critical scrutiny of our program and it also worries me that a fortune is made from all of this over-screening and over-treatment and that may prompt many vested interests to keep our harmful program in place or hold up long overdue changes for as long as possible.
When you look at programs around the world, our program stands out for excess...lifetime risk of referral here after an "abnormal" pap test is a shocking 77% for a 0.65% lifetime risk of cervical cancer. Almost all referrals are due to false positives. As a low risk woman my risk of cc is near zero, the risks were too high for me and I have always declined testing. Doctors here receive target payments for pap testing, which IMO, also creates a potential conflict of interest.

Anyone concerned about this cancer should look to Finland and the Netherlands - both have 7 pap test programs, 5 yearly from 30 to 60 and the Finns have the lowest rates of cc in the world and JUST as importantly, send far fewer women for colposcopy/biopsy/over-treatment. Over-treatment and cone biopsies can damage the cervix and lead to cervical stenosis, infertility, cervical incompetence, premature babies, high risk pregnancy and cervical cerclage etc
The Dutch are about to move to something that offers far better protection for the 95% of women who can't benefit from pap testing and risk being harmed - they will offer 5 hrHPV primary triage tests at 30, 35, 40, 50 and 60 and ONLY those positive will be offered a 5 yearly pap test. Only 5% of women at age 30 are HPV positive and at risk (but most will clear the virus within a year or two)
That means 95% of women don't need pap tests, they're not at risk from this cancer.
Those negative can follow the HPV program or test themselves using the Delphi Screener or if monogamous or no longer sexually active can forget all testing and revisit the subject if their risk profile changes in the future.
This program greatly reduces testing, false positives, excess biopsies and potentially harmful over-treatment.
It is also more likely to prevent these rare cancers, including the 50% of adenocarcinoma and 25% of squamous cell currently missed by our program.
I think women need to demand an independent review - why has our program been allowed to fall so far behind the evidence? Women are being tested and treated unnecessarily - women are being harmed by our program AND we may also be missing cancers that might have been prevented by hrHPV primary testing and the Delphi Screener.
The Delphi Screener has being used in the Netherlands and has just been launched in Singapore - it is also being looked at by several other countries. It is very important to know your HPV status - positive and you might benefit from 3 or 5 yearly pap testing, HPV negative and you're not currently at risk - you can re-test infrequently or if monogamous or no longer sexually active, forget all testing. The testing and over-treatment burden placed on women not even at risk has always been unacceptable - we didn't need to worry and harm so many (with serious over-screening) to help so few...but now there is no excuse at all. The delay in bringing our program up to date is inexcusable.

Report This Reply