http://healthy-women.bolady.com/just-wondering-how-much-an-i-at-risk-of-cervical-cancer-i-had-cin2-in-2000.html fitness tips, weight loss advice, beauty, nutrition,cancer Mon, 30 Aug 2010 07:12:12 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://healthy-women.bolady.com/just-wondering-how-much-an-i-at-risk-of-cervical-cancer-i-had-cin2-in-2000.html/comment-page-1#comment-52629 spanish mortgages Tue, 09 Feb 2010 02:39:33 +0000 http://healthy-women.bolady.com/just-wondering-how-much-an-i-at-risk-of-cervical-cancer-i-had-cin2-in-2000.html#comment-52629 Given your medical history, it would seem wise to have at least one pap smear annually. Three years is way too long. Consult with your doctor. Given your medical history, it would seem wise to have at least one pap smear annually. Three years is way too long. Consult with your doctor.

]]> http://healthy-women.bolady.com/just-wondering-how-much-an-i-at-risk-of-cervical-cancer-i-had-cin2-in-2000.html/comment-page-1#comment-52628 Blackbir Tue, 09 Feb 2010 00:57:36 +0000 http://healthy-women.bolady.com/just-wondering-how-much-an-i-at-risk-of-cervical-cancer-i-had-cin2-in-2000.html#comment-52628 where you not invited back for smears more regularly after your treatment? I have had CIN 3, i have got to go for a colposcopy soon again, smears every 6 months to begin with, then every year, only moving to every 3 years after 6 years. No, discharge is not necessarily a symptom of cancer, unless it smells. If you are worried, why don't you book in for a smear? It is the only way to put your mind at rest. When i had my Abnormal smear result, i had not had a smear for 9 years, if you had CIN 2, it could have reverted back to normal anyway, or taken several years to become CIN3, then on to cancer. CIN 2 does not go straight on to become cancer. do get a smear. where you not invited back for smears more regularly after your treatment? I have had CIN 3, i have got to go for a colposcopy soon again, smears every 6 months to begin with, then every year, only moving to every 3 years after 6 years. No, discharge is not necessarily a symptom of cancer, unless it smells. If you are worried, why don’t you book in for a smear? It is the only way to put your mind at rest. When i had my Abnormal smear result, i had not had a smear for 9 years, if you had CIN 2, it could have reverted back to normal anyway, or taken several years to become CIN3, then on to cancer. CIN 2 does not go straight on to become cancer. do get a smear.

]]> http://healthy-women.bolady.com/just-wondering-how-much-an-i-at-risk-of-cervical-cancer-i-had-cin2-in-2000.html/comment-page-1#comment-52627 Mary Boo Mon, 08 Feb 2010 23:51:40 +0000 http://healthy-women.bolady.com/just-wondering-how-much-an-i-at-risk-of-cervical-cancer-i-had-cin2-in-2000.html#comment-52627 I don't feel fully informed yet. I haven't looked at the clinical trial that brought its approval, and I also don't know if ACIP has weighed in with an opinion on its use or not. My first gloss impressions are: 1) It sounds expensive, so reimbursement is likely to be a big issue in the short term; 2) Aren't the same adults who miss getting Pap smears likely to be the ones who miss getting the vaccine, too (IE, uninsured working poor)? If so, I wonder how many cases of cervical CA it will prevent in the real world. Pap smears, if done appropriately at the right intervals, "prevent" cervical cancers very effectively. 3) If I understand correctly, the two HPV strains associated with CA in the vaccine account for 70% of cervical cancers; obviously, that means it doesn't cover the other 30%, right? The greatest utility would seem to be in pre/early adolescents who clearly have a low exposure rate pre-vaccination. I think it got approved for ages 9-26. Once again, though, those are largely uninformed impressions. I need to review the data much more thoroughly. It sounds to me like the big question will be COST-efficacy, not efficacy. I don’t feel fully informed yet. I haven’t looked at the clinical trial that brought its approval, and I also don’t know if ACIP has weighed in with an opinion on its use or not. My first gloss impressions are:
1) It sounds expensive, so reimbursement is likely to be a big issue in the short term;
2) Aren’t the same adults who miss getting Pap smears likely to be the ones who miss getting the vaccine, too (IE, uninsured working poor)? If so, I wonder how many cases of cervical CA it will prevent in the real world. Pap smears, if done appropriately at the right intervals, “prevent” cervical cancers very effectively.
3) If I understand correctly, the two HPV strains associated with CA in the vaccine account for 70% of cervical cancers; obviously, that means it doesn’t cover the other 30%, right?
The greatest utility would seem to be in pre/early adolescents who clearly have a low exposure rate pre-vaccination. I think it got approved for ages 9-26.
Once again, though, those are largely uninformed impressions. I need to review the data much more thoroughly. It sounds to me like the big question will be COST-efficacy, not efficacy.

]]>