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. J Clin Microbiol. 2012;50:3937-3943. [PMID: 23015677 DOI: 10.1128/jcm.01506-12]

Agreement Between High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Testing in Paired Self-Collected and Clinician-Collected Samples from Cervical Cancer Screening in Spain

Background: Implementing self-sampling (SS) in cervical cancer screening requires comparable results to clinician-collected samples (CCS). Agreement measures are essential for evaluating HPV test performance. Previous studies on non-paired samples have reported higher viral cycle threshold (Ct) values in SS compared to CCS, affecting sensitivity for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+). Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the agreement of high-risk (hr)HPV testing results between SS and CCS using paired samples and to explore differences in Ct values. Methods: Women aged 30 to 65 years attending cervical cancer screening in two regions of Spain were invited to participated in this study. For each woman there was: CCS collected during the screening visit using liquid-based cytology and cytobrush, and a SS using a brush at home one month later. A PCR-based assay was used for hrHPV detection. Agreement in hrHPV results among both samples, Ct value differences, and their association with screening outcomes were analyzed. Results: This study included 981 women with paired samples. SS had a higher hrHPV prevalence than CCS (overall ratio of 1.3). Positive agreement for all hrHPV genotypes, HPV16, HPV18, and other hrHPV types were 85%, 91.3%, 66.7%, and 83.3%, respectively. Negative agreement was >95% for all results. Median Ct values was slightly higher in SS than in CSS (32.9 vs. 30.6, p = 0.02). Seven CIN2+ cases HPV positive were detected by both methods. One CIN3 case was missed by SS. Conclusions: This study showed a good agreement between SS and CCS for hrHPV testing in a routine screening in Spain. Despite the slightly higher Ct values for SS, no significant impact on sensitivity could be determined due to the low incidence of CIN2+ cases. Further research on larger paired samples is needed to assess the implications of Ct values on test sensitivity.

Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling for Unscreened Women Aged 24 Years During the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

The increasing trend of cervical cancer in women in their 20s in Japan is largely attributable to the low rate of cervical cancer screening. This study aimed to assess the usefulness of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling among 24-year-old Japanese women who had never previously been screened for cervical cancer during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.

METHODS

In August 2021, consenting eligible women received HPV self-sampling kits. An Evalyn brush was used for self-sampling, and a Cobas 4800 PCR-based HPV DNA test was used to detect high-risk HPV genotypes. We analyzed the return rates of self-sampling kits and conducted a survey on the acceptability of the self-sampling method.

RESULTS

Of the total 1997 eligible women, 13.4% (268/1997) agreed to participate. The return rate of the kits was 72.4% (194/268), corresponding to 9.7% of the eligible population. Among the participants who returned the kits, 14.9% (29/194) tested positive for HPV, and 41.4% (12/29) of these underwent subsequent cytological testing. The questionnaire results indicated that 57.8% of participants reported no pain during self-sampling, and 72.9% expressed a willingness to continue using the self-sampling method in the future.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that opt-in HPV self-sampling among 24-year-old women who had never been screened for cervical cancer had a favorable kit return rate and was well accepted by the participants, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the follow-up cytology test rates were low, highlighting the need for improved post-screening management.

Increasing coverage in cervical and colorectal cancer screening by leveraging attendance at breast cancer screening: A cluster-randomised, crossover trial

BACKGROUND

Screening participation remains suboptimal in cervical cancer (CC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening despite their effectiveness in reducing cancer-related morbidity and mortality. We investigated the effectiveness of an intervention by leveraging the high participation rate in breast cancer (BC) screening as an opportunity to offer self-sampling kits to nonparticipants in CC and CRC screening.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

A pragmatic, unblinded, cluster-randomised, multiple period, crossover trial was conducted in 5 BC screening units in the Central Denmark Region (CDR) between September 1, 2021 and May 25, 2022. On each of 100 selected weekdays, 1 BC screening unit was randomly allocated as the intervention unit while the remaining units served as controls. Women aged 50 to 69 years attending BC screening at the intervention unit were offered administrative check-up on their CC screening status (ages 50 to 64 years) and CRC screening status (aged 50 to 69), and women with overdue screening were offered self-sampling. Women in the control group received only standard screening offers according to the organised programmes. The primary outcomes were differences between the intervention group and the control group in the total screening coverage for the 2 programmes and in screening participation among women with overdue screening, measured 6 months after the intervention. These were assessed using intention-to-treat analysis, reporting risk differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A total of 27,116 women were included in the trial, with 5,618 (20.7%) in the intervention group and 21,498 (79.3%) in the control group. Six months after the intervention, total coverage was higher in the intervention group as compared with the control group in CC screening (88.3 versus 83.5, difference 4.8 percentage points, 95% CI [3.6, 6.0]; p < 0.001) and in CRC screening (79.8 versus 76.0, difference 3.8 percentage points, 95% CI [2.6, 5.1]; p < 0.001). Among women overdue with CC screening, participation in the intervention group was 32.0% compared with 6.1% in the control group (difference 25.8 percentage points, 95% CI [22.0, 29.6]; p < 0.001). In CRC screening, participation among women overdue with screening in the intervention group was 23.8% compared with 8.9% in the control group (difference 14.9 percentage points, 95% CI [12.3, 17.5]; p < 0.001). Women who did not participate in BC screening were not included in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

Offering self-sampling to women overdue with CC and CRC screening when they attend BC screening was a feasible intervention, resulting in an increase in participation and total coverage. Other interventions are required to reach women who are not participating in BC screening.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05022511. The record of processing activities for research projects in the Central Denmark Region (R. No.: 1-16-02-217-21).

Evaluation of a novel vaginal cells self-sampling device for human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screening: A clinical trial assessing reliability and acceptability

Cervical cancer is a significant public health concern, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where resources for prevention and treatment are limited. Routine screening, such as the Papanicolaou test (Pap smears) and human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, plays a crucial role in the early detection and prevention of cervical cancer. However, the participation rate in cervical cancer screening programs remains below optimal levels due to various factors. This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and acceptability of the HygeiaTouch Self Sampling Kit for Women in collecting vaginal samples for HPV typing, comparing the results with samples collected by physicians. The study included 1210 women aged 21-65 from three medical centers in Taiwan. The findings indicated that the self-sampling kit was as effective as physician-collected specimens in terms of obtaining valid samples and identifying HPV. The agreement between the two methods was 88%, with a κ value of 0.75. Furthermore, the study assessed the mechanical characteristics of the self-sampling applicator through tensile, bending, and torque tests, and determined that it was safe for intravaginal use. Additionally, the study evaluated the safety and satisfaction of self-sampling and found a low rate of adverse events (0.7%) and high levels of satisfaction (over 90%) among participants. Overall, we demonstrated that the HygeiaTouch Self Sampling Kit for Women is a reliable and acceptable device for HPV testing and cervical screening, providing a convenient, safe, and effective alternative for women.

Human Papillomavirus Genotype Detection and Cytology Using a New Self-Sampling Method

OBJECTIVE

High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing using dry-type self-sampled vaginal specimens is becoming more widespread worldwide due to increased screening uptake. However, for the triage of hrHPV-positive women, a visit to a general practitioner is required for reflex cytology. This study aimed to evaluate the hrHPV detection capability of CellSoft®, a wet-type self-sampling method that also allows for cytology.

METHODS

Thirty-eight women aged 20 years and older were included in the study. The women self-sampled using CellSoft® after using an Evalyn® Brush. PCR-based HPV genotyping was performed on both specimens and hrHPV detection results of both devices were compared. Additionally, cytological exam was performed on CellSoft® samples.

RESULTS

Overall agreement between self-sampling devices for the detection of hrHPV in CellSoft® and Evalyn Brush was observed in 97.4% (37/38) of participants. More hrHPV genotypes were detected with Evalyn Brush than with CellSoft®. Among the 22 CellSoft® hrHPV-positive cases, 11 (47.6%) were atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse.

CONCLUSION

CellSoft® hrHPV genotype detection results were in good agreement with those of Evalyn Brush. CellSoft® provided a sufficient cell volume for HPV testing and cytological evaluation.

Direct mailing of HPV self-sampling kits to women aged 50-65 non-participating in cervical screening in the Czech Republic

BACKGROUND

A population-based cervical cancer screening programme is implemented in the Czech Republic. However, participation is insufficient among women over 50 years. This study aimed to estimate the potential improvement in participation through directly mailed HPV self-sampling kits (HPVssk) compared with standard invitation letters in women aged 50-65 non-participating in screening.

METHODS

The study recruited 1564 eligible women (no cervical cancer screening in the last 3 years or more, no previous treatment associated with cervical lesions or cervical cancer). Eight hundred women were mailed with an HPVssk (HPVssk group), and 764 women were sent a standard invitation letter (control group) inviting them to a routine screening (Pap test). The primary outcome was a comparison of the overall participation rate between study groups using a binominal regression model.

RESULTS

The participation rate in the HPVssk group was 13.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.2-15.9%; 7.4% of women returned the HPVssk and 6.0% attended gynaecological examination] and 5.0% (95% CI 3.6-6.8%) in the control group. Using the binominal regression model, the difference between the groups was estimated as 7.6% (95% CI 5.0-10.2%; P < 0.001). In the HPVssk group, 22% of women who returned HPVssk had a positive result and 70% of them underwent a follow-up examination.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with traditional invitation letters, the direct mailing of the HPVssk achieved a significantly higher participation rate, along with a notable HPV positivity rate among HPVssk responders. This approach offers a potentially viable method for engaging women who have not yet attended a cervical screening programme.

Evaluating Opt-In Vaginal Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling: Participation Rates and Detection of High-Grade Lesions (CIN2+) among Unscreened Japanese Women Aged 30-39

Cervical cancer incidence is increasing among Japanese women, which is partly attributed to low screening rates. This study examined the implementation of opt-in human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling among Japanese women aged 30-39 years who had not undergone cervical cancer screening, focusing on those requiring preconception care. The responses to the opt-in approach and effectiveness in detecting cervical squamous intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse (CIN2+) were evaluated. Participants used the Evalyn® Brush for self-sampling, with HPV testing conducted using the Cobas 4800 system (version 2.2.0). Out of 3489 eligible, unscreened women from four municipalities in Fukui Prefecture, only 10.6% (370/3489) requested the self-sampling kit. Of these, 77.3% (286/370) returned the kit (HPV testing rate: 8.2% (286/3489)). The HPV positivity rate was 13.7% (39/285), yet only 61.5% (24/39) of those with positive HPV results proceeded to cytology testing. Subsequently, three cases of CIN2+ were detected (10.5/1000). While this study demonstrated a reasonable kit return rate and indicated the capability of opt-in HPV self-sampling to detect CIN2+ cases in unscreened women, the low ordering rate of kits and suboptimal compliance for follow-up cytology testing highlight significant challenges. The findings suggest the need for more effective strategies to enhance participation in cervical cancer screening programs.

A Comprehensive Review of Cervical Cancer Screening Devices: The Pros and the Cons

OBJECTIVE

The low screening coverage and reluctance of women in participation lead to low uptake in cervical screening tests. Hence the majority of cervical cancer patients visiting the hospitals are diagnosed at advanced stage, often leading to poor survival rate. This paper aims to review and compile available cancer screening devices so that more people in this field will adopt suitable devices in cervical cancer screening routine depending on requirements which may encourage the uptake in cervical screening tests.

METHODS

This paper reviews devices invented for different cervical cancer screening methods, which are Pap smear test, visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) or Lugol's iodine (VILI), and HPV (human papillomavirus)-DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) self-test in terms of functionality, performance in solving the limitations of screening procedure and additionally where applicable, the cervical cell collection efficacy and abnormality detection accuracy. The devices are either available in the market, published in research articles or published in international patent databases.

RESULT

The reviewed devices either simplified the screening procedure to improve the clinical efficiency and accuracy in screening, reduced the pain and discomfort experienced by women during screening procedures, or achieved both outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Many devices have been invented to improve the screening procedures which may potentially improve the uptake in cervical screening tests and encourage the organization of screening campaigns to reduce cervical cancer incidence.

Does full HPV genotyping perform similarly well in clinician-collected cervical samples and self-collected vaginal samples when using the CLART HPV4S assay?

BACKGROUND

Studies comparing self-collected vaginal samples with clinician-collected cervical samples with respect to high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) detection and genotype agreement based on clinically validated full HPV genotype assays (e.g. the CLART HPV4S) are limited. This study compared the two types of samples using the CLART assay with respect to HPV detection and genotype agreement in a referral population.

METHODS

A total of 212 women aged 30-59 years and diagnosed with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) within the Danish cervical cancer screening programme had a cervical sample taken at their general practitioner. Afterwards, the women took a vaginal sample with the Evalyn Brush device at home. The paired samples were HPV-tested with the full genotyping CLART HPV4S assay. Histological results, i.e. cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) were available for 14 women with HPV-positive clinician-collected samples.

RESULTS

The study found the same HPV prevalence in self-collected vaginal samples compared to clinician-collected cervical samples (19.3%, 95% CI 14.3-25.3% vs 18.4%, 95% CI 13.4-24.3%). The CLART HPV4S assay detected approximately the same number of CIN2+ cases in the self-collected vaginal samples compared to the clinician-collected cervical samples (13 vs 11 cases). Exactly the same genotypes were detected in 75% (21/28) of the HPV-positive paired samples, while at least one identical genotype was found in the remaining 25% (7/28) of the paired samples.

CONCLUSIONS

The CLART HPV4S assay performed similarly well in self-collected vaginal samples as in clinician-collected cervical samples with respect to both HPV detection and genotype agreement when using the Evalyn Brush and the CLART HPV4S assay in a referral population. Although further evaluation is needed, the findings suggest that full HPV genotyping based on the CLART assay can be useful when establishing HPV genotype-specific referral strategies for women tested HPV-positive by self-sampling.

Does self-sampling for human papilloma virus testing have the potential to increase cervical cancer screening? An updated meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized clinical trials

Objectives

A meta-analysis was conducted to examine the effectiveness of HPV self-sampling proposal on cervical cancer screening (CCS) uptake when compared with an invitation to have a clinician to collect the sample. Secondary outcomes were acceptability and preference of self-sampling compared to clinician-collected samples.

Methods

The present systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies examining the CCS uptake comparing self-sampling over invitation to be sampled by an healthcare professional and examining the proportion of women accepting or preferring self-sampling vs. clinician-collected sampling were included. The CCS uptake was also explored according to strategy of self-samplers' distribution, collection device type and screening status. Peters' test and Funnel Plot inspection were used to assess the publication bias. Quality of the studies was assessed through Cochrane Risk of Bias and NIH Quality Assessment tools.

Results

One hundred fifty-four studies were globally identified, and 482,271 women were involved. Self-sampling procedures nearly doubled the probability (RR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.7-2.0) of CCS uptake when compared with clinician-collected samples. The opt-out (RR: 2.1; 95% CI: 1.9-2.4) and the door-to-door (RR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.6-2.0) did not statistically significant differ (p = 1.177) in improving the CCS uptake. A higher relative uptake was shown for brushes (RR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.5-1.7) and swabs (RR: 2.5; 95% CI: 1.9-3.1) over clinician-collected samples. A high between-studies variability in characteristics of sampled women was shown. In all meta-analyses the level of heterogeneity was consistently high (I 2 > 95%). Publication bias was unlikely.

Conclusions

Self-sampling has the potential to increase participation of under-screened women in the CCS, in addition to the standard invitation to have a clinician to collect the sample. For small communities door-to-door distribution could be preferred to distribute the self-sampler while; for large communities opt-out strategies should be preferred over opt-in. Since no significant difference in acceptability and preference of device type was demonstrated among women, and swabs and brushes exhibited a potential stronger effect in improving CCS, these devices could be adopted.

Results of Self-Sampling Methodology Impression for Cervical Cancer Screening in Mongolia

OBJECTIVE

 Mongolia is a sparsely populated country; however, almost fifty percent of the population lives in the capital city. Medical care services and exceptionally well-organized cervical cancer screening tests are limited in remote areas. To improve cervical cancer screening test coverage, we compared the interest between physicians taking samples and self-sampling among the attendees in this study.

METHODS

A total of 175 women participated in this study. The hundred twelve women visited the Gynecology ward, and the sixty-three women were provided with the cervical self-sampling test kit and filled out a questionnaire. Subsequently, the acceptability of physician taking and self-sampling were evaluated using a questionnaire. All specimens were processed using the TACAS LBC system, and the quality of samples was tested by cytology.

RESULTS

Regarding the acceptability of self-sampling, the selections for subsequent screening were 36% self-sampling and 64% gynecologist-sampling methods. The acceptability rates were higher in the remote areas than the urban areas. However, 64% of the participants lacked knowledge that the causative agent of cervical cancer is the human papillomavirus, and 66.9% mainly were sexually transmitted. In addition, 82.3% of the women surveyed were unaware that there was a vaccine to prevent cervical cancer, but 88.6% wanted to be vaccinated. Of most women, 44.4% chose self-sampling due to no embarrassment in the gynecological examination. The self-sampling preferences were dominant in the old age group (61.6%). The cytology satisfaction rate in physician-sampling (99.1%) was higher than in the self-sampling group (69.8%).

CONCLUSION

The Implementation of the self-sampling tool may be considered a primary screening. The self-sampling test can adopt into the early screening program and may increase the coverage of the screening program and improve the quality.

Three birds with one stone: a protocol for a randomised intervention study to increase participation in cervical and colorectal cancer screening among women attending breast cancer screening

INTRODUCTION

The participation rate is higher in breast cancer screening than in cervical cancer (CCU) and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. In this cluster-randomised study, we aim to evaluate an intervention offering home-based CCU and CRC screening to women when attending breast cancer screening if they are overdue for CCU and/or CRC screening.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

On intervention days, one of the five breast cancer screening units in the Central Denmark Region will be randomly allocated to intervention, whereas the remaining units will serve as control. Women attending breast cancer screening in the intervention unit will be offered information regarding their CCU and CRC screening history, and, if overdue, they will be offered self-sampling screening kits. For CCU screening, women aged 50-64 years will be offered a vaginal self-sampling kit for human papillomavirus testing. For CRC screening, women aged 50-69 years will be offered a kit to obtain a faecal immunochemical test. Women attending the control units will receive only standard care.After the intervention, a survey will be sent to all women in the intervention and control group, asking about their experience while attending breast cancer screening.Primary outcomes will be difference in the coverage in CCU and CRC screening 6 months after intervention between the intervention and the control group, and difference in participation rates 6 months after intervention for those who were overdue for CCU and/or CRC screening at the time of the intervention.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The project is listed in the record of processing activities for research projects in the Central Denmark Region (R. No.: 1-16-02-217-21). According to the Danish Consolidation Act on Research Ethics Review of Health Research Project, this study was not notifiable to the Committee (R. No.: 1-10-72-1-21). The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05022511.

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.

Concordance in HPV Detection Between Self-Collected and Health Provider-Collected Cervicovaginal Samples Using careHPV in Tanzanian Women

PURPOSE

Cervical cancer screening is one of the strategies to prevent the disease among women at risk. Human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing is increasingly used as the cervical cancer screening method because of its high sensitivity. Self-collection of cervical specimens has the potential to improve participation. However, there is only limited information on comparison between self-collected and provider-collected samples with regard to detection of high-risk HPV using the careHPV method. The study aimed to compare HPV detection by careHPV in self-collected and provider-collected cervical samples and to assess the acceptability of self-collection techniques.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Women attending cervical cancer screening clinics at Ocean Road Cancer Institute, Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre or Mawenzi Hospital in Tanzania were included in the study. They underwent a face-to-face interview, HIV testing, and collected a self-sample using Evalyn Brush. Subsequently, they had a cervical sample taken by a health provider. Both samples were tested for high-risk HPV DNA using careHPV.

RESULTS

Overall, 464 women participated in the study. The high-risk HPV prevalence was 19.0% (95% CI, 15.6 to 22.9) in the health provider samples, but lower (13.8%; 95% CI, 10.9 to 17.3) in the self-collected samples. There was a good overall agreement 90.5% (95% CI, 87.5 to 93.0) and concordance (κ = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.75) between the two sets of samples. Sensitivity and specificity were 61.4% (95% CI, 50.4 to 71.6) and 97.3% (95% CI, 95.2 to 98.7), respectively, varying with age. Most women preferred self-collection (79.8%).

CONCLUSION

Overall, self-sampling seems to be a reliable alternative to health-provider collection and is acceptable to the majority of women. However, instructions on proper procedures for sample collection to the women are important.

The SWIM study: Ethnic minority women's ideas and preferences for a tailored intervention to promote national cancer screening programmes-A qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND

Ethnic minority women from non-Western countries are less likely than the native women to participate in screening programmes for cervical cancer, breast cancer and colorectal cancer. This social inequality can result in loss of possibility for prevention, delayed diagnosis and treatment and, ultimately, lower chance of survival. Developing a tailored intervention might be the solution to reduce social inequalities in cancer screening, and a key feature in intervention research is to consult the target group.

OBJECTIVE

To explore ethnic minority women's own ideas and preferences for a cancer screening intervention and identify their attitudes to different strategies.

METHODS

An interview study with five focus group interviews, two group interviews with an interpreter and three individual interviews. Thirty-seven women from 10 non-Western countries contributed to the study. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim followed by a thematic analysis.

RESULTS

According to the women, a tailored intervention should focus on knowledge in the form of face-to-face teaching. The women further suggested information material in their own language with a simple, positive and concrete communication strategy. They would like to be involved in an awareness strategy and share the knowledge with their network.

CONCLUSION

Ethnic minority women were interested in a tailored intervention, and they were keen to contribute with ideas and preferences. The findings emphasized the potential of a tailored intervention with specific suggestions to the content when attempting to reduce inequality in cancer screening participation.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Minority women were involved in the interview study.

Self-obtained vaginal samples for HPV DNA testing to detect HPV-related cervical disease

OBJECTIVE

To investigate if a self-obtained vaginal sample (SOVAS) contains sufficient DNA for a human papillomavirus (HPV) test and if the results are comparable to those obtained via cervical samples (CS) collected by a physician.

METHODS

One hundred and fifty-one women who had abnormal cervical smears or who were HPV-positive were enrolled. Self-sampling was done after reading instructions and watching a 2-min-long video, whereas CS was obtained with a cervical cytobrush during a gynecologic examination.

RESULTS

A multiplex real-time polymerase chain reaction-based assay detected the prevalence of any type of HPV to be 67.5% in the SOVAS and 57.4% in the CS, and that of high-risk (HR-) HPV to be 58.7% in the SOVAS and 48.6% in the CS. The sensitivity of detection of HR-HPV in the SOVAS was 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.09 to 0.32) for high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, 78% (95% CI -0.09 to 0.13) for atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse, and 95% (95% CI -0.01 to 0.25) for low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or worse, which was statistically within the non-inferiority margin compared with that of CS.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that the collection of a SOVAS is feasible and it is comparable to a CS for HPV DNA testing. Future studies are required to investigate the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of a mail-delivered SOVAS for cervical cancer screening.

Urine collection in cervical cancer screening - analytical comparison of two HPV DNA assays

Background

To reach non-participants, reluctant to undergo clinician-based cervical cancer screening and vaginal self-sampling, urine collection for high-risk human papillomavirus detection (hrHPV) may be valuable. Using two hrHPV DNA assays, we evaluated the concordance of hrHPV positivity in urine samples in comparison with vaginal self-samples and cervical cytology samples taken by the general practitioner (GP). We also studied women’s acceptance of urine collection and preferences towards the different sampling procedures.

Methods

One hundred fifty paired self-collected urine and vaginal samples and GP-collected cervical cytology samples were obtained from 30 to 59-year-old women diagnosed with ASC-US within the Danish cervical cancer screening program. After undergoing cervical cytology at the GP, the women collected first-void urine and vaginal samples at home and completed a questionnaire. Each sample was hrHPV DNA tested by the GENOMICA CLART® and COBAS® 4800 assays. Concordance in hrHPV detection between sample types was determined using Kappa (k) statistics. Sensitivity and specificity of hrHPV detection in urine was calculated using cervical sampling as reference.

Results

With the COBAS assay, urine showed good concordance to the vaginal (k = 0.66) self-samples and cervical samples (k = 0.66) for hrHPV detection. The corresponding concordance was moderate (k = 0.59 and k = 0.47) using CLART. Compared to cervical sampling, urinary hrHPV detection had a sensitivity of 63.9% and a specificity of 96.5% using COBAS; compared with 51.6 and 92.4% for CLART. Invalid hrHPV test rates were 1.8% for COBAS and 26.9% for CLART. Urine collection was well-accepted and 42.3% of the women ranked it as the most preferred future screening procedure.

Conclusions

Urine collection provides a well-accepted screening option. With COBAS, higher concordance between urine and vaginal self-sampling and cervical sampling for hrHPV detection was found compared to CLART. Urinary hrHPV detection with COBAS is feasible, but its accuracy may need to be improved before urine collection at home can be offered to non-participants reluctant to both cervical sampling and vaginal self-sampling.

Expanding the upper age limit for cervical cancer screening: a protocol for a nationwide non-randomised intervention study

INTRODUCTION

Cervical cancer screening ceases between the ages of 60 and 65 in most countries. Yet, a relatively high proportion of cervical cancers are diagnosed in women above the screening age. This study will evaluate if screening of women aged 65-69 years may result in increased detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) compared with women not invited to screening. Invited women may choose between general practitioner (GP)-based screening or cervico-vaginal self-sampling. Furthermore, the study will assess if self-sampling is superior to GP-based screening in reaching long-term unscreened women.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This population-based non-randomised intervention study will include 10 000 women aged 65-69 years, with no record of a cervical cytology sample or screening invitation in the 5 years before inclusion. Women who have opted-out of the screening programme or have a record of hysterectomy or cervical amputation are excluded. Women residing in the Central Denmark Region (CDR) are allocated to the intervention group, while women residing in the remaining four Danish regions are allocated to the reference group. The intervention group is invited for human papillomavirus-based screening by attending routine screening at the GP or by requesting a self-sampling kit. The reference group receives standard care which is the opportunity to have a cervical cytology sample obtained at the GP or by a gynaecologist. The study started in April 2019 and will run over the next 4.5 years. The primary outcome will be the proportion of CIN2+ detected in the intervention and reference groups. In the intervention group, the proportion of long-term unscreened women attending GP-based screening or self-sampling will be compared.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been submitted to the Ethical Committee in the CDR which deemed that the study was not notifiable to the Committee and informed consent is therefore not required. The study is approved by the Danish Data Protection Regulation and the Danish Patient Safety Authority. Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04114968.

Human Papillomavirus (HPV) DNA Detection Using Self-Sampling Devices in Women Undergoing Long Term Immunosuppressive Therapy

Immunosuppression is a risk factor of persistent human papillomavirus (HPV) infections, which might lead to development of (pre)malignant lesions of the cervix and lower anogenital tract. Results of HPV DNA testing using cervicovaginal self-samples are comparable to those that are clinician-obtained and therefore might be used in cervical screening. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of high-risk HPV (hrHPV) infections, their risk factors and the genotypes distribution among women undergoing immunosuppressive therapy. Women undergoing immunosuppressive therapy for at least three months due to solid organ transplantation or autoimmune disorders were asked to self-collect samples for HPV testing using cervicovaginal brushes and complete questionnaires regarding cervical cancer risk factors. HPV DNA detection and genotyping were performed using Genotyping kit HPV GP version 2. hrHPV was detected in 26/90 (28.9%) specimens. Genotyping revealed a broad range of hrHPV, with type 16 being the most common genotype (11/26). The components of bivalent/quadrivalent or nonavalent vaccines cover all genotypes present in 4.4% and 17.8% women, respectively, and occur as a co-infection with other types in 12.2% and 23.3% of women, respectively. The only feature significantly associated with being hrHPV-positive was having at least two lifetime sexual partners. The high prevalence of hrHPV infections among immunosuppressed women emphasizes the need for regular cervical cancer screening with HPV DNA testing, which might be performed on self-collected specimen.

Evaluation of the concordance in HPV type between self- and physician-collected samples using a brush-based device and a PCR-based HPV DNA test in Japanese referred patients with abnormal cytology or HPV infection

BACKGROUND

To adopt HPV self-sampling in Japan, we assessed the concordance between self- and physician-collected human papillomavirus (HPV) samples from Japanese patients and examined the performance of HPV self-sampling for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+).

METHODS

Patients who had previously tested negative for intraepithelial lesions or malignancy/HPV-positive, and patients with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse (ASCUS+) cytology were eligible for this cross-sectional study. Participants performed HPV self-sampling using an Evalyn brush, which was submitted at the Fukui Prefectural Health Care Association. The Evalyn brush heads were stored in ThinPrep vials. The physician, however, performed HPV and cell sampling using an endocervical brush and immediately stored the brush heads in ThinPrep vials. All participants underwent colposcopy and biopsy. Histopathological diagnoses were made by pathologists at Fukui University Hospital. HPV infection was confirmed using a PCR-based Cobas 4800 HPV DNA test. Cytological analysis was performed at Fukui Prefectural Health Care Association.

RESULTS

HPV-positive rates for physician-collected samples and self-collected samples were 51 and 50%, respectively. The perfect match rate of HPV type between the groups was 88% (κ = 0.76). HPV16/18 showed higher agreement rates than other HPVs (99%, kappa 0.96 and 89% kappa 0.77, respectively). Both groups showed 100% sensitivity to CIN2+, but specificity was 57.0 and 58.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

For HPV typing, a good concordance rate was seen between self- and physician-collected samples. Self-sampling showed high sensitivity for CIN2+. Self-sampling using the Evalyn brush and Cobas 4800 may be feasible for screening Japanese individuals.

Comparison Study of Self-Sampled and Physician-Sampled Specimens for High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Test and Cytology

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to calculate the positive rate and overall concordance rate of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) test and cytology using self-sampled and physician-sampled cervicovaginal tests and to compare both specimens.

METHODS

In collaboration with 3 private hospitals in Sapporo city, 300 women visiting these organizations were enrolled in the study by previously signing an informed consent. From these women, both types of samples (self-obtained and physician-sampled) were obtained at the same time. HrHPV test and cytology were performed on both specimens, and the positive rate and overall concordance rate were calculated to compare both specimens.

RESULTS

HrHPV-positive women were 13.7% in physician-sampled specimens and 14.7% in self-sampled specimens, with an overall concordance rate of 96.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 94-98%). On the other hand, the positive rate of the cases higher than or equal to atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) on cytology was different between both groups, that is, 12.3% in physician-obtained and 5.3% in self-sampled specimens; the overall concordance rate was 90.7% (95% CI: 87-94%), indicating an apparent decrease in the positive rate of cytology in self-obtained specimens.

CONCLUSION

HrHPV test and cytology were performed on parallel samples obtained by the patients with a self-sampling tool and by the physician. The positive rate of cytology was considerably different between these specimens, while almost equivalent results were obtained for hrHPV test in both specimens. It was concluded that hrHPV test may be safely and accurately performed on self-obtained cervicovaginal samples by the help of a self-sampling device in the Japanese population as a first screening tool, with equivalent results to physician-obtained specimens.

Self-Collection for Cervical Screening Programs: From Research to Reality

In 2018, there were an estimated 570,000 new cases of cervical cancer globally, with most of them occurring in women who either had no access to cervical screening, or had not participated in screening in regions where programs are available. Where programs are in place, a major barrier for women across many cultures has been the requirement to undergo a speculum examination. With the emergence of HPV-based primary screening, the option of self-collection (where the woman takes the sample from the vagina herself) may overcome this barrier, given that such samples when tested using a PCR-based HPV assay have similar sensitivity for the detection of cervical pre-cancers as practitioner-collected cervical specimens. Other advantages of HPV-based screening using self-collection, beyond the increase in acceptability to women, include scalability, efficiency, and high negative predictive value, allowing for long intervals between negative tests. Self-collection will be a key strategy for the successful scale up of cervical screening programs globally in response to the WHO call for all countries to work towards the elimination of cervical cancer as a public health problem. This review will examine self-collection for HPV-based cervical screening including the collection devices, assays and possible routine laboratory processes considering how they can be utilized in cervical screening programs.

Analytical performance of HPV assays on vaginal self-collected vs practitioner-collected cervical samples: the SCoPE study

BACKGROUND

In the last decade, human papillomavirus (HPV) testing has been evaluated extensively for cervical screening, with studies finding increased sensitivity compared to cytology. Another advantage of HPV based-screening is the ability to test vaginal samples that can be collected by women themselves. Self-collection has the potential to extend cervical screening coverage by increasing participation rates, particularly among women who are under-screened or have never screened. This could have a significant impact on cervical cancer prevention, as the majority of invasive cervical cancer cases occur among under-screened women. Both the Netherlands and Australia have transitioned their national programs from cytology to HPV as the primary screening test and both countries include a pathway for self-collection.

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated the relative sensitivity for HPV detection of self-collection compared with practitioner-collected cervical specimens in the context of the Australian National Cervical Screening Program (NCSP).

STUDY DESIGN

303 women aged ≥18 years attending a single tertiary referral centre took their own sample using a flocked-swab, and then had a practitioner-collected sample taken at colposcopy. All samples were tested at a single laboratory on the six PCR-based HPV assays which can be utilised in the NCSP; Roche cobas 4800 and cobas, Abbott RealTime, BD Onclarity, Cepheid Xpert, and Seegene Anyplex.

RESULTS

HPV16/18 results had high observed agreement between self- and practitioner-collected samples on all assays (range: 0.94-0.99), with good agreement for non-HPV16/18 oncogenic HPV types (range: 0.64-0.73).

CONCLUSIONS

Self-collection for HPV-based cervical screening shows good concordance and relative sensitivity when compared to practitionercollected samples across assays in the NCSP.

Efficacy of strategies to increase participation in cervical cancer screening: GPs offering self-sampling kits for HPV testing versus recommendations to have a pap smear taken - A randomised controlled trial

Background

Cervical cancer is preventable by early detection and treatment of pre-cancerous lesions. The current screening policy in Belgium (3-yearly cytology on Pap smears) covers 60% of the target population. Offering self-samples by GPs can overcome barriers for women who are currently not screened.

Methods

Women aged 25–64 who did not have a Pap smear since three years and consulted a GP practice in a Flemish municipality between November 2014 and April 2015 were allocated in a 1:1 ratio to either the intervention arm where women were given a vaginal self-sampling kit or control arm where women were encouraged to make an appointment for having a Pap smear taken by a clinician.

Results

Eighty-eight consenting women were randomised. 35 (78%) out of 45 women in the self-sampling arm participated in screening compared to 22 (51%) out of 43 women in the control arm (p = 0.009). This difference remained significant after adjusting for covariates (age category, education level, time interval since last Pap smear, past Pap smear-taker).

Conclusion

GPs offering self-sampling kits resulted in a high participation. Larger trials should confirm this effect and evaluate feasibility of this approach.4. The authors would also like to include the following sentence in the acknowledgement “The laboratory AML (Antwerp, Belgium) is acknowledged for the free HPV testing on the self-samples."

An observational study comparing HPV prevalence and type distribution between HPV-vaccinated and -unvaccinated girls after introduction of school-based HPV vaccination in Norway

BACKGROUND

Many countries have initiated school-based human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programs. The real-life effectiveness of HPV vaccines has become increasingly evident, especially among girls vaccinated before HPV exposure in countries with high vaccine uptake. In 2009, Norway initiated a school-based HPV vaccination program for 12-year-old girls using the quadrivalent HPV vaccine (Gardasil®), which targets HPV6, 11, 16, and 18. Here, we aim to assess type-specific vaginal and oral HPV prevalence in vaccinated compared with unvaccinated girls in the first birth cohort eligible for school-based vaccination (born in 1997).

METHODS

This observational, cross-sectional study measured the HPV prevalence ratio (PR) between vaccinated and unvaccinated girls in Norway. Facebook advertisement was used to recruit participants and disseminate information about the study. Participants self-sampled vaginal and oral specimens using an Evalyn® Brush and a FLOQSwab™, respectively. Sexual behavior was ascertained through a short questionnaire.

RESULTS

Among the 312 participants, 239 (76.6%) had received at least one dose of HPV vaccine prior to sexual debut. 39.1% of vaginal samples were positive for any HPV type, with similar prevalence among vaccinated and unvaccinated girls (38.5% vs 41.1%, PR: 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-1.41). For vaccine-targeted types there was some evidence of lower prevalence in the vaccinated (0.4%) compared to the unvaccinated (6.8%) group (PR: 0.06, 95%CI: 0.01-0.52). This difference remained after adjusting for sexual behavior (PR: 0.04, 95%CI: 0.00-0.42). Only four oral samples were positive for any HPV type, and all of these participants had received at least one dose of HPV vaccine at least 1 year before oral sexual debut.

CONCLUSION

There is evidence of a lower prevalence of vaccine-targeted HPV types in the vagina of vaccinated girls from the first birth cohort eligible for school-based HPV vaccination in Norway; this was not the case when considering all HPV types or types not included in the quadrivalent HPV vaccine.

Genital self-sampling for HPV-based cervical cancer screening: a qualitative study of preferences and barriers in rural Ethiopia

Background

In the context of WHO’s “task shifting” project and growing global consensus on primary HPV-based cervical cancer screening, self-sampling is a promising new tool to expand screening access, uptake and coverage for women worldwide. We aimed to explore perceptions and acceptability of HPV self-sampling-based cervical cancer screening among community members and health professionals in rural northwest Ethiopia and to identify preferences and socio-cultural barriers regarding self-sampling in order to design a suitable high-coverage screening intervention for a rural African setting.

Methods

Four community-based focus group discussions (FGD) were conducted in the rural district of Dabat, Northwest Ethiopia, each comprising 8 to 14 female participants, counting a total of 41 participants. The groups were homogenously composed in terms of their socio-economic status in the community. They included health centre attendees, community members, nurses and health development army leaders (HDAL). Two qualitative data collection experts conducted the interviews in the local language, using a FGD guide with several thematic areas. All participants granted written informed consent prior to the conduct of the interviews. As a concrete example of an existing self-sampling approach for cervical cancer screening we used the Evalyn® Brush.

Results

Emerging themes included (i) misconceptions and low awareness about cervical cancer among community residents and primary health care providers in rural northwest Ethiopia, (ii) stigmatization and social exclusion of affected women, (iii) delay in seeking of health care due to poor access and availability of services, and lacking of a concept of early cancer prevention, (iv) need of spousal permission, (v) fear of financial burden and (vi) fear of social marginalization. The self-sampling device was regarded to be acceptable and was judged to be easy to use for most women. The existing Ethiopian health care structure could facilitate a community approach.

Conclusion

Home-based self-sampling for cervical cancer screening is a socially acceptable and feasible “task shifting” method that will increase cervical cancer screening access and coverage in the Ethiopian study community. Education, awareness creation, community mobilization and family inclusion are identified as key activities to promote, implement and facilitate “task shifting” approaches like self-sampling.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-019-7354-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

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.

HPV testing in first-void urine provides sensitivity for CIN2+ detection comparable with a smear taken by a clinician or a brush-based self-sample: cross-sectional data from a triage population

OBJECTIVE

To compare the sensitivity of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) and genotype detection in self-collected urine samples in the morning (U1), and later on (U2), brush-based self-samples (SS), and clinician-taken smears (CTS) for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN2+) in a colposcopic referral population.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional single-centre study.

SETTING

A colposcopy clinic in Spain.

POPULATION

A cohort of 113 women referred for colposcopy after an abnormal Pap smear.

METHODS

Women undergoing colposcopy with biopsy for abnormal Pap smears were sent a device (Colli-Pee™, Novosanis, Wijnegem, Belgium) to collect U1 on the morning of colposcopy. U2, CTS, and SS (Evalyn brush™, Rovers Medical Devices B.V., Oss, the Netherlands) were also analysed. All samples were tested for HPV DNA using the analytically sensitive SPF10-DEIA-LiPA25 assay and the clinically validated GP5+/6+-EIA-LMNX.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Histologically confirmed CIN2+ and hrHPV positivity for 14 high-risk HPV types.

RESULTS

Samples from 91 patients were analysed. All CIN3 cases (n = 6) tested positive for hrHPV in CTS, SS, U1, and U2 with both HPV assays. Sensitivity for CIN2+ with the SPF10 system was 100, 100, 95, and 100%, respectively. With the GP5+/6+ assay, sensitivity was 95% in all sample types. The sensitivities and specificities for both tests on each of the sample types did not significantly differ. There was 10-14% discordance on hrHPV genotype.

CONCLUSIONS

CIN2+ detection using HPV testing of U1 shows a sensitivity similar to that of CTS or brush-based SS, and is convenient. There was substantial to almost excellent agreement between all samples on genotype with both hrHPV assays. There was no advantage in testing U1 compared with U2 samples.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Similar CIN2+ sensitivity for HPV testing in first-void urine, physician-taken smear and brush-based self-sample.

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.

HPV self-sampling in cervical cancer screening: the effect of different invitation strategies in various socioeconomic groups - a randomized controlled trial

Background

Participation in cervical cancer screening varies by socioeconomic status. The aims were to assess if offering human papilloma virus (HPV) self-sampling kits has an effect on screening participation among various socioeconomic groups and to determine if two invitation strategies for offering self-sampling influence the participation rate equally.

Methods

The study was based on registry data that were applied to data from a randomized controlled trial (n=9,791) measuring how offering HPV self-sampling affected screening participation. The women received either 1) a self-sampling kit mailed directly to their homes (directly mailed group); 2) an invitation to order the kit (opt-in group); or 3) a standard second reminder to attend regular cytology screening (control group). The participation data were linked to registries containing socioeconomic information.

Results

Women in the directly mailed group participated significantly more than women in the control group, regardless of their socioeconomic status, but the largest effects were observed in Western immigrants (participation difference [PD]=18.1%, 95% CI=10.2%–26.0%) and social welfare recipients (PD=15.2%, 95% CI=9.7%–20.6%). Compared with the control group, opt-in self-sampling only had an insignificant effect on participation among women who were immigrants, retired, or less educated. Western immigrants had a significantly higher increase in participation than native Danish women when kits were mailed directly compared with the opt-in strategy (PD=18.1%, 95% CI=10.2%–26.2% and PD=5.5%, 95% CI=2.9%–8.1%, respectively, P=0.01).

Conclusion

All socioeconomic groups benefited from the directly mailed strategy in terms of higher screening participation, but Western immigrants and lower socioeconomic groups seemed to benefit the most. Immigrants and some lower socioeconomic groups only had insignificant benefits of opt-in self-sampling. The directly mailed strategy might be preferable to opt-in self-sampling because it ensures that ethnic minority groups obtain benefits of introducing HPV self-sampling in an organized cervical cancer screening program.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials NCT02680262. Registered February 10, 2016.

Good concordance of HPV detection between cervico-vaginal self-samples and general practitioner-collected samples using the Cobas 4800 HPV DNA test

Background

Studies comparing self-samples and clinician-collected samples for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) detection using clinically validated PCR-based HPV DNA assays are limited. We measured the concordance of HPV detection between home-based self-sampling and general practitioner (GP) sampling using the Cobas 4800 HPV DNA test and studied women’s accept of home-based self-sampling.

Methods

Paired GP-collected samples and cervico-vaginal self-samples were obtained from 213 women aged 30–59 years diagnosed with ASC-US within the cervical cancer screening program. After undergoing cervical cytology at their GP, the women collected a self-sample with the Evalyn Brush at home and completed a questionnaire. Both samples were HPV-tested using the Cobas 4800 test. Histology results were available for those who tested HPV positive in GP-collected samples.

Results

We observed good concordance for HPV detection between self-samples and GP-collected samples (κ: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.58–0.81). No underlying CIN2+ cases were missed by self-sampling. Women evaluated that self-sampling was easy (97.2%, 95% CI: 93.9–98.9%) and comfortable (94.8%, 95% CI: 90.9–97.4%).

Conclusions

Home-based self-sampling using the Evalyn Brush and the Cobas 4800 test is an applicable and reliable alternative to GP-sampling.

Comparison between professional sampling and self-sampling for HPV-based cervical cancer screening among postmenopausal women

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether self-sampling is as reliable as professional sampling for HPV testing and genotype detection among postmenopausal women.

METHODS

In the present prospective cross-sectional study, women in Örebro County, Sweden, who had high-risk HPV (hrHPV) and normal cytology results in exit screening tests conducted in between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2014, were invited to follow-up screenings between February 24, 2015 and May 15, 2015, that included professional sampling and self-sampling. HPV genotypes were identified by a DNA-based assay that could detect 35 HPV genotypes. Findings between the different sampling methods were compared.

RESULTS

Of 143 women who participated, 119 returned a self-sample. Completely concordant results were observed in 67 of these samples when both hrHPV and low-risk HPV genotypes were analyzed. Overall, 99 (83.2%) women had the same clinically relevant finding from both sampling methods. Twenty women had discordant hrHPV results (hrHPV detected in 10 self-samples vs 10 professionally collected samples; Cohen κ 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.53-0.80). There was no significant difference between the two sampling methods for clinically significant infections (P>0.99) or extended genotyping (P=0.827).

CONCLUSION

Postmenopausal women could be offered self-sampling devices to increase screening-program coverage while maintaining test quality.

Preventing cervical cancer using HPV self-sampling: direct mailing of test-kits increases screening participation more than timely opt-in procedures - a randomized controlled trial

Background

Cervical cancer screening participation remains insufficient in most countries. Our aim was to evaluate whether offering a HPV self-sampling kit, either mailed directly to the woman’s home or using timely opt-in procedures for ordering the kit, increased screening participation compared with a standard second reminder.

Methods

In this randomized, controlled effectiveness trial, 9791 Danish women aged 30–64 who were due to receive the second reminder were equally randomized to either: 1) direct mailing of a second reminder and a self-sampling kit (directly mailed group); 2) mailing of a second reminder that offered a self-sampling kit to be ordered by e-mail, text message, phone, or webpage (opt-in group); or 3) mailing of a second reminder to attend regular cytology screening (control group). In an intention-to-treat analysis, we estimated the participation rate at 180 days post intervention, by returning a self-sample or attending regular cytology screening. We calculated the proportion of women with a positive HPV self-sample who attended for cervical cytology triage at the general practitioner within 90 days.

Results

Participation was significantly higher in the directly mailed group (38.0%) and in the opt-in group (30.9%) than in the control group (25.2%) (participation difference (PD): 12.8%, 95% CI: 10.6–15.0% and PD: 5.7%, 95% CI: 3.5–7.9%, respectively). Within 90 days, 107 women (90.7%, 95% CI: 83.9–95.3%) with a HPV-positive self-sample attended follow-up.

Conclusions

Offering the opportunity of HPV self-sampling as an alternative to regular cytology screening increased participation; the direct mailing strategy was the most effective invitation strategy. A high compliance with follow-up was seen.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials NCT02680262. Registered 10 February 2016.

Mailed Human Papillomavirus Self-Collection With Papanicolaou Test Referral for Infrequently Screened Women in the United States

BACKGROUND

Testing for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection using mailed, self-collected samples is a promising approach to increase screening in women who do not attend clinic screening at recommended intervals.

METHODS

To assess this intervention among high-risk women in the United States, 429 women without a Papanicolaou (Pap) test in 4 or more years (overdue by US guidelines) were recruited from the general population. Participants aged 30 to 65 years were mailed a kit to self-collect a cervicovaginal sample at home, return the sample by mail, and receive HPV results by telephone, with referral to follow-up cytological Pap testing at a local clinic. Cervicovaginal self-samples were collected with a Viba brush, stored in Scope mouthwash, and tested by Hybrid Capture 2. Data were collected in 2010 to 2011 and analyzed in 2017.

RESULTS

Two-thirds (64%) of participants returned a self-collected sample, of whom 15% tested HPV DNA positive. Human papillomavirus self-test-positive women reported higher rates of follow-up Pap tests (82%) than did those with self-test negative results (51%). No demographic differences were found in self-test return rate or HPV positivity. High acceptability was reported in participant surveys: most women (81%) had "mostly positive" overall thoughts about the self-test, and most reported being comfortable receiving the kit in the mail (99%), returning their self-collected sample by mail (82%), and receiving their test results by telephone (97%).

CONCLUSIONS

Conducting HPV self-testing through population-based recruitment, mailed kit delivery and return by mail, and results delivery by telephone has the potential to reach a broad segment of US underscreened women.

Self-sampling for human papillomavirus DNA detection: a preliminary study of compliance and feasibility in BOLIVIA

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer incidence and mortality rates in Bolivia are among the highest in Latin America. This investigation aims to evaluate the possibility of using simple devices, e.g. a cotton swab and a glass slide, for self-sampling in order to detect human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA by PCR in cervico-vaginal cells.

METHODS

In the first phase of our study we evaluated the use of a glass slide as a transport medium for cervical cells. A physician took paired-cervical samples from 235 women. One sample was transported in Easyfix® solution and the other sample was smeared over a glass slide. Both were further analyzed and compared for human DNA recovery and HPV detection. A kappa value was determined to evaluate the agreement between the HPV DNA detection rates. In the second phase of the study, 222 women from the urban, peri-urban and rural regions of Cochabamba were requested to perform self-sampling using the following devices: a cotton swab combined with a glass slide, and a vaginal tampon. Women gave their opinion about the self-sampling technique. Finally, the agreement for high risk-HPV detection between self- and physician-collected samples was performed in 201 samples in order to evaluate the self-sampling technique.

RESULTS

Firstly, the comparison between Easyfix® solution and the glass slide to transport clinical samples gave a good agreement for HPV DNA detection (κ = 0.71, 95% CI 0.60-0.81). Secondly, self-sampling, especially with cotton swab combined with glass slide, would generally be preferred over clinician sampling for a screening program based on HPV detection. Finally, we showed a good agreement between self- and physician collected samples for high risk-HPV detection (κ = 0.71, 95% CI 0.55-0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Simple devices such as a cotton swab and a glass slide can be used to perform self-sampling and HPV DNA detection. Furthermore, most Bolivian women preferred self-sampling over clinician-sampling for cervical cancer screening.

Safety and acceptability of human papillomavirus testing of self-collected specimens: A methodologic study of the impact of collection devices and HPV assays on sensitivity for cervical cancer and high-grade lesions

BACKGROUND

Comparative data on different self-collection methods is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of hrHPV testing of two self-collection devices for detection of cervical carcinoma and high-grade lesions.

STUDY DESIGN

Three hundred ten patients collected two cervicovaginal specimens using a brush (Evalyn^®Brush) and a swab (FLOQSwabs™), and filled a questionnaire at home. Then, a physician at the clinic took a cervical specimen into PreservCyt^® buffer for hrHPV testing and cytology. All specimens were tested using Anyplex™ II HPV28, Cobas^® 4800 HPV Test and Xpert^®HPV.

RESULTS

Performance comparison included 45 cervical carcinomas and 187 patients with premalignant lesions. Compared to the physician-specimen, hrHPV testing of Evalyn^®Brush showed non-inferior sensitivity for CIN3+ (relative sensitivity of Anyplex™ 0.99; Cobas^® 0.96; Xpert^®HPV 0.97) while hrHPV testing of FLOQSwabs™ showed inferior sensitivity (relative sensitivity of Anyplex™ 0.91; Cobas^® 0.92; Xpert^®HPV 0.93). Similar results were observed for invasive carcinomas albeit that FLOQSwabs™ was statistically non-inferior to the physician-specimen. Self-collection by either Evalyn^®Brush or FLOQSwabs™ was more sensitive for CIN3+ than LSIL or worse cytology. Significant decrease in sensitivity for CIN3+ were observed for FLOQSwabs™ when specimens were preprocessed for hrHPV testing after 28 days. Both devices were well accepted, but patients considered Evalyn^®Brush easier and more comfortable than FLOQSwabs™.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-collection is comparable to current screening practice for detecting cervical carcinoma and CIN3+ but device and specimen processing effects exist. Only validated procedure including collection device, hrHPV assay and specimen preparation should be used.

Candidate biomarkers in the cervical vaginal fluid for the (self-)diagnosis of cervical precancer

Purpose

Despite improvement in vaccines against human papilloma virus (HPV), the causative agent of cervical cancer, screening women for cervical precancer will remain indispensable in the coming 30–40 years. A simple test that could be performed at home or at a doctor’s practice and that informs the woman whether she is at risk would significantly help make a broader group of patients who aware that they need medical treatment. Cervical vaginal fluid (CVF) is a body fluid that is very well suited for such a test.

Methods

Narrative review of cervical (pre)cancer candidate biomarkers from cervicovaginal fluid, is based on a detailed review of the literature. We will also discuss the possibilities that these biomarkers create for the development of a self-test or point-of-care test for cervical (pre)cancer.

Results

Several DNA, DNA methylation, miRNA, and protein biomarkers were identified in the cervical vaginal fluid; however, not all of these biomarkers are suited for development of a simple diagnostic assay.

Conclusions

Proteins, especially alpha-actinin-4, are most suited for development of a simple assay for cervical (pre)cancer. Accuracy of the test could further be improved by combination of several proteins or by combination with a new type of biomarker, e.g., originating from the cervicovaginal microbiome or metabolome.

Accuracy of self-collected human papillomavirus samples from Japanese women with abnormal cervical cytology

AIM

The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of self-collected vaginal samples compared with physician-collected cervical samples for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in Japanese women with abnormal cervical cytology. We also assessed the acceptability of self-collected HPV (sHPV) testing using a questionnaire.

METHODS

Women aged 20-69 years (n = 136) attending Yokohama City University Hospital because of abnormal cervical cytology between April 2014 and January 2015 were enrolled in this study. Cervical samples for conventional cytology and physician-collected HPV (pHPV) testing were obtained before colposcopic examination. After this examination, patients were asked to provide a self-sampled vaginal specimen (sHPV) at home, some time between the following day and the next week and to complete a self-sampling acceptability questionnaire.

RESULTS

The overall positive rates of HPV detection with pHPV and sHPV testing were 61.0% (83/136) and 40.4% (55/136), respectively (P < 0.001). sHPV testing had a lower sensitivity compared to pHPV for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)2 or worse (CIN2+: 59.4% vs 100%, P < 0.001; CIN3: 66.7% vs 100%, P = 0.248). There were no statistically significant differences in the sensitivity to detect CIN3 among pHPV testing, sHPV testing, and cytology. The self-collecting device had good acceptability.

CONCLUSION

sHPV testing is a possible technique with which to improve poor cervical cancer screening uptake rates in Japan; however, the sensitivity to detect CIN2+ lesions must improve before it can be a substitute for conventional cytology or pHPV testing. Further large-scale acceptability studies involving non-responders are also needed before practical application.

Evaluation of the Impact of Human Papillomavirus DNA Self-sampling on the Uptake of Cervical Cancer Screening

Background:

The rate of uptake of the Papanicolaou (Pap) smear is generally low. Its causal relationship with human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA allows HPV DNA self-sampling to be used as an alternative screening tool for cervical cancer.

Objectives:

This study explored the acceptability of HPV DNA self-sampling and its impact on the rate of compliance with cervical cancer screening.

Methods:

A crossover randomized clinical trial was conducted in community-based clinics. Participants were allocated to 1 of the following 2 arms: arm 1: self-sampling before a Pap smear; and arm 2: a Pap smear before self-sampling. After completing the 2 screening methods, participants in each arm took part in face-to-face interviews using standardized, structured questionnaire.

Results:

The participants accepted both self-sampling (7.7/10) and a Pap smear (7.8/10) for cervical cancer screening. However, participants without previous experience of Pap smears or who had more than 2 sexual partners preferred self-sampling (P < .05). The participants expressed overall positive feelings toward self-sampling, and there was good agreement in HPV detection between the 2 screening methods (κ = 0.65). We estimate that the introduction of HPV DNA self-sampling could increase the future rate of uptake of cervical cancer screening by 6.5% and would entail lower costs.

Conclusion:

Human papillomavirus DNA self-sampling could be an alternative screening method to increase the coverage of cervical cancer screening.

Implications for Practice:

Human papillomavirus DNA self-sampling could overcome the barriers raised by Pap smears and enhance the coverage of cervical cancer screening. Promotional publicity and education are essential.

Reactivation of Latent HPV Infections After Renal Transplantation

Female renal transplant recipients (RTRs) have an increased risk for developing human papillomavirus (HPV)-related (pre)malignant lesions of the genital tract. This study aims to assess the genital prevalence of HPV before and after renal transplantation (RT). In female patients who were counseled for RT at the Radboud University Medical Center Nijmegen, the Netherlands, gynecological examination was performed at first visit, and 1 and 2 years later. HPV self-sampling and questionnaires on sexual behavior were performed every 3 months. In 65 patients who underwent RT, the high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) prevalence as assessed with the highly sensitive SPF₁₀ -LiPA₂₅ test increased significantly from 19% before to 31% after RT (p = 0.045). Based upon the clinically validated Cobas 4800 HPV test, the hrHPV prevalence increased from 10% before to 14% after RT (p = 0.31). During follow-up, no changes in sexual behavior were reported. Thirty-three patients who did not undergo RT showed a hrHPV prevalence of 21% at study entry and of 27% after 12 months with the sensitive test, and a stable prevalence of 16% with the clinically validated test. The results of this study indicate that activation of latent HPV infections may contribute to the increased risk of HPV-related (pre)malignant lesions in female RTRs.

Randomized trial evaluating self-sampling for HPV DNA based tests for cervical cancer screening in Nigeria

Background

Cervical cancer incidence and mortality rates in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) remain high due to several factors including low levels of uptake of cervical cancer screening. Self-collection of cervicovaginal samples for HPV DNA testing may be an effective modality that can increase uptake of cervical cancer screening in SSA and hard to reach populations in developed countries. We investigated whether self-collection of cervicovaginal samples for HPV DNA tests would be associated with increased uptake of screening compared with clinic based collection of samples. Furthermore, we compared the quality of samples collected by both approaches for use in HPV genotyping.

Methods

We conducted a community based randomized trial in a semi-urban district of Abuja, Nigeria with 400 women, aged 30 to 65 years randomized to either hospital-collection or self-collection of cervicovaginal samples. We compared cervical cancer screening uptake among the 2 groups and evaluated the concentration of human DNA in the samples by measuring RNase P gene levels using qPCR. High-risk HPV DNA detection and typing was done using the GP5+/6+ Luminex system.

Results

Most participants in the self-collection arm (93%, 185/200) submitted their samples while only 56% (113/200) of those invited to the hospital for sample collection attended and were screened during the study period (p value < 0.001). Human genomic DNA was detected in all but five (1.7%) participants, all of whom were in the self-collection arm. The prevalence of high-risk HPV in the study population was 10% with types 35, 52 and 18 being the commonest.

Conclusions

Our study shows that self-sampling significantly increased uptake of HPV DNA based test for cervical cancer screening in this population and the samples collected were adequate for HPV detection and genotyping. Cervical cancer screening programs that incorporate self-sampling and HPV DNA tests are feasible and may significantly improve uptake of cervical cancer screening in SSA.

Ease, Comfort, and Performance of the HerSwab Vaginal Self-Sampling Device for the Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae

BACKGROUND

Many sexually transmitted diseases are asymptomatic in the lower genital tract and can cause upper tract complications if left untreated. Self-collected vaginal (SCV) swabs enable the accurate detection of many sexually transmitted infections and give women the option of collecting their own samples while providing them with privacy and convenience.

METHODS

We compared SCV samples collected and transported dry using the HerSwab device to physician-collected vaginal (PCV) Aptima swabs for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG), and measured patients' ease and comfort with self-collection. A total of 189 women aged 16 to 41 years were consented into the study and answered a standardized anonymized questionnaire regarding self-collection with the HerSwab device.

RESULTS

Women reported self-collection with HerSwab to be easy (97.1%) and comfortable (88.3%). They preferred self-collection over physician collection (80.9%) and would consider using HerSwab for self-collection at home (79.7%). Samples of SCV and PCV showed an overall agreement of 94.7% (κ = 0.64) for CT and of 98.4% (κ = 0.56) for NG, and HerSwab collection detected 7 more positive patients than PCV collection. The overall prevalence of infection was 10.6% for CT and 2.6% for NG.

CONCLUSION

HerSwab SCV samples are suitable for the diagnosis of CT and NG.

Study protocol of the CHOiCE trial: a three-armed, randomized, controlled trial of home-based HPV self-sampling for non-participants in an organized cervical cancer screening program

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of cervical cancer screening programs is challenged by suboptimal participation and coverage. Offering cervico-vaginal self-sampling for human papillomavirus testing (HPV self-sampling) to non-participants can increase screening participation. However, the effect varies substantially among studies, especially depending on the approach used to offer HPV self-sampling. The present trial evaluates the effect on participation in an organized screening program of a HPV self-sampling kit mailed directly to the home of the woman or mailed to the woman's home on demand only, compared with the standard second reminder for regular screening.

METHODS/DESIGN

The CHOiCE trial is a parallel, randomized, controlled, open-label trial. It will include 9327 women aged 30-64 years who are living in the Central Denmark Region and who have not participated in cervical cancer screening after an invitation and one reminder. The women will be equally randomized into three arms: 1) Directly mailed a second reminder including a HPV self-sampling kit; 2) Mailed a second reminder offering a HPV self-sampling kit, to be ordered by e-mail, text message, phone, or through a webpage; and 3) Mailed a second reminder for a practitioner-collected sample (control group). The primary outcome will be the proportion of women in the intervention groups who participate by returning their HPV self-sampling kit or have a practitioner-collected sample compared with the proportion of women who have a practitioner-collected sample in the control group at 90 and 180 days after mail out of the second reminders. Per-protocol and intention-to-treat analyses will be performed. The secondary outcome will be the proportion of women with a positive HPV self-collected sample who attend follow-up testing at 30, 60, or 90 days after mail out of the results.

DISCUSSION

The CHOiCE trial will provide strong and important evidence allowing us to determine if and how HPV self-sampling can be used to increase participation in cervical cancer screening. This trial therefore has the potential to improve prevention and reduce the number of deaths caused by cervical cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials NCT02680262 . Registered 10 February 2016.

Validation of the FAM19A4/mir124-2 DNA methylation test for both lavage- and brush-based self-samples to detect cervical (pre)cancer in HPV-positive women

Objectives

DNA methylation analysis of cancer-related genes is a promising tool for HPV-positive women to identify those with cervical (pre)cancer (CIN3+) in need of treatment. However, clinical performance of methylation markers can be influenced by the sample type utilized. We describe a multiplex quantitative methylation-specific PCR that targets FAM19A4 and mir124-2 loci, to detect CIN3+ using both HPV-positive lavage- and brush self-samples.

Methods

We determined methylation thresholds for clinical classification using HPV-positive training sets comprising lavage self-samples of 182 women (including 40 with CIN3+) and brush self-samples of 224 women (including 61 with CIN3+). Subsequently, independent HPV-positive validation sets of 389 lavage self-samples (including 78 with CIN3+), and 254 brush self-samples (including 72 with CIN3+) were tested using the preset thresholds. Furthermore, the clinical performance of combined methylation analysis and HPV16/18 genotyping was determined.

Results

Training set analysis revealed similar FAM19A4 and mir124-2 thresholds for both self-sample types to yield highest CIN3+ sensitivity at 70% specificity. Validation set analysis resulted in a CIN3+ sensitivity of 70.5% (95%CI: 60.4–80.6) at a specificity of 67.8% (95%CI: 62.7–73.0) for lavage self-samples, and a CIN3+ sensitivity of 69.4% (95%CI: 58.8–80.1) at a 76.4% (95%CI: 70.2–82.6) specificity for brush self-samples. In combination with HPV16/18 genotyping, CIN3+ sensitivity and specificity were 88.5% (95%CI: 81.4–95.6) and 46.0% (95%CI: 40.4–51.5) for lavage self-samples, and 84.7% (95%CI: 76.4–93.0) and 54.9% (95%CI: 47.7–62.2) for brush self-samples.

Conclusions

FAM19A4/mir124-2 methylation analysis performs equally well in HPV-positive lavage- and brush self-samples to identify women with CIN3+. In combination with HPV16/18 genotyping, significantly higher CIN3+ sensitivities are obtained, at decreased specificity.

•

FAM19A4/mir124-2 triage of HPV-positive self-samples is a feasible and promising tool

•

FAM19A4/mir124-2 analysis identifies HPV-positive women at risk of cervical cancer.

•

FAM19A4/mir124-2 analysis performs equally well in lavage and brush self-samples.

•

Further validation of HPV self-sampling with FAM19A4/mir124-2 triage is warranted

Qualitative study of barriers to cervical cancer screening among Nigerian women

OBJECTIVES

To explore the barriers to cervical cancer screening, focusing on religious and cultural factors, in order to inform group-specific interventions that may improve uptake of cervical cancer screening programmes.

DESIGN

We conducted four focus group discussions among Muslim and Christian women in Nigeria.

SETTING

Discussions were conducted in two hospitals, one in the South West and the other in the North Central region of Nigeria.

PARTICIPANTS

27 Christian and 22 Muslim women over the age of 18, with no diagnosis of cancer.

RESULTS

Most participants in the focus group discussions had heard about cervical cancer except Muslim women in the South Western region who had never heard about cervical cancer. Participants believed that wizardry, multiple sexual partners and inserting herbs into the vagina cause cervical cancer. Only one participant knew about the human papillomavirus. Among the Christian women, the majority of respondents had heard about cervical cancer screening and believed that it could be used to prevent cervical cancer. Participants mentioned religious and cultural obligations of modesty, gender of healthcare providers, fear of disclosure of results, fear of nosocomial infections, lack of awareness, discrimination at hospitals, and need for spousal approval as barriers to uptake of screening. These barriers varied by religion across the geographical regions.

CONCLUSIONS

Barriers to cervical cancer screening vary by religious affiliations. Interventions to increase cervical cancer awareness and screening uptake in multicultural and multireligious communities need to take into consideration the varying cultural and religious beliefs in order to design and implement effective cervical cancer screening intervention programmes.