Accuracy and cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening by high-risk human papillomavirus DNA testing of self-collected vaginal samples

Self-sampling for HPV testing in cervical cancer screening: A scoping review

Cervical cancer is the third most common gynecological cancer worldwide. Its origin is linked to intraepithelial lesions caused by high-risk Human Papillomavirus (HPV) types, detected in 99.7% of cases. Early screening is essential to prevent cancer development from these lesions. Molecular methods are more specific and offer the possibility of being performed through a self-collected sample by the patient, thus contributing to increasing screening coverage for this pathology. This study aim was to map the medical-scientific literature on existing protocols for self-sampling for HPV testing in cervical cancer screening. A search strategy was developed using the following keywords and their synonyms: "self-sampling," "professional sampling," and "HPV", on the databases: MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Virtual Health Library - BVS, Scopus, National Institute for Health Research NHS EED, Web of Science, and EMBASE. The search strategy was formulated to identify relevant studies and describe their main characteristics, such as patient acceptance of self-sampling, cost differences between the tests used, and the accuracy of self-sampling compared to the gold standard test. A total of 876 studies were found, and 33 of those studies were included in this review. Out of these, 10 studies were domized clinical trials involving 46,751 patients, and 23 observational studies included 142,795 patients. Regarding acceptance, most studies reported a preference for self-sampling. Sensitivity analyses from various studies also showed that the low cost of self-sampling kits generally increased cost-effectiveness. The study concluded that using HPV testing on self-collected samples is a viable strategy for monitoring women with HPV.

An intervention to increase cervical cancer screening among women living with HIV: A mixed methods study

OBJECTIVE

We examined the effectiveness of a behavioral intervention in promoting cervical cancer screening among women living with HIV (WLWH) in Ghana.

METHODS

A Mixed-methods study was conducted involving 83 WLWH, who were randomly assigned to an intervention group (n = 42) to receive voice-recorded messages based on the 3 R model (Reframing, Reprioritizing, and Reforming) or a control group (n = 41) to receive standard care. The primary outcomes were screening uptake and HPV prevalence. Other outcomes were the acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of the intervention.

RESULTS

The intervention group had a 100% screening rate, and the control group had a 14.63% screening rate. The prevalent rate of high-risk (hr)-HPV genotypes among the women was 67.5% (95%C.I: 0.56-0.77). Over 48% of the participants had multiple hr-HPV genotypes, 64.29% had HPV16/18/45%, and 73.21% had HPV 31/33/45/52/58. Of the women (89.30%) who screened positive, 60% of them were diagnosed and treated for pre-cancer lesions. The intervention messages were acceptable (encourage proactive behavior), feasible (simple, easy to understand), and appropriate (helpful, informative). Facilitators and barriers to self-sampling were identified.

CONCLUSION

Combining the 3 R model with self-sampling increases cervical cancer screening among WLWH.

PRACTICE IMPLICATION

Healthcare professionals and policymakers can use this model to increase cervical cancer screening.

Development of a cervical cancer prevention text-messaging program for women living with HIV

Cervical cancer screening and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination are critical for those immunocompromised due to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Health education programs, including text messaging, can effectively improve knowledge of cervical cancer and recommended screening. This paper describes the data-driven development of a 4-week text-messaging intervention to improve HPV and cervical cancer knowledge among women living with HIV (WLH). This study reports data from surveys (n = 81; January 2020 to September 2021) and focus group discussions (FGDs, n = 39; April-June 2020) conducted among WLH in the DC area. While most WLH revealed that their usual sources of health information were through in-person group sessions, they pointed out that these were impractical options due to the coronavirus 2019 pandemic. They noted that a text-messaging intervention was feasible and acceptable. FGD participants' responses structured around the Protection Motivation Theory constructs informed the text-messaging library, covering topics such as (I) understanding of cervical cancer and HPV, (II) cervical cancer prevention and (III) HPV self-sampling. The utilization of low-cost and easily accessible health education interventions, such as mobile-based text messaging, can effectively increase knowledge and awareness of cervical cancer in populations that have been historically difficult to access and during times when health services are disrupted such as during a global pandemic or public health emergency.

The acceptability of HPV vaginal self-sampling for cervical cancer screening in Latin America: A systematic review

Objective

This review summarizes women's acceptability of vaginal self-sampling for cervical cancer screening in Latin America.

Study design

Systematic review.

Method

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase regarding the acceptance of HPV vaginal self-sampling by women over 18 years old. Articles were selected for research that was conducted in Latin America and published between January 1st, 1993, and December 31st, 2022.

Results

Fifteen publications were included. Eight publications reported an acceptance of HPV self-sampling as high as 80%, six papers found an acceptance rate between 50 and 80% and only one found an acceptance rate of less than 50%. Based on non-standardized questionnaires, women considered self-sampling more comfortable, easier, and less painful than conventional cytology. The procedure was associated with less embarrassment and a greater sense of privacy.

Conclusion

HPV vaginal-self sampling appears to be an acceptable screening method amongst eligible Latin American women.

Proteomic analysis of small extracellular vesicles unique to cervical cancer

Background

Cervical cancer (CC) is the fourth most common cancer in females worldwide. Existing biomarkers for CC, such as squamous cell carcinoma antigens, show low specificity. Hence, a novel biomarker for the diagnosis of CC is required. Through proteomic analysis, this study aimed to distinguish between the small extracellular vesicle (sEV) protein profiles of healthy controls (HC) and CC sera and to identify potential sEV proteins that can serve as biomarkers for CC diagnosis.

Methods

The number and size distribution of sEVs in HC and CC sera were measured using nanoparticle tracking analysis. Differential ultracentrifugation combined with size-exclusion chromatography was used to isolate and purify sEVs. Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry was used to identify and compare the protein profiles between patients with CC and HC. Differentially expressed extracellular vesicle (EV) proteins were validated using The Cancer Genome Atlas database.

Results

The EV particle concentration in patients with CC was marginally higher than that in HC. Proteomic and functional protein analyses revealed a difference in the EV protein profiles between HC and CC and identified proteins that can serve as biomarkers for CC.

Conclusions

This study provides insights into the potential of sEVs as less invasive biomarkers for CC diagnosis. Validation with a well-designed cohort should be performed to determine the clinical diagnostic value of specific protein markers for CC.

Exploring factors associated with preferences for human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling among racially- and ethnically-diverse women in Minnesota: A cross-sectional study

Pap tests are still underutilized by minority women due to limited awareness of cervical cancer screening (CCS), inadequate health care access, and cultural or religious beliefs. Human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling, a new CCS tool, has demonstrated potential to overcome some of these barriers. In 2021, women aged 30-65 years old were recruited across Minnesota to complete an online survey. The survey assessed five outcome measures related to HPV self-sampling: (1) awareness of test; (2) self-efficacy to conduct test; (3) location preference of test (clinic vs. home); 4) collector preference (self vs. clinician); and (5) preference of CCS strategy (HPV self-sampling vs. Pap test). Modified Poisson regressions tested associations between sociodemographic variables and outcomes. A total of 420 women completed the survey, of which 32.4% identified as Non-Hispanic white, 22.2% as Hispanic, 12.6% as Black/African-American, 28.3% as Asian, 1.9% as American Indian/Alaskan Native, and 1.4% as more than two races. Few women had heard of HPV self-sampling (6.5%), but a majority reported high self-efficacy to perform self-sampling (75.3%). Women also reported higher preferences for completing an HPV test in the clinic (52.2%) and for performing a self-collected HPV test themselves (58.7%), yet would choose a traditional Pap test over HPV self-sampling (56.0%). The low level of HPV self-sampling awareness, across all racial/ethnic groups, suggests a strong opportunity to promote widespread educational efforts around this new tool. Future HPV self-sampling research efforts should examine educational interventions targeted at healthcare providers to educate and encourage women on the importance of self-collection options.

Intervention to Increase Cervical Cancer Screening Behavior among Medically Underserved Women: Effectiveness of 3R Communication Model

Human Papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling has the potential to increase Cervical Cancer Screening (CCS) and reduce the cervical cancer burden in Medically Underserved Women (MUW). However, interventions promoting self-sampling are limited. We examined the effectiveness of an intervention study in increasing CCS among MUW. We conducted a quasi-experimental intervention study. A face-to-face verbal approach was used to recruit MUW (n = 83, mean age 48.57 ± 11.02) living in a small city in the US. Behavioral intervention based on reframing, reprioritizing, and reforming (3R model) was used to educate the women about CCS in a group format. The women (n = 83) completed pre-and post-intervention assessments, and 10 of them were invited for follow-up interviews. The primary outcome was CCS uptake. Mixed methods analyses were conducted using a t-test for the primary outcome, PROCESS for mediation analysis, and NVivo for interview data. The majority of women (75%) completed self-testing. High-risk HPV among women was 11%, and of those, 57% followed up with physicians for care. We found that the significant increase in the women's post-intervention screening behaviors was mediated by the increase in knowledge (Indirect Effect [IE] = 0.1314; 95% CI, 0.0104, 0.4079) and attitude (IE = 0.2167; 95% CI, 0.0291, 0.6050) scores, (p < 0.001). Interview analyses offered further explanations why MUW found the intervention messages acceptable (encourages proactive behavior), feasible (simple and easy to understand), and appropriate (helpful and informative). Barriers, including lack of trust and fear of results, were identified. The findings suggest that an intervention that combines the 3R model and self-sampling may increase CCS among MUW.

Health care personnel's perspectives on human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling for cervical cancer screening: a pre-implementation, qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Persistent infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) types is a well-documented cause of cervical cancer. Since the implementation of cervical cancer screening methods (e.g., Pap tests), cervical cancer rates have declined. However, Pap tests are still unacceptable to many women and require complex infrastructure and training. Self-sampling techniques for collecting HPV specimens (or "HPV self-sampling") have been proposed as a possible alternative to overcome these barriers. The objective of this study was to capture perspectives from health care personnel (providers, leaders, and clinic staff) across primary care systems on the potential implementation of an HPV self-sampling practice.

METHODS

Between May and July 2021, a study invitation was emailed to various health care professional networks across the Midwest, including a snowball sampling of these networks. Eligible participants were invited to a 45-60-min Zoom-recorded interview session and asked to complete a pre-interview survey. The survey collected sociodemographics on age, occupation, level of educational attainment, race/ethnicity, gender, and awareness of HPV self-sampling. The semi-structured interview was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and asked participants about their views on HPV self-sampling and its potential implementation. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using NVivo 12.

RESULTS

Key informant interviews were conducted with thirty health care personnel-13 health care providers, 6 clinic staff, and 11 health care leaders-from various health care systems. Most participants had not heard of HPV self-sampling but reported a general enthusiasm for wanting to implement it as an alternative cervical cancer screening tool. Possible barriers to implementation were knowledge of clinical evidence and ease of integration into existing clinic workflows. Potential facilitators included the previous adoption of similar self-sampling tools (e.g., stool-based testing kits) and key decision-makers.

CONCLUSION

Although support for HPV self-sampling is growing, its intervention's characteristics (e.g., advantages, adaptability) and the evidence of its clinical efficacy and feasibility need to be better disseminated across US primary care settings and its potential adopters. Future research is also needed to support the integration of HPV self-sampling within various delivery modalities (mail-based vs. clinic-based).

Comparison of the performance of HPV DNA chip test and HPV PCR test in cervical cancer screening in rural China

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the performance of two different principles of HPV testing in primary cervical cancer screening and ASC-US triage in rural areas.

METHODS

3,328 and 3,913 women were enrolled in Shanxi, China in 2017 and 2018, respectively, and screened using liquid-based cytology and different HPV tests with a 4-year follow-up. Different screening methods commonly used in clinical practice were evaluated.

RESULTS

In the HPV PCR test cohort, the prevalence of HPV infection was 14.90%. A total of 38 cases of CIN2+ were identified at baseline, 2 of which were in the HPV-negative cohort and the rest in the HPV-positive cohort (2 = 186.85, p < 0.001). Fifty-three cases of CIN2+ were accumulated over 4 years. The HPV infection rate in the HPV DNA chip test cohort was 21.10%. A total of 26 CIN2+ cases were identified at baseline, all in the HPV-positive population (2 = 92.96, p < 0.001). 54 CIN2+ cases were cumulative over 4 years. At 4-year follow-up, HPV-negative results were significantly more protective against cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) than normal cytologic results at baseline. HPV screening was more sensitive and specific than cytologic screening (using ASC-US as the threshold) and performed better on the HPV DNA microarray test. In addition, compared with HPV 16/18 testing, sensitivity increases and specificity decreases when using HPV testing for cytologic ASC-US triage, regardless of which HPV test is used.

CONCLUSION

In the rural areas where we implemented the study, HPV tests performed well for screening than LBC and HPV DNA chip testing performed better than HPV PCR testing in the screening cohort. Optimal screening was achieved technically when used in combination with LBC for ASC-US population triage, without thinking the feasibility for resource availability.

HPV Self-Sampling for Cervical Cancer Screening among Women Living with HIV in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: What Do We Know and What Can Be Done?

INTRODUCTION

Self-sampling has the potential to increase cervical cancer (CC) screening among women with HIV in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, our understanding of how HPV self-collection studies have been conducted in women with HIV is limited. The purpose of this scoping review was to examine the extent to which the HPV self-sampling has been applied among women with HIV in LMICs.

METHOD

We conducted multiple searches in several databases for articles published between 2000 and January 2022. With the combination of keywords relating to HPV self-sampling, LMICs, and women with HIV, we retrieved over 9000 articles. We used pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria to select relevant studies for this review. Once a study met the inclusion criteria, we created a table to extract each study's characteristics and classified them under common themes. We used a qualitative descriptive approach to summarize the scoping results.

RESULTS

A total of 12 articles were included in the final review. Overall, 3178 women were enrolled in those studies and 2105 (66%) of them were women with HIV. The self-sampling participation rate was 92.6%. The findings of our study show that 43% of the women with HIV in 8 of the studies reviewed tested positive for high-risk HPV (hr-HPV) genotypes, indicating 4 out of 10 women with HIV in the studies are at risk of cervical cancer. The prevalence of the hr-HPV in women with HIV was 18% higher than that of HIV-negative women. Most women in the study found the self-sampling experience acceptable, easy to use, convenient, and comfortable. Self-sampling performance in detecting hr-HPV genotypes is comparable to clinician-performed sampling. However, limited access (i.e., affordability, availability, transportation), limited knowledge about self-screening, doubts about the credibility of self-sampling results, and stigma remain barriers to the wide acceptance and implementation of self-sampling. In conclusion, the findings of this review highlight that (a) the prevalence of hr-HPV is higher among women with HIV than HIV-negative women, (b) self-sampling laboratory performance is similar to clinician-performed sampling, (c) the majority of the women participated in self-sampling, which could likely increase the cervical cancer screening uptake, and (d) women with HIV reported a positive experience with self-sampling. However, personal, environmental, and structural barriers challenge the application of self-sampling in LMICs, and these need to be addressed.

Detection of Host Cell Gene/HPV DNA Methylation Markers: A Promising Triage Approach for Cervical Cancer

Cervical cancer is the most prevalent gynecologic malignancy, especially in women of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). With a better understanding of the etiology and pathogenesis of cervical cancer, it has been well accepted that this type of cancer can be prevented and treated via early screening. Due to its higher sensitivity than cytology to identify precursor lesions of cervical cancer, detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) DNA has been implemented as the primary screening approach. However, a high referral rate for colposcopy after HR-HPV DNA detection due to its low specificity in HR-HPV screening often leads to overtreatment and thus increases the healthcare burden. Emerging evidence has demonstrated that detection of host cell gene and/or HPV DNA methylation represents a promising approach for the early triage of cervical cancer in HR-HPV-positive women owing to its convenience and comparable performance to cytology, particularly in LMICs with limited healthcare resources. While numerous potential markers involving DNA methylation of host cell genes and the HPV genome have been identified thus far, it is crucial to define which genes or panels involving host and/or HPV are feasible and appropriate for large-scale screening and triage. An ideal approach for screening and triage of CIN/ICC requires high sensitivity and adequate specificity and is suitable for self-sampling and inexpensive to allow population-based screening, particularly in LMICs. In this review, we summarize the markers of host cell gene/HR-HPV DNA methylation and discuss their triage performance and feasibility for high-grade precancerous cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or worse (CIN2+ and CIN3+) in HR-HPV-positive women.

Switching clinic-based cervical cancer screening programs to human papillomavirus self-sampling: A cost-effectiveness analysis of vaccinated and unvaccinated Norwegian women

Several countries have implemented primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical cancer screening. HPV testing enables home-based, self-collected sampling (self-sampling), which provides similar diagnostic accuracy as clinician-collected samples. We evaluated the impact and cost-effectiveness of switching an entire organized screening program to primary HPV self-sampling among cohorts of HPV vaccinated and unvaccinated Norwegian women. We conducted a model-based analysis to project long-term health and economic outcomes for birth cohorts with different HPV vaccine exposure, that is, preadolescent vaccination (2000- and 2008-cohorts), multiage cohort vaccination (1991-cohort) or no vaccination (1985-cohort). We compared the cost-effectiveness of switching current guidelines with clinician-collected HPV testing to HPV self-sampling for these cohorts and considered an additional 44 strategies involving either HPV self-sampling or clinician-collected HPV testing at different screening frequencies for the 2000- and 2008-cohorts. Given Norwegian benchmarks for cost-effectiveness, we considered a strategy with an additional cost per quality-adjusted life-year below $55 000 as cost-effective. HPV self-sampling strategies considerably reduced screening costs (ie, by 24%-40% across cohorts and alternative strategies) and were more cost-effective than clinician-collected HPV testing. For cohorts offered preadolescent vaccination, cost-effective strategies involved HPV self-sampling three times (2000-cohort) and twice (2008-cohort) per lifetime. In conclusion, we found that switching from clinician-collected to self-collected HPV testing in cervical screening may be cost-effective among both highly vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts of Norwegian women.

Cervical Cancer Prevention and High-Risk HPV Self-Sampling Awareness and Acceptability among Women Living with HIV: A Qualitative Investigation from the Patients’ and Providers’ Perspectives

Routine cervical cancer screening is important for women living with HIV (WLH) due to the greater incidence and persistence of high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) infection. HR-HPV self-sampling has been proposed to overcome barriers to in-office cervical cancer screening in underserved populations. However, little is known about baseline knowledge of HR-HPV and the acceptability of HR-HPV self-sampling among WLH. This paper describes WLH’s experiences and needs regarding cervical cancer screening, specifically HR-HPV self-sampling, and seeks to reconcile their experiences with the views of their providers. In total, 10 providers and 39 WLH participated in semi-structured interviews and group discussions, respectively. Knowledge of cervical cancer and HR-HPV was generally limited among WLH; when present, it was often due to personal experience of or proximity to someone affected by cervical cancer. Most WLH were not familiar with HR-HPV self-sampling but, despite some of the providers’ skepticism, expressed their willingness to participate in a mail-based HR-HPV self-sampling intervention and highlighted convenience, ease of use, and affordability as facilitators to the uptake of HR-HPV self-sampling. The experiences identified can be used to guide patient-centered communication aimed at improving cervical cancer knowledge and to inform interventions, such as HR-HPV self-sampling, designed to increase cervical cancer screening among under-screened WLH.

Comparative accuracy of cervical cancer screening strategies in healthy asymptomatic women: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

To compare all available accuracy data on screening strategies for identifying cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade ≥ 2 in healthy asymptomatic women, we performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched up to October 2020 for paired-design studies of cytology and testing for high-risk genotypes of human papillomavirus (hrHPV). The methods used included a duplicate assessment of eligibility, double extraction of quantitative data, validity assessment, random-effects network meta-analysis of test accuracy, and GRADE rating. Twenty-seven prospective studies (185,269 subjects) were included. The combination of cytology (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or higher grades) and hrHPV testing (excepting genotyping for HPV 16 or 18 [HPV16/18]) with the either-positive criterion (OR rule) was the most sensitive/least specific, whereas the same combination with the both-positive criterion (AND rule) was the most specific/least sensitive. Compared with standalone cytology, non-HPV16/18 hrHPV assays were more sensitive/less specific. Two algorithms proposed for primary cytological testing or primary hrHPV testing were ranked in the middle as more sensitive/less specific than standalone cytology and the AND rule combinations but more specific/less sensitive than standalone hrHPV testing and the OR rule combination. Further research is needed to assess these results in population-relevant outcomes at the program level.

Cost-effectiveness studies of HPV self-sampling: A systematic review

HPV self-sampling (HPV-SS) can increase cervical cancer screening participation by addressing barriers in high- and low- and middle-income settings. Successful implementation of HPV-SS programs will depend on understanding potential costs and health effects. Our objectives were to summarize the methods and results of published HPV-SS cost and cost-effectiveness studies, present implications of these results for HPV-SS program implementation, and identify knowledge gaps. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. One reviewer searched online databases for articles published through June 12, 2019, identified eligible studies, and extracted data; a second reviewer checked extracted data for accuracy. Eligible studies used an economic model to compare HPV-SS outreach strategies to standard-of-care tests. Of 16 eligible studies, 14 reported HPV-SS could be a cost-effective strategy. Studies differed in model type, HPV-SS delivery methods, triage strategies for positive results, and target populations. Most (9/16) modeled HPV-SS in European screening programs, 6/16 targeted women who were underscreened for cervical cancer, and 5/16 modeled HPV-SS in low- and middle-income countries. The most commonly identified driver of HPV-SS cost-effectiveness was the level of increase in cervical cancer screening attendance. Lower HPV-SS material and testing costs, higher sensitivity to detect cervical precancer, and longer duration of underscreening among HPV-SS users were also associated with increased cost-effectiveness. Future HPV-SS models in high-income settings should explore the effect of widespread vaccination and new triage strategies such as partial HPV genotyping. Knowledge gaps remain about the cost-effectiveness of HPV-SS in low- and middle-income settings.

Cost-Effectiveness of Cancer Screening: Health and Costs in Life Years Gained

INTRODUCTION

Studies reporting on the cost-effectiveness of cancer screening usually account for quality of life losses and healthcare costs owing to cancer but do not account for future costs and quality of life losses related to competing risks. This study aims to demonstrate the impact of medical costs and quality of life losses of other diseases in the life years gained on the cost-effectiveness of U.S. cancer screening.

METHODS

Cost-effectiveness studies of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening in the U.S. were identified using a systematic literature review. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of the eligible articles were updated by adding lifetime expenditures and health losses per quality-adjusted life year gained because of competing risks. This was accomplished using data on medical spending and quality of life by age and disease from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2011-2015) combined with cause-deleted life tables. The study was conducted in 2018.

RESULTS

The impact of quality of life losses and healthcare expenditures of competing risks in life years gained incurred owing to screening were the highest for breast cancer and the lowest for cervical cancer. The updates suggest that incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are underestimated by $10,300-$13,700 per quality-adjusted life year gained if quality of life losses and healthcare expenditures of competing risks are omitted in economic evaluations. Furthermore, cancer screening programs that were considered cost saving, were found not to be so following the inclusion of medical expenditures of competing risks.

CONCLUSIONS

Practical difficulties in quantifying quality of life losses and healthcare expenditures owing to competing risks in life years gained can be overcome. Their inclusion can have a substantial impact on the cost-effectiveness of cancer screening programs.

Acceptability and Feasibility of Community-Based, Lay Navigator-Facilitated At-Home Self-Collection for Human Papillomavirus Testing in Underscreened Women

Objective: Women without regular health care providers or a medical home routinely fail to complete recommended cervical cancer screening. At-home self-collection of samples to test for high-risk strains of human papillomavirus (hrHPV) can improve screening rates. This study documents acceptability and feasibility of community lay navigator (LN)-facilitated at-home self-collection for underscreened women in Appalachian Virginia. Materials and Methods: This study used mixed methods in three phases. Phase I involved focus groups of LNs to ensure cultural acceptability of self-collection, and to enhance recruitment of medically underserved women. An environmental scan of community resources and climate was created in Phase II. During Phase III, underscreened women in Appalachian Virginia (the far southwest corner of Virginia) were recruited to complete hrHPV testing using LN-provided self-collection kits. Results: LN-facilitated at-home self-collection for HPV testing was deemed culturally acceptable and feasible to participants in this community-based pilot study. Self-kit training included 64 LNs, of which 35 engaged in the study and were provided 77 kits and instructions. A total of 59 self-kits were returned, of which 42 were correctly completed with valid HPV results, yielding a 16.6% hrHPV rate. Conclusions: Over a quarter of the women LNs recruited had no medical home, indicating this delivery model may have potential to reach women at increased risk of being underscreened for cervical cancer. Research is needed to identify optimal approaches to increase LN participation in outreach self-collection interventions.

Prevention of Cervical Cancer: Guideline of the DGGG and the DKG (S3 Level, AWMF Register Number 015/027OL, December 2017) - Part 2 on Triage, Treatment and Follow-up

Aims Annual opportunistic screening for cervical carcinoma has been done in Germany since 1971. The creation of this S3 guideline meets an important need, outlined in the National Cancer Plan, with regard to screening for cervical cancer, as this guideline aims to provide important information and support for planned organized screening for cervical cancer in Germany. Methods With the financial support of German Cancer Aid, 21 professional societies developed evidence-based statements and recommendations (classified using the GRADE system) for the screening, management and treatment of precancerous conditions of the cervix. Two independent scientific institutes compiled systematic reviews for this guideline. Recommendations The second part of this short summary deals with the triage, treatment and follow-up care of cervical dysplasia. With regard to those women who do not participate in screening, the guideline authors recommend sending out repeat invitation letters or an HPV self-collection kit. Colposcopy should be carried out for further investigation if cytology findings are Pap II-p and HPV test results are positive or if the results of an HPV 16 or HPV 18 screening test are positive. A single abnormal Pap smear should be triaged and investigated using HPV testing or p16/Ki67 dual staining.

[New strategies for the prevention and control of cervical cancer in Chile.]

OBJECTIVE

To discuss cervical cancer (CC), Human PapillomaVirus (HPV),CC control program and propose alternatives for Chile.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed the national program of CC 1966-2015 and the clinical CC guideline 2015-2020;HPV prevalence in women and in cases of CC; HPV infection and serology; the self-vaginal sample; the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of screening with HPV versus Papanicolaou,and triage options among HPV-AR positives.

RESULTS

600 women die of CC each year in Chile, mainly from low resources. Papanicolaou coverage is <70%; Papanicolaou sensitivity is much lowerthan HPV test.Change from Papanicolaou to HPV test is cost-effective. Since 2015, girls under 13 have been vaccinated against HPV.

CONCLUSIONS

.There are the technical and economic conditions for a substantial improvement of CC in Chile: replacement of the Papanicolaou by HPV; screening every five years, with the option of self-sampling, and triage based on HPV 16/18 or Papanicolaou typing.

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

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.

Simple but not simpler: a systematic review of Markov models for economic evaluation of cervical cancer screening

The aim of this study was to critically evaluate the quality of the models used in economic evaluations of screening strategies for cervical cancer prevention. We systematically searched multiple databases, selecting model-based full economic evaluations (cost-effectiveness analyses, cost-utility analyses, and cost-benefit analyses) of cervical cancer screening strategies. Two independent reviewers screened articles for relevance and performed data extraction. Methodological assessment of the quality of the models utilized formal checklists, and a qualitative narrative synthesis was performed. Thirty-eight articles were reviewed. The majority of the studies were conducted in high-income countries (82%, n=31). The Pap test was the most used screening strategy investigated, which was present in 86% (n=33) of the studies. Half of the studies (n=19) used a previously published Markov model. The deterministic sensitivity analysis was performed in 92% (n=35) of the studies. The mean number of properly reported checklist items was 9 out of the maximum possible 18. Items that were better reported included the statement of decision problem, the description of the strategies/comparators, the statement of time horizon, and information regarding the disease states. Compliance with some items of the checklist was poor. The Markov models for economic evaluation of screening strategies for cervical cancer varied in quality. The following points require improvement: 1) assessment of methodological, structural, heterogeneity, and parameter uncertainties; 2) model type and cycle length justification; 3) methods to account for heterogeneity; and 4) report of consistency evaluation (through calibration and validation methods).

Quality of life assumptions determine which cervical cancer screening strategies are cost-effective

Quality-adjusted life years are used in cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs). To calculate QALYs, a "utility" (0-1) is used for each health state induced or prevented by the intervention. We aimed to estimate the impact of quality of life (QoL) assumptions (utilities and durations of health states) on CEAs of cervical cancer screening. To do so, 12 alternative sets of utility assumptions were retrieved from published cervical cancer screening CEAs. Two additional sets were based on empirical QoL data that were integrally obtained through two different measures (SF-6D and EQ-5D) from eight groups of women (total n = 3,087), from invitation for screening to diagnosis with cervical cancer. Per utility set we calculated the number of quality-adjusted days lost (QADL) for each relevant health state in cervical cancer screening, by multiplying the study-specific assumed disutilities (i.e., 1-utility) with study-specific durations of the loss in QoL, resulting in 14 "QADL-sets." With microsimulation model MISCAN we calculated cost-effectiveness of 342 alternative screening programs (varying in primary screening test [Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vs. cytology], starting ages, and screening interval) for each of the 14 QADL-sets. Utilities used in CEAs appeared to differ largely. We found that ten QADL-sets from the literature resulted in HPV and two in cytology as preferred primary test. The SF-6D empirical QADL-set resulted in cytology and the EQ-5D one in HPV as preferred primary test. In conclusion, assumed utilities and health state durations determine cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening. Also, the measure used to empirically assess utilities can be crucial for CEA conclusions.

Barriers to HPV self-sampling and cytology among low-income indigenous women in rural areas of a middle-income setting: a qualitative study

Background

Data is needed about barriers to self-collection of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) samples and cytology among low-income, disadvantaged women living in rural areas of lower-income countries as these women are at increased risk of cervical cancer mortality.

Methods

Individual interviews (n = 29), focus groups (n = 7, 5–11 participants) and discussion groups (n = 2, 18–25 participants) were organized with women from three indigenous ethnic groups residing in rural areas in Mexico, after they were provided with free, self-sampled HPV tests. These groups are low-income, underserved by healthcare and have historically been on the receiving end of racism and social exclusion. Descriptive, qualitative content analysis was done, including two cycles of coding.

Results

Interview and focus/discussion group data indicate women had limited understanding of HPV’s role in cervical cancer etiology. They identified HPV’s existence, that cytology detects cervical cancer, the need for regular testing and that cervical cancer is sexually transmitted. Organizational barriers to clinic-based cytology included irregular supplies of disposable speculums, distance to clinics and lack of clear communication by healthcare personnel. Women considered self-collected HPV-testing easy, less embarrassing and less painful than cytology, an opportunity for self-care and most felt they understood how to take a self-sample after a 20-min explanation. Some women feared hurting themselves when taking the self-sample or that they would take the sample incorrectly, which they worried would make the test useless. Attending HPV-testing in groups facilitated use by allowing women to discuss their doubts and fears before doing self-collection of the sample or to ask other women who were the first to do the self-sampling what the experience had been like (whether it hurt and how easy it was). Lack of indoor bathrooms was a barrier to doing HPV self-sampling at home, when those homes were resource-poor (one-room dwellings).

Conclusions

Low-income, indigenous Mexican women residing in rural, underserved areas identified their need for cervical cancer screening but encountered multiple barriers to cytology-based screening. They found a number of advantages of HPV self-sampled tests. Employing self-collected HPV-testing instead of cytology could resolve some but not all gender-related, organizational or technical quality-of-care issues within cervical cancer detection and control programs.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-017-3723-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Rationale and design of the HOME trial: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of home-based human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling for increasing cervical cancer screening uptake and effectiveness in a U.S. healthcare system

Women who delay or do not attend Papanicolaou (Pap) screening are at increased risk for cervical cancer. Trials in countries with organized screening programs have demonstrated that mailing high-risk (hr) human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling kits to under-screened women increases participation, but U.S. data are lacking. HOME is a pragmatic randomized controlled trial set within a U.S. integrated healthcare delivery system to compare two programmatic approaches for increasing cervical cancer screening uptake and effectiveness in under-screened women (>3.4years since last Pap) aged 30-64years: 1) usual care (annual patient reminders and ad hoc outreach by clinics) and 2) usual care plus mailed hrHPV self-screening kits. Over 2.5years, eligible women were identified through electronic medical record (EMR) data and randomized 1:1 to the intervention or control arm. Women in the intervention arm were mailed kits with pre-paid envelopes to return samples to the central clinical laboratory for hrHPV testing. Results were documented in the EMR to notify women's primary care providers of appropriate follow-up. Primary outcomes are detection and treatment of cervical neoplasia. Secondary outcomes are cervical cancer screening uptake, abnormal screening results, and women's experiences and attitudes towards hrHPV self-sampling and follow-up of hrHPV-positive results (measured through surveys and interviews). The trial was designed to evaluate whether a programmatic strategy incorporating hrHPV self-sampling is effective in promoting adherence to the complete screening process (including follow-up of abnormal screening results and treatment). The objective of this report is to describe the rationale and design of this pragmatic trial.

Using a multimethod approach to develop implementation strategies for a cervical self-sampling program in Kenya

BACKGROUND

Numerous health policy makers/researchers are concerned about the limitations of research being applied to support informed decision/policy making and the implementation of practical solutions. The aim of the Chaguo Letu project (which means our choice in Swahili) was to determine how local decision makers could apply a multimethod approach to make strategic decisions to effectively implement a Cervical Self-Sampling Program in Kenya.

METHODS

A multimethod approach, involving participatory action research, scenario based planning, and phenomenology, was applied in conjunction with two tools to identify relevant factors (negative or positive) that could impact Cervical Self-Sampling Program implementation. A total of 107 stakeholders participated in interviews, focus groups, workshops, and informal interactions. Content analysis, an affinity exercise, and impact analysis were used to analyze data and develop robust strategic directions and supporting implementation strategies.

RESULTS

A total of 57 factors thought to impact the implementation of the Cervical Self-Sampling Program were identified and grouped into 13 thematic categories. These themes were instrumental in developing 10 strategic directions and 22 implementation strategies deemed necessary to implement a technically viable, politically supported, affordable, logistically feasible, socially acceptable, and transformative Program.

CONCLUSIONS

This study made three conclusions: 1) there is political will and a desire to improve cervical screening across Kenya, but in a period of dynamic change resources are constrained; 2) implementing the Program in urban/rural settings is logistically feasible, but the majority of Kenyan women could not afford screening without some form of a subsidy, and 3) self-sampling is perceived to be much more socially acceptable than the current Pap screening process. The Chaguo Letu study went beyond the traditional strategy development process of determining "what" needs to do done by describing in detail "how" the Program should be implemented to be relevant and accessible to all Kenyan women at risk of cervical cancer. This work could potentially facilitate communities of practice and knowledge sharing when addressing other types of health decisions in other low resource settings beyond Kenya.

Acceptability and Feasibility of Human Papilloma Virus Self-Sampling for Cervical Cancer Screening

OBJECTIVES

Women in safety-net institutions are less likely to receive cervical cancer screening. Human papilloma virus (HPV) self-sampling is an alternative method of cervical cancer screening. We examine the acceptability and feasibility of HPV self-sampling among patients and clinic staff in two safety-net clinics in Miami.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Haitian and Latina women aged 30-65 years with no Pap smear in the past 3 years were recruited. Women were offered HPV self-sampling or traditional Pap smear screening. The acceptability of HPV self-sampling among patients and clinic staff was assessed. If traditional screening was preferred the medical record was reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 180 women were recruited (134 Latinas and 46 Haitian). HPV self-sampling was selected by 67% women. Among those selecting traditional screening, 22% were not screened 5 months postrecruitment. Over 80% of women agreed HPV self-sampling was faster, more private, easy to use, and would prefer to use again. Among clinic staff, 80% agreed they would be willing to incorporate HPV self-sampling into practice.

CONCLUSIONS

HPV self-sampling was both acceptable and feasible to participants and clinic staff and may help overcome barriers to screening.

Beware of Kinked Frontiers: A Systematic Review of the Choice of Comparator Strategies in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Human Papillomavirus Testing in Cervical Screening

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the choice of comparator strategies in cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of human papillomavirus testing in cervical screening.

METHODS

The PubMed, Web of Knowledge, and Scopus databases were searched to identify eligible model-based CEAs of cervical screening programs using human papillomavirus testing. The eligible CEAs were reviewed to investigate what screening strategies were chosen for analysis and how this choice might have influenced estimates of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Selected examples from the reviewed studies are presented to illustrate how the omission of relevant comparators might influence estimates of screening cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

The search identified 30 eligible CEAs. The omission of relevant comparator strategies appears likely in 18 studies. The ICER estimates in these cases are probably lower than would be estimated had more comparators been included. Five of the 30 studies restricted relevant comparator strategies to sensitivity analyses or other subanalyses not part of the principal base-case analysis. Such exclusion of relevant strategies from the base-case analysis can result in cost-ineffective strategies being identified as cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Many of the CEAs reviewed appear to include insufficient comparator strategies. In particular, they omit strategies with relatively long screening intervals. Omitting relevant comparators matters particularly if it leads to the underestimation of ICERs for strategies around the cost-effectiveness threshold because these strategies are the most policy relevant from the CEA perspective. Consequently, such CEAs may not be providing the best possible policy guidance and lead to the mistaken adoption of cost-ineffective screening strategies.

Perceptions of mailed HPV self-testing among women at higher risk for cervical cancer

Whether human papillomavirus (HPV) self-testing can expand access to cervical cancer screening will depend on making the test accessible and acceptable to higher-risk women. To evaluate a novel delivery mode, we mailed HPV self-test kits to low-income, under-screened women and assessed their perceptions of self-testing and cervical cancer prevention. We conducted a telephone survey of 199 women in North Carolina. Eligibility criteria included not having had a Pap test in 4 years and reporting 1 or more indicators of economic hardship, such as being uninsured. Over half (55 %) of women in the diverse sample were non-Hispanic black, and almost three-quarters (74 %) reported annual household incomes of $20,000 or less. Trust in HPV self-testing was moderate to high, with almost all women (98 %) agreeing the mailed test was safe. A few women (6 %) preferred HPV self-testing to Pap testing for protecting health, but most (75 %) had no preference. Trust in or preference for mailed self-testing did not vary by race or income. However, compared to white women, black women had lower HPV-related knowledge (OR 0.46, 95 % CI 0.23-0.92) and perceived lower cervical cancer risk in the absence of screening (OR 0.44, 95 % CI 0.22-0.86). We found similar patterns of disparities for women with very low (<$10,000) versus relatively higher incomes. Our findings suggest that, across racial and economic subgroups, under-screened women generally trust HPV self-tests delivered by mail. To succeed, programs for HPV self-testing must overcome disparities in knowledge and perceptions related to cervical cancer screening.

Accuracy of human papillomavirus testing on self-collected versus clinician-collected samples: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Screening for human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is more effective in reducing the incidence of cervical cancer than screening using Pap smears. Moreover, HPV testing can be done on a vaginal sample self-taken by a woman, which offers an opportunity to improve screening coverage. However, the clinical accuracy of HPV testing on self-samples is not well-known. We assessed whether HPV testing on self-collected samples is equivalent to HPV testing on samples collected by clinicians.

METHODS

We identified relevant studies through a search of PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they fulfilled all of the following selection criteria: a cervical cell sample was self-collected by a woman followed by a sample taken by a clinician; a high-risk HPV test was done on the self-sample (index test) and HPV-testing or cytological interpretation was done on the specimen collected by the clinician (comparator tests); and the presence or absence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) or worse was verified by colposcopy and biopsy in all enrolled women or in women with one or more positive tests. The absolute accuracy for finding CIN2 or worse, or CIN grade 3 (CIN3) or worse of the index and comparator tests as well as the relative accuracy of the index versus the comparator tests were pooled using bivariate normal models and random effect models.

FINDINGS

We included data from 36 studies, which altogether enrolled 154 556 women. The absolute accuracy varied by clinical setting. In the context of screening, HPV testing on self-samples detected, on average, 76% (95% CI 69-82) of CIN2 or worse and 84% (72-92) of CIN3 or worse. The pooled absolute specificity to exclude CIN2 or worse was 86% (83-89) and 87% (84-90) to exclude CIN3 or worse. The variation of the relative accuracy of HPV testing on self-samples compared with tests on clinician-taken samples was low across settings, enabling pooling of the relative accuracy over all studies. The pooled sensitivity of HPV testing on self-samples was lower than HPV testing on a clinician-taken sample (ratio 0·88 [95% CI 0·85-0·91] for CIN2 or worse and 0·89 [0·83-0·96] for CIN3 or worse). Also specificity was lower in self-samples versus clinician-taken samples (ratio 0·96 [0·95-0·97] for CIN2 or worse and 0·96 [0·93-0·99] for CIN3 or worse). HPV testing with signal-based assays on self-samples was less sensitive and specific than testing on clinician-based samples. By contrast, some PCR-based HPV tests generally showed similar sensitivity on both self-samples and clinician-based samples.

INTERPRETATION

In screening programmes using signal-based assays, sampling by a clinician should be recommended. However, HPV testing on a self-sample can be suggested as an additional strategy to reach women not participating in the regular screening programme. Some PCR-based HPV tests could be considered for routine screening after careful piloting assessing feasibility, logistics, population compliance, and costs.

FUNDING

The 7th Framework Programme of the European Commission, the Belgian Foundation against Cancer, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, and the German Guideline Program in Oncology.

Self-collected versus clinician-collected sampling for sexually transmitted infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

BACKGROUND

Three meta-analyses and one systematic review have been conducted on the question of whether self-collected specimens are as accurate as clinician-collected specimens for STI screening. However, these reviews predate 2007 and did not analyze rectal or pharyngeal collection sites. Currently, there is no consensus on which sampling method is the most effective for the diagnosis of genital chlamydia (CT), gonorrhea (GC) or human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. Our meta-analysis aims to be comprehensive in that it will examine the evidence of whether self-collected vaginal, urine, pharyngeal and rectal specimens provide as accurate a clinical diagnosis as clinician-collected samples (reference standard).

INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA

Eligible studies include both randomized and non-randomized controlled trials, pre- and post-test designs, and controlled observational studies.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The databases that will be searched include the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), EMBASE and PubMed/Medline.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data will be abstracted independently by two reviewers using a standardized pre-tested data abstraction form. Heterogeneity will be assessed using the Q2 test. Sensitivity and specificity estimates with 95% confidence intervals as well as negative and positive likelihood ratios will be pooled and weighted using random effects meta-analysis, if appropriate. A hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristics curve for self-collected specimens will be generated.

DISCUSSION

This synthesis involves a meta-analysis of self-collected samples (urine, vaginal, pharyngeal and rectal swabs) versus clinician-collected samples for the diagnosis of CT, GC and HPV, the most prevalent STIs. Our systematic review will allow patients, clinicians and researchers to determine the diagnostic accuracy of specimens collected by patients compared to those collected by clinicians in the detection of chlamydia, gonorrhea and HPV.

A quantitative glycogen assay to verify use of self-administered vaginal swabs

BACKGROUND

Self-administered swabs are used to sample vaginal contents for a variety of clinical purposes including detection of sexually transmitted infections, condom breakage, and vaginal product use. The goal of this study was to determine whether a quantitative glycogen assay can be used to assess whether a swab has been exposed to the vagina to assure study compliance.

STUDY DESIGN

Buccal, skin, or vaginal samples were tested to determine whether a commercial quantitative glycogen assay can differentiate vaginal specimens. In addition, archived remnant de-identified vaginal swabs from clinical trials were tested. Periodic acid-Schiff stain was used to identify glycogen-positive cells as a confirmation test.

RESULTS

Glycogen concentrations in eluates of vaginal swabs from reproductive-aged women were significantly higher than those from unused swabs (mean ± SE, 964 ± 135 μg/mL vs. 14.7 ± 2.5 μg/mL, P < 0.001) and swabs exposed to buccal and finger/hand epithelia (40.3 ± 4.8 and 18.5 ± 5.4 μg/mL, P < 0.001). Glycogen concentrations were lower and more variable in vaginal swabs from older perimenopausal/menopausal women (mean ± SE, 235 ± 123, P < 0.01). Semen and sample storage longer than 1 year did not affect glycogen detection. Using a cutoff of 100 μg/mL of glycogen, 30 of 30 vaginal swabs from reproductive-aged women versus 0 of 28 control swabs were positive, for an assay sensitivity of 1 (95% confidence interval, 0.86-1) and specificity of 1 (95% confidence interval, 0.85-1). Periodic acid-Schiff stain correlated with soluble glycogen results but was less specific.

CONCLUSIONS

The quantitative glycogen assay provides a simple and inexpensive method to validate the use of self-administered swabs for sampling vaginal contents in clinical studies.

Acceptability and usability of self-collected sampling for HPV testing among African-American women living in the Mississippi Delta

BACKGROUND

Human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing has been shown to be an effective approach to cervical cancer screening, and self-collection sampling for HPV testing could be a potential alternative to Pap test, provided that women who tested positive by any method get timely follow-up and care. This feasibility study examined acceptability and usability of self-collected sampling for HPV testing among African-American (AA) women in the Mississippi Delta to inform the development of interventions to promote cervical cancer screening in this population.

METHODS

The study consisted of two phases. Phase I consisted of eight focus groups (n = 87) with AA women to explore knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about cervical cancer and HPV infection as well as acceptability of self-collected sampling for HPV testing. In phase II, we examined the usability of this technology through one discussion group (n = 9). The Health Belief Model guided data collection and analysis.

RESULTS

Although participants perceived themselves as susceptible to cervical cancer and acknowledged its severity, there was a lack of knowledge of the link between HPV and cervical cancer, and they expressed a number of misconceptions. The most frequent barriers to screening included embarrassment, discomfort, and fear of the results. Women in both phases were receptive to self-collected sampling for HPV testing. All participants in the usability phase expressed that self-collection was easy and they did not experience any difficulties.

CONCLUSION

Self-collection for HPV testing is an acceptable and feasible method among AA women in the Mississippi Delta to complement current cytology cervical cancer screening programs.

A role for research: an observation on preventive services for women

BACKGROUND

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA) added preventive services for women, recommended by the IOM, to healthcare coverage requirements beginning in August 2011.

PURPOSE

The current review provides evidence on the economic impact of services that will be covered under the ACA, focusing on IOM-recommended measures that address women's health.

METHODS

This review analyzed the cost-effectiveness literature related to these services using the Tufts Medical Center Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry (www.cearegistry.org), which catalogs detailed information on cost-effectiveness studies published in English in the peer-reviewed literature. In order to keep the review relevant to current clinical practice, the analysis was restricted to studies published in 2000-2010. The data search and analysis were performed in 2011.

RESULTS

Cost-effectiveness studies have evaluated a limited subset of the preventive measures available for women. Further, few cost-effectiveness studies have evaluated the recommended counseling and screening services for women. Of 16 relevant studies found, eight focused on HIV screening, with results varying substantially depending on the specific groups screened and the screening frequency.

CONCLUSIONS

The current review underscores the finding that there is a substantial gap in the health economic literature on preventive care, especially with respect to screening and counseling of women in the primary care setting. There is some evidence that better access to preventive services can be maintained at a reasonable cost to the healthcare system, and that certain services may even lower healthcare costs.

Dry storage and transport of a cervicovaginal self-sample by use of the Evalyn Brush, providing reliable human papillomavirus detection combined with comfort for women

Primary screening using high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) detection has been suggested as a way of improving cervical cancer prevention. Women currently not attending screening (nonresponders) are more likely to participate when given the opportunity of self-sampling for hrHPV testing. The Evalyn Brush is a new cervicovaginal self-sampling device, developed specifically to meet women's demands, which is user-friendly and easy to use. The aims of this study were to investigate agreement of hrHPV detection by two PCR methods between the Evalyn Brush and physician-obtained samples and to study women's acceptance of this self-sampling device. Each of 134 women visiting the gynecology outpatient clinic collected a self-obtained sample (self-sample) and completed a questionnaire. The brush was stored dry. After self-sampling, a trained physician obtained a conventional cervical cytology specimen in ThinPrep medium. HrHPV detection was performed using the SPF(10)-DEIA-LiPA(25) and GP5+/6+-LQ-test. The overall agreement for hrHPV detection using SPF(10)-DEIA-LiPA(25) between the self-sample and the physician-taken sample was 85.8% (kappa value, 0.715; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.597 to 0.843; P = 1.000). The overall agreement for hrHPV detection using GP5+/6+-LQ between the self-sample and the physician-taken sample was 86.6% (kappa value, 0.725; 95% CI, 0.607 to 0.843; P = 0.815). Ninety-eight percent of the women rated their experience as good to excellent. Moreover, 95% of women preferred self-sampling to physician sampling. Self-sampling using the dry Evalyn Brush system is as good as a physician-taken sample for hrHPV detection and is highly acceptable to women. To validate this self-sampling device for clinical use, a large screening cohort should be studied.

Evaluation of dry and wet transport of at-home self-collected vaginal swabs for human papillomavirus testing

Our objective was to compare human papillomavirus (HPV) detection in paired self-collected vaginal samples transported by overnight mail in liquid specimen transport medium (STM) (wet) or in dry tubes (dry). Women aged 18-24 years were recruited online to self-collect vaginal swab samples at home for HPV testing and 159 women returned paired wet and dry samples. Dry samples were rehydrated with STM upon arrival at the laboratory. HPV was detected by the Roche Linear Array HPV genotyping test (37 genotypes) and Kappa and McNemar statistics were used to compare wet versus dry samples for detecting HPV. Of the subjects tested in this study, 51 % were HPV-positive (in either sample) and 40 % were positive for high-risk HPV. A total of 216 type-specific infections were detected among the 80 HPV-positive women. Almost perfect agreement was observed between paired samples for detecting any HPV (subject-level positive agreement: 91.9 %, κ: 0.85) or type-specific HPV (positive agreement across types: 90.1 %, κ: 0.90). Similar agreement between sample types was seen when testing for high-risk types and 81.9 % of all type-specific infections were detected in both samples. Among discordant pairs, wet samples were 3.3 times more likely to be positive for type-specific HPV than dry samples (P = 0.02). However, in 63.6 % of wet-positive/dry-negative discordant pairs analysed for viral load, type-specific HPV was either undetectable or detected at a low level (<100 copies) in the wet samples, suggesting that the majority of infections missed by using dry samples are less likely to be clinically relevant. Our results indicate that dry transport is a feasible option for transporting at-home self-collected vaginal samples for HPV DNA testing.

Pooled analysis of a self-sampling HPV DNA Test as a cervical cancer primary screening method

BACKGROUND

Worldwide, one-seventh of cervical cancers occur in China, which lacks a national screening program. By evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of self-collected cervicovaginal specimens tested for human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA (Self-HPV testing) in China, we sought to determine whether Self-HPV testing may serve as a primary cervical cancer screening method in low-resource settings.

METHODS

We compiled individual patient data from five population-based cervical cancer-screening studies in China. Participants (n = 13 140) received Self-HPV testing, physician-collected cervical specimens for HPV testing (Physician-HPV testing), liquid-based cytology (LBC), and visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA). Screen-positive women underwent colposcopy and confirmatory biopsy. We analyzed the accuracies of pooled Self-HPV testing, Physician-HPV testing, VIA, and LBC to detect biopsy-confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe (CIN2+) and CIN3+. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

Of 13 004 women included in the analysis, 507 (3.9%) were diagnosed as CIN2+, 273 (2.1%) as CIN3+, and 37 (0.3%) with cervical cancer. Self-HPV testing had 86.2% sensitivity and 80.7% specificity for detecting CIN2+ and 86.1% sensitivity and 79.5% specificity for detecting CIN3+. VIA had statistically significantly lower sensitivity for detecting CIN2+ (50.3%) and CIN3+ (55.7%) and higher specificity for detecting CIN2+ (87.4%) and CIN3+ (86.9%) (all P values < .001) than Self-HPV testing, LBC had lower sensitivity for detecting CIN2+ (80.7%, P = .015), similar sensitivity for detecting CIN3+ (89.0%, P = .341), and higher specificity for detecting CIN2+ (94.0%, P < .001) and CIN3+ (92.8%, P < .001) than Self-HPV testing. Physician-HPV testing was more sensitive for detecting CIN2+ (97.0%) and CIN3+ (97.8%) but similarly specific for detecting CIN2+ (82.7%) and CIN3+ (81.3%) (all P values <.001) than Self-HPV testing.

CONCLUSIONS

The sensitivity of Self-HPV testing compared favorably with that of LBC and was superior to the sensitivity of VIA. Self-HPV testing may complement current screening programs by increasing population coverage in settings that do not have easy access to comprehensive cytology-based screening.