Philip E. Castle

Bio: Philip E. Castle is an academic researcher from Albert Einstein College of Medicine. The author has contributed to research in topics: Cervical cancer & Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. The author has an hindex of 53, co-authored 265 publications receiving 9564 citations. Previous affiliations of Philip E. Castle include Durham University.

The Elevated 10-Year Risk of Cervical Precancer and Cancer in Women With Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Type 16 or 18 and the Possible Utility of Type-Specific HPV Testing in Clinical Practice

Abstract: Background: Human papillomavirus (HPV) types 16 and 18 cause 60% – 70% of cervical cancer worldwide, and other HPV types cause virtually all remaining cases. Pooled HPV testing for 13 oncogenic types, including HPV16 and 18, is currently used in clinical practice for triage of equivocal cytology and, in conjunction with Pap tests, is an option for general screening among women 30 years of age and older. It is not clear to what extent individual identifi cation of HPV16 or HPV18 as an adjunct to pooled oncogenic HPV testing might effectively identify women at particularly high risk of cervical cancer or its immediate precursor, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3 (CIN3). Methods: From April 1, 1989, to November 2, 1990, a total of 20 810 women in the Kaiser Permanente health plan in Portland, OR, enrolled in a cohort study of HPV and cervical neoplasia. Women were tested for 13 oncogenic HPV types by Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2), and those women with a positive HC2 test were tested for HPV16 and 18. Enrollment Pap smear interpretation and HPV test results were linked to histologically confi rmed CIN3 and cervical cancer ( ≥ CIN3) occurring during 10 years of cytologic follow-up. We calculated cumulative incidence rates with 95% confi dence intervals for each interval up to 122 months using Kaplan – Meier methods. Results: The 10-year cumulative incidence rates of ≥ CIN3 were 17.2% (95% confi dence interval [CI] = 11.5% to 22.9%) among HPV16+ women and 13.6% (95% CI = 3.6% to 23.7%) among HPV18+ (HPV16 − ) women, but only 3.0% (95% CI = 1.9% to 4.2%) among HC2+ women negative for HPV16 or HPV18. The 10-year cumulative incidence among HC2 − women was 0.8% (95% CI = 0.6% to 1.1%). A subanalysis among women 30 years of age and older with normal cytology at enrollment strengthened the observed risk differences. Conclusions: HPV screening that distinguishes HPV16 and HPV18 from other oncogenic HPV types may identify women at the greatest risk of ≥ CIN3 and may permit less aggressive management of other women with oncogenic HPV infections. [J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:1072 – 9]

Detecting cervical precancer and reaching underscreened women by using HPV testing on self samples: updated meta-analyses

Abstract: Objective To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) assays on self samples and the efficacy of self sampling strategies to reach underscreened women. Design Updated meta-analysis. Data sources Medline (PubMed), Embase, and CENTRAL from 1 January 2013 to 15 April 2018 (accuracy review), and 1 January 2014 to 15 April 2018 (participation review). Review methods Accuracy review: hrHPV assay on a vaginal self sample and a clinician sample; and verification of the presence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) by colposcopy and biopsy in all enrolled women or in women with positive tests. Participation review: study population included women who were irregularly or never screened; women in the self sampling arm (intervention arm) were invited to collect a self sample for hrHPV testing; women in the control arm were invited or reminded to undergo a screening test on a clinician sample; participation in both arms was documented; and a population minimum of 400 women. Results 56 accuracy studies and 25 participation trials were included. hrHPV assays based on polymerase chain reaction were as sensitive on self samples as on clinician samples to detect CIN2+ or CIN3+ (pooled ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.97 to 1.02). However, hrHPV assays based on signal amplification were less sensitive on self samples (pooled ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 0.89). The specificity to exclude CIN2+ was 2% or 4% lower on self samples than on clinician samples, for hrHPV assays based on polymerase chain reaction or signal amplification, respectively. Mailing self sample kits to the woman’s home address generated higher response rates to have a sample taken by a clinician than invitation or reminder letters (pooled relative participation in intention-to-treat-analysis of 2.33, 95% confidence interval 1.86 to 2.91). Opt-in strategies where women had to request a self sampling kit were generally not more effective than invitation letters (relative participation of 1.22, 95% confidence interval 0.93 to 1.61). Direct offer of self sampling devices to women in communities that were underscreened generated high participation rates (>75%). Substantial interstudy heterogeneity was noted (I2>95%). Conclusions When used with hrHPV assays based on polymerase chain reaction, testing on self samples was similarly accurate as on clinician samples. Offering self sampling kits generally is more effective in reaching underscreened women than sending invitations. However, since response rates are highly variable among settings, pilots should be set up before regional or national roll out of self sampling strategies.

A Prospective Study of High-Grade Cervical Neoplasia Risk Among Human Papillomavirus-Infected Women

Abstract: Background: In case-control studies, smoking, parity, and oral contraceptive use have been associated with an increased risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN3) and cervical cancer among women who are infected with oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV). However, these potential risk factors have not been adequately studied in prospective studies. Methods: We studied 1812 women who were enrolled in a 10-year prospective study of cervical neoplasia at Kaiser Permanente in Portland, Oregon, and who at enrollment had tested positive for oncogenic HPV DNA and had responded to a questionnaire that included questions on smoking, oral contraceptive use, and parity. Absolute risks and crude relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for CIN3 or cervical cancer were computed for three time intervals (0-8, 9-68, and 69-122 months after enrollment) using the Kaplan-Meier method. Conditional logistic regression models were used to control for factors that may have influenced our risk estimates, specifically the cytologic interpretation of baseline Pap smear, number of Pap smears during follow-up, age at enrollment, age at prediagnosis visit, and age at diagnosis. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Oral contraceptive use and parity were not associated with risk of CIN3 or cervical cancer. Former smokers, women who smoked less than one pack of cigarettes per day, and women who smoked one or more packs per day had crude RRs for CIN3 or cervical cancer for the entire follow-up period of 2.1 (95% CI = 1.1 to 3.9), 2.2 (95% CI = 1.2 to 4.2), and 2.9 (95% CI = 1.5 to 5.6), respectively, compared with never smokers. In the multivariable model, former smokers, women who smoked less than one pack/day, and women who smoked one or more packs/day had RRs of 3.3 (95% CI = 1.6 to 6.7), 2.9 (95% CI = 1.4 to 6.1), and 4.3 (95% CI = 2.0 to 9.3), respectively, for CIN3 or cervical cancer compared with never smokers. Conclusions: Smoking is associated with an increased risk of invasive cervical cancer in women who are infected with oncogenic HPV. Subsequent studies should examine the role of smoking in the multistage pathogenesis of cervical cancer.

A population-based prospective study of carcinogenic human papillomavirus variant lineages, viral persistence, and cervical neoplasia.

Abstract: Human papillomavirus (HPV) types differ profoundly in cervical carcinogenicity. For the most carcinogenic type HPV16, variant lineages representing further evolutionary divergence also differ in cancer risk. Variants of the remaining 10 to 15 carcinogenic HPV types have not been well studied. In the first prospective, population-based study of HPV variants, we explored whether, on average, the oldest evolutionary branches within each carcinogenic type predicted different risks of >2-year viral persistence and/or precancer and cancer [cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3+ (CIN3+)]. We examined the natural history of HPV variants in the 7-year, 10,049-woman Guanacaste Cohort Study, using a nested case-control design. Infections were assigned to a variant lineage determined by phylogenetic parsimony methods based on URR/E6 sequences. We used the Fisher's combination test to evaluate significance of the risk associations, cumulating evidence across types. Globally, for HPV types including HPV16, the P value was 0.01 for persistence and 0.07 for CIN3+. Excluding HPV16, the P values were 0.04 and 0.37, respectively. For HPV16, non-European viral variants were significantly more likely than European variants to cause persistence [odds ratio (OR), 2.6; P = 0.01] and CIN3+ (OR, 2.4; P = 0.004). HPV35 and HPV51 variant lineages also predicted CIN3+. HPV variants generally differ in risk of persistence. For some HPV types, especially HPV16, variant lineages differ in risk of CIN3+. The findings indicate that continued evolution of HPV types has led to even finer genetic discrimination linked to HPV natural history and cervical cancer risk. Larger viral genomic studies are warranted, especially to identify the genetic basis for HPV16's unique carcinogenicity.

Reassurance Against Future Risk of Precancer and Cancer Conferred by a Negative Human Papillomavirus Test

Abstract: Primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing (without concurrent Pap tests) every 3 years is under consideration in the United States as an alternative to the two recommended cervical cancer screening strategies: primary Pap testing every 3 years, or concurrent Pap and HPV testing ("cotesting") every 5 years. Using logistic regression and Weibull survival models, we estimated and compared risks of cancer and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) for the three strategies among 1011092 women aged 30 to 64 years testing HPV-negative and/or Pap-negative in routine screening at Kaiser Permanente Northern California since 2003. All statistical tests were two sided. Three-year risks following an HPV-negative result were lower than 3-year risks following a Pap-negative result (CIN3+ = 0.069% vs 0.19%, P < .0001; Cancer = 0.011% vs 0.020%, P < .0001) and 5-year risks following an HPV-negative/Pap-negative cotest (CIN3+ = 0.069% vs 0.11%, P < .0001; Cancer = 0.011% vs 0.014%, P = .21). These findings suggest that primary HPV testing merits consideration as another alternative for cervical screening.

Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries.

Abstract: This article provides an update on the global cancer burden using the GLOBOCAN 2020 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Worldwide, an estimated 19.3 million new cancer cases (18.1 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and almost 10.0 million cancer deaths (9.9 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) occurred in 2020. Female breast cancer has surpassed lung cancer as the most commonly diagnosed cancer, with an estimated 2.3 million new cases (11.7%), followed by lung (11.4%), colorectal (10.0 %), prostate (7.3%), and stomach (5.6%) cancers. Lung cancer remained the leading cause of cancer death, with an estimated 1.8 million deaths (18%), followed by colorectal (9.4%), liver (8.3%), stomach (7.7%), and female breast (6.9%) cancers. Overall incidence was from 2-fold to 3-fold higher in transitioned versus transitioning countries for both sexes, whereas mortality varied <2-fold for men and little for women. Death rates for female breast and cervical cancers, however, were considerably higher in transitioning versus transitioned countries (15.0 vs 12.8 per 100,000 and 12.4 vs 5.2 per 100,000, respectively). The global cancer burden is expected to be 28.4 million cases in 2040, a 47% rise from 2020, with a larger increase in transitioning (64% to 95%) versus transitioned (32% to 56%) countries due to demographic changes, although this may be further exacerbated by increasing risk factors associated with globalization and a growing economy. Efforts to build a sustainable infrastructure for the dissemination of cancer prevention measures and provision of cancer care in transitioning countries is critical for global cancer control.

Cancer statistics in China, 2015

Abstract: With increasing incidence and mortality, cancer is the leading cause of death in China and is a major public health problem. Because of China's massive population (1.37 billion), previous national incidence and mortality estimates have been limited to small samples of the population using data from the 1990s or based on a specific year. With high-quality data from an additional number of population-based registries now available through the National Central Cancer Registry of China, the authors analyzed data from 72 local, population-based cancer registries (2009-2011), representing 6.5% of the population, to estimate the number of new cases and cancer deaths for 2015. Data from 22 registries were used for trend analyses (2000-2011). The results indicated that an estimated 4292,000 new cancer cases and 2814,000 cancer deaths would occur in China in 2015, with lung cancer being the most common incident cancer and the leading cause of cancer death. Stomach, esophageal, and liver cancers were also commonly diagnosed and were identified as leading causes of cancer death. Residents of rural areas had significantly higher age-standardized (Segi population) incidence and mortality rates for all cancers combined than urban residents (213.6 per 100,000 vs 191.5 per 100,000 for incidence; 149.0 per 100,000 vs 109.5 per 100,000 for mortality, respectively). For all cancers combined, the incidence rates were stable during 2000 through 2011 for males (+0.2% per year; P = .1), whereas they increased significantly (+2.2% per year; P < .05) among females. In contrast, the mortality rates since 2006 have decreased significantly for both males (-1.4% per year; P < .05) and females (-1.1% per year; P < .05). Many of the estimated cancer cases and deaths can be prevented through reducing the prevalence of risk factors, while increasing the effectiveness of clinical care delivery, particularly for those living in rural areas and in disadvantaged populations.

Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness

Abstract: NUDGE: IMPROVING DECISIONS ABOUT HEALTH, WEALTH, AND HAPPINESS by Richard H. Thaler and Cass R. Sunstein Penguin Books, 2009, 312 pp, ISBN 978-0-14-311526-7This book is best described formally as a general explanation of and advocacy for libertarian paternalism, a term coined by the authors in earlier publications. Informally, it is about how leaders, systems, organizations, and governments can nudge people to do the things the nudgers want and need done for the betterment of the nudgees, or of society. It is paternalism in the sense that "it is legitimate for choice architects to try to influence people's behavior in order to make their lives longer, healthier, and better", (p. 5) It is libertarian in that "people should be free to do what they like - and to opt out of undesirable arrangements if they want to do so", (p. 5) The built-in possibility of opting out or making a different choice preserves freedom of choice even though people's behavior has been influenced by the nature of the presentation of the information or by the structure of the decisionmaking system. I had never heard of libertarian paternalism before reading this book, and I now find it fascinating.Written for a general audience, this book contains mostly social and behavioral science theory and models, but there is considerable discussion of structure and process that has roots in mathematical and quantitative modeling. One of the main applications of this social system is economic choice in investing, selecting and purchasing products and services, systems of taxes, banking (mortgages, borrowing, savings), and retirement systems. Other quantitative social choice systems discussed include environmental effects, health care plans, gambling, and organ donations. Softer issues that are also subject to a nudge-based approach are marriage, education, eating, drinking, smoking, influence, spread of information, and politics. There is something in this book for everyone.The basis for this libertarian paternalism concept is in the social theory called "science of choice", the study of the design and implementation of influence systems on various kinds of people. The terms Econs and Humans, are used to refer to people with either considerable or little rational decision-making talent, respectively. The various libertarian paternalism concepts and systems presented are tested and compared in light of these two types of people. Two foundational issues that this book has in common with another book, Network of Echoes: Imitation, Innovation and Invisible Leaders, that was also reviewed for this issue of the Journal are that 1 ) there are two modes of thinking (or components of the brain) - an automatic (intuitive) process and a reflective (rational) process and 2) the need for conformity and the desire for imitation are powerful forces in human behavior. …