Is self-sampling to test for high-risk papillomavirus an acceptable option among women who have been treated for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia?

A pilot study of risk-stratified cervical cancer screening

Background: Cervical screening programs target entire populations, although it is well established that cervical cancer risks can vary >100-fold based, in particular, on the woman's screening history. Since cervical screening switched to Human Papillomavirus (HPV) testing as the primary screening method, the risk differences are even larger as different HPV types may vary in associated cancer risk by 100 times. Furthermore, HPV infections with the most oncogenic types are declining dramatically because of HPV vaccination programs. Tailoring screening intensity based on the known cancer risk of the individual (risk-stratified screening) therefore has great potential to increase both the sensitivity and specificity. Within Horizon 2020 a major project for Risk-stratified Screening for Cervical Cancer (RISCC) has therefore been launched. We performed a pilot study of risk-stratified screening to evaluate feasibility and acceptability of offering vaginal HPV self-sampling tests to women with a higher risk of cervical cancer. Methods: We identified resident women who had had either i) atypical glandular cells in screening tests during the past six years (risk >150/100,000 woman-years) or ii) abnormal screening findings above the age of 50, but without sufficient follow-up (risk >65/100,000). The women were invited, either by short message service (SMS) or physical letters, to order an HPV self-sampling kit via the study web-platform. The returned self-collected samples were tested for HPV. If positive, women were invited for clinical follow-up. Results: Among 920 targeted women, 191 (21%) placed an order and 163 (18%) returned a self-collected sample. Among all tested samples, 19 (12%) were positive for hrHPV and 18 of these women attended clinical follow-up. Conclusions: SMS invitations to high-risk women complemented with physical letters are feasible and result in substantial requests for kits and submission of samples. Future work will focus on improving the efficiency of the procedure and further increasing attendance.

Predictors of treatment failure for adenocarcinoma in situ of the uterine cervix: Up to 14 years of recorded follow‑up

The incidence of adenocarcinoma-in-situ (AIS) of the uterine cervix is rising, with invasive adenocarcinoma becoming increasingly common relative to squamous cell carcinoma. The present study reviewed a cohort of 84 patients first-time treated by conization for histologically-confirmed AIS from January 2001 to January 2017, to identify risk factors associated with recurrent/persistent AIS as well as progression to invasive cervical cancer. Nearly 80% of the patients were age 40 or younger at conization. Endocervical and ectocervical margins were deemed clear in 42 of the patients. All but two patients had ≥1 follow-up, with post-conization high-risk human papilloma virus (HPV) results documented in 52 patients. Altogether, 12 histopathologically-confirmed recurrences (14.3%) were detected; two of these patients had microinvasive or invasive carcinoma. In three other patients cytology showed AIS, but without recorded histopathology. Eight patients underwent hysterectomy for incomplete resection very soon after primary conization; they were not included in bivariate or multivariate analyses. Having ≥1 post-follow-up positive HPV finding yielded the highest sensitivity for histologically-confirmed recurrence: 87.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 47.4-99.7]. Current or historical smoking status provided highest specificity: 94.4 (95% CI 72.7-99.9) and overall accuracy: 88.0 (95% CI 68.8-97.5) for histologically-confirmed recurrence. With multiple logistic regression (MLR), adjusting for age at conization and abnormal follow-up cytology, positive HPV18 was the strongest predictor of histologically-confirmed recurrence (P<0.005). Having ≥2 positive HPV results also predicted recurrence (P<0.02). Any unclear margin yielded an odds ratio 7.21 (95% CI 1.34-38.7) for histologically-confirmed recurrence adjusting for age, but became non-significant when including abnormal cytology in the MLR model. The strong predictive value of HPV, particularly HPV18 and persistent HPV positivity vis-à-vis detected recurrence indicated that regular HPV testing for patients treated for AIS is imperative. In conclusion, furthering a participatory approach, including attention to smoking with encouragement to attend needed long-term follow-up, can better protect these patients at high risk for cervical cancer.

HPV self-sampling in the follow-up of women after treatment of cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia: A prospective study in a high-income country

Current follow-up strategy for women after large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) for cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia (CIN) is burdened by a low compliance. We evaluated the performance of home-based Human Papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling (Self-HPV) after treatment for CIN with the aim to assess the (i) feasibility and (ii) follow-up compliance. This study took place at the Geneva University Hospitals between May 2016 and September 2020. Women aged 18 years or older, undergoing LLETZ for a biopsy-proven cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 or worse (CIN1 + ) were invited to participate. Agreement statistics, interpreted according to the scale of κ values, were calculated for Self-HPV and HPV performed by the physician (Dr-HPV). The samples were analyzed using GeneXpert and Cobas. Sample size was calculated to provide a 10% precision to estimate the kappa coefficient. A total of 127 women were included, with a median age of 35 years (interquartile range 30-41 years). There was a substantial agreement between Self-HPV and Dr-HPV using GeneXpert at 6 and 12 months, with a κ value of 0.63 (95%CI: 0.47-0.79) and 0.66 (95%CI: 0.50-0.82), respectively. Up to 9/10 (90%) women who did not come to their follow-up visit did not send their Self-HPV, either. In the follow-up after LLETZ treatment, home-based self-HPV is feasible, with substantial agreement between the two groups, however, concern remains regarding adherence to Self-HPV performance at home and loss to follow-up. The trial was registered on clinicaltrials.gov with the identifier NCT02780960.

Age, margin status, high-risk human papillomavirus and cytology independently predict recurrent high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia up to 6 years after treatment

The present study aimed to identify the factors that independently contribute to disease recurrence among women first-time treated for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) during 4–6 years of follow-up. Overall, 529 of 530 eligible patients participated; these patients all attended a 1st follow-up appointment ~6 months post-conization, at which time high-risk human-papillomavirus (HPV) testing, liquid-based cytology and colposcopy were performed. Full data on margin excision status, other aspects of initial treatment and comorbidity were obtained. At least one subsequent follow-up was attended by 88% of patients. A total of 22 recurrent cases were detected during follow-up. Detected recurrence was the outcome of focus for multiple logistic regression analysis, with odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) computed. Four significant independent risk factors were identified: Age 45 years or above (OR=3.5, 95% CI=1.3–9.9), one or both unclear or uncertain margins (OR=5.3, 95% CI=2.0–14.2), positive HPV at 1st follow-up (OR=5.8, 95% CI=2.0–16.8), and abnormal cytology at 1st follow-up (OR=3.9, 95% CI=1.4–11.0). Bivariate analysis revealed that persistent HPV positivity was associated with recurrence (P<0.01). These findings indicated that incomplete excision of the CIN lesion may warrant more intensive subsequent screening, regardless of early post-conization HPV findings. Although early post-conization positive HPV was a powerful, independent predictor of recurrent high-grade CIN, over one-third of the patients with detected recurrence had a negative early post-conization HPV finding. These patients returned for routine screening, at which time, in most cases, HPV status was positive, thus indicating the need for repeated HPV evaluation. Especially during the on-going pandemic, home vaginal self-sampling is recommended. Particular attention is required for women aged ≥45 years. In addition, although not statistically significant, relevant comorbidities, especially autoimmune conditions, warrant consideration in clinical decision-making. Women who have been treated for high-grade CIN are at risk for recurrent disease and progression to cervical cancer; therefore, they require careful, individualized follow-up to avoid these adverse consequences.

HPV self-sampling for cervical cancer screening: a systematic review of values and preferences

INTRODUCTION

The WHO recommends human papillomavirus (HPV) cervical self-sampling as an additional screening method and HPV DNA testing as an effective approach for the early detection of cervical cancer for women aged ≥30 years. This systematic review assesses end user's values and preferences related to HPV self-sampling.

METHODS

We searched four electronic databases (PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature and Embase) using search terms for HPV and self-sampling to identify articles meeting inclusion criteria. A standardised data extraction form was used to capture study setting, population, sample size and results related to values and preferences.

RESULTS

Of 1858 records retrieved, 72 studies among 52 114 participants published between 2002 and 2018 were included in this review. Almost all studies were cross-sectional surveys. Study populations included end users who were mainly adolescent girls and adult women. Ages ranged from 14 to 80 years. Most studies (57%) were conducted in high-income countries. Women generally found HPV self-sampling highly acceptable regardless of age, income or country of residence. Lack of self-confidence with collecting a reliable sample was the most commonly cited reason for preferring clinician-collected samples. Most women preferred home-based self-sampling to self-sampling at a clinic. The cervical swab was the most common and most accepted HPV DNA sampling device.

CONCLUSIONS

HPV self-sampling is generally a highly accepted method of cervical cancer screening for end users globally. End user preferences for self-sampling device, method and setting can inform the development of new and expanded interventions to increase HPV screening.

Comparison of vaginal self-sampling and cervical sampling by medical professionals for the detection of HPV and CIN2+: A randomized study

Primary screening with human papillomavirus (HPV) test is more effective in reducing cervical cancer incidence than cytology and it also offers the opportunity to self-sample. We conducted a randomized study to compare vaginal self-sampling with cervical sampling by medical professionals for HPV testing concerning prevalence of HPV and detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) or grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) in primary screening. In total, 11 951 women aged 30-60 years were randomized into two groups, 5961 for self-sampling (SS arm) and 5990 for sampling by medical professionals (SMP arm). Sampling was performed with a RoversViba-brush in the SS arm and a cytobrush in the SMP arm. All samples were applied to an indicating FTA elute card and analyzed for HPV using a clinically validated real-time PCR test (hpVIR). All HPV-positive women performed repeated sampling about 6 months later using the same procedure as used initially. All HPV-positive women in the second sampling were referred to colposcopy. The prevalence of HPV in the first test did not differ between the SS arm (6.8%, 167/2466) and the SMP arm (7.8%, 118/1519) (P = .255). The prevalence of CIN2+ per 1000 screened women was 17 (43/2466 × 1000) (95%CI 13-24) in the SS arm and 21 (32/1519 × 1000) (95%CI 15-30) in the SMP arm. For CIN3+, the prevalence per 1000 screened women was 14 (35/2466 × 1000) (95%CI 10-20) in the SS arm and 15 (23/1519 × 1000) (95%CI 10-23) in the SMP arm. In conclusion, self-sampling and sampling by medical professionals showed the same prevalence of HPV and detection rate of CIN2+ and CIN3+ in histology.

Acceptance of Self-Sampling Among Long-Term Cervical Screening Non-Attenders with HPV-Positive Results: Promising Opportunity for Specific Cancer Education

This study aims to investigate acceptance of vaginal self-sampling for high-risk human papilloma virus (HPV) among long-term screening non-attenders at increased cervical cancer risk and to identify leverage points to promote screening adherence among these women. Forty-three long-term screening non-attenders performed home vaginal self-sampling for HPV, had positive HPV results, and subsequently attended gynecologic examination. Sixteen (37.2%) had high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2 or 3), and two had invasive cervical cancer. Forty-one of these women completed a questionnaire concerning Specific Knowledge about HPV, CIN, and cervical cancer, potential barriers to screening and views about self-sampling. Results were compared with 479 women treated for CIN2+ who attended gynecologic follow-up and also performed self-sampling. Significant multivariate predictors of long-term non-attender status compared with referents were low Specific Knowledge, high confidence in self-sampling, and potential barriers-refraining from activity to attend gynecologic examination, needing another's help to attend, and long travel time. Non-attenders citing fear/refraining from gynecologic examination as why they preferred self-sampling significantly more often had lowest Specific Knowledge compared with other non-attenders. All non-attenders could envision themselves doing self-sampling again while only 74% of referents endorsed this statement (p = 0.0003). We conclude that HPV self-sampling is an acceptable option for women at increased cervical cancer risk who have been long-term screening non-attenders. Educational outreach to enhance Specific Knowledge about HPV, CIN and cervical cancer is critical. Those non-attenders who explicitly avoid gynecologic examinations need special attention. Trial Registry: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02750124.

Self-sampling for high-risk human papillomavirus as a follow-up alternative after treatment of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

Women treated for high-grade cervical-intraepithelial-neoplasia (CIN) require long-term follow-up with high-risk human-papillomavirus (HPV) testing. Self-sampling for HPV is well-accepted among these patients, but its role in follow-up for this group requires investigation. The present study examined how well HPV findings from self-sampled vaginal (VSS) and urine specimens correctly identified women from this cohort with recurrent CIN2+ compared with samples collected by clinicians. At 1st post-conization follow-up, 531 patients (99.8% participation) gave urine samples, performed VSS, underwent colposcopy with punch biopsy of visible lesions and clinician-collected cervical sampling for HPV analysis and liquid-based cytology. A total of 113 patients with positive HPV and/or abnormal cytology at 1st follow-up underwent 2nd follow-up. At 1st follow-up, all patients with recurrent CIN3 had positive HPV results by all methods. Clinician sampling and VSS revealed HPV16 positivity in 50% of recurrent cases and urine sampling revealed HPV16 positivity in 25% of recurrent cases. At 2nd follow-up, all 7 newly-detected CIN2/3 recurrences were associated with HPV positivity on VSS and clinician-samples. Only clinician-collected samples detected HPV positivity for two adenocarcinoma-in-situ recurrences, and both were HPV18 positive. A total of 77 patients had abnormal cytology at 1st follow-up, for which HPV positivity via VSS yielded highest sensitivity. The HPV findings were positive from VSS in 12 patients with high-grade squamous-intraepithelial-lesions (HSIL), and 11 patients with HSIL had positive HPV findings in clinician-collected and urine samples. All methods for assessing HPV presence yielded significant age-adjusted odds ratios for predicting abnormal lesions at 1st follow-up. For overall HPV results, Cohen's kappa revealed substantial agreement between VSS and clinician sampling, and moderate agreement between urine and clinician sampling. Clinician sampling and VSS were highly concordant for HPV16. Insofar as the pathology was squamous (not glandular), VSS appeared as sensitive as clinician sampling for HPV in predicting outcome among the present cohort. Since VSS can be performed at home, this option can maximize participation in the required long-term follow-up for these women at high-risk.

The Acceptability and Preference of Vaginal Self-sampling for Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Testing among a Multi-ethnic Asian Female Population

Vaginal self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing can potentially increase cervical screening coverage. This study aimed to investigate the acceptability of vaginal self-sampling for HPV testing and factors that might influence a woman's preference for this as a cervical screening method. This was a cross-sectional study that recruited 725 women from the urban and suburban areas of Selangor, Malaysia. All study participants were instructed to self-collect vaginal sample using a dry flocked swab before responding to a detailed questionnaire documenting their experience and preference for self-sampling. Most of the study participants (>80%) perceived vaginal self-sampling as easy, convenient, not embarrassing, comfortable, and were confident in performing the test. This suggests high acceptability toward vaginal self-sampling for HPV testing. Of the 725 women, 83% preferred self-sampling HPV testing over healthcare personnel sampling HPV testing and Pap test. Women with higher household income and full-time employment status were more likely to prefer self-sampling. Those who had not undergone Pap test also expressed preference for self-sampling HPV testing. Convenience and women's confidence in performing a vaginal self-sampling for HPV testing were the independent key factors that influenced the preference for self-sampling method. Vaginal self-sampling for HPV testing is highly acceptable among Malaysian women. It is the preferred choice as a primary cervical screening method and serves as an alternative to healthcare-acquired sample for Pap test. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: Organized cervical cancer screening remains unachievable in many countries. Self-sampling HPV testing is an evidence-based method that can remove barriers to cervical screening. This is particularly important for developing countries in order to achieve the WHO global strategy to accelerate cervical cancer elimination.