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

Implementing High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling for Cervical Cancer Screening in Ghana: A Study (CarciSCAN) Protocol

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) aims to eliminate cervical cancer by 2030 through a global strategy, centred on high-risk Human papillomavirus (hrHPV)-based screening and treatment. Implementing these strategies in low-resource settings remains challenging, due to barriers associated with limited healthcare infrastructure and patient awareness. Self-sampling for hrHPV has shown higher acceptability and similar diagnostic accuracy compared to clinician-taken samples. This study proposes a protocol to evaluate the clinical efficacy of a cervical cancer screening program utilising hrHPV self-sampling in Ghana.Methods and Analysis: 1000 non-pregnant women aged 30-65 years will be invited to self-collect hrHPV samples. Those testing hrHPV positive will undergo visual inspection with acetic acid. Those diagnosed with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions will be offered ablation. In any case where there is a suspicion of invasion, or equivocal diagnosis, biopsies will be taken. Follow-up for women who are test positive for hrHPV and/or undergo treatment, will involve hrHPV self-sampling after 6 months. HrHPV-negative women will rescreen after 3 years. Biopsies will be taken where immediate treatment is not suitable, and women with confirmed or suspected invasive cervical carcinoma will be referred for surgical and/or oncological care. The primary outcome will be the proportion of women successfully screened, defined as the proportion of women with a valid HPV test result out of those invited to attend cervical screening. Secondary outcomes include screening uptake, disease detection rate, hrHPV genotype prevalence, treatment acceptance rate, successful treatment response, missed disease during treatment, number lost to follow-up, and disease recurrence.Discussion: In low-resource settings, hrHPV self-sampling offers an accessible method to increase screening uptake. This study will inform strategies for broader implementation of cervical cancer screening and contribute to achieving the WHO's goal of elimination by 2030.Trial Registration: Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Kintampo Health Research Centre Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC), Bono East, Ghana, West Africa, on 24 May 2024 (IEC IRB Registration No. 0004854; Study ID: KHRCIEC/2024-03).

Human papillomavirus self-sampling versus provider-sampling in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review of accuracy, acceptability, cost, uptake, and equity

Introduction

HPV self-sampling is a relatively new, cost-effective and widely accepted method, however, uptake in LMICs remains limited. We aimed to map out the evidence and identify gaps in accuracy, acceptability, cost, equity and uptake of self-sampling vs. provider-sampling in LMICs.

Methods

We searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Global Index Medicus, from 1946 to July 2023. Inclusion criteria entailed studies focusing on self-sampling alone or compared to provider-sampling for HPV testing and reporting on at least one outcome of interest (accuracy, acceptability, cost, equity, or uptake). Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts, resolving disagreements through discussion. Data was extracted by one reviewer independently, with quality checks by senior authors, and results were synthesised narratively.

Results

Our search yielded 3,739 records, with 124 studies conducted on 164,165 women aged 15-88 years between 2000 and 2023 included. Most studies were from the African region (n = 61, 49.2%). Designs included cross-sectional (n = 90, 81.1%), randomised (n = 5, 4.5%), modelling (n = 4, 3.6%), micro-costing (n = 2, 1.8%), and non-randomised crossover (n = 1, 0.9%) studies. Outcomes included; acceptability (n = 79, 63.7%), accuracy (n = 51, 41.1%), cost (n = 7, 5.6%), and uptake (n = 7, 5.6%). Most studies reported that participants preferred self-sampling, with only a few studies (n = 7, 8.9%) studies favouring provider-sampling. The sensitivity and specificity of self-sampling ranged from 37.5-96.8% and 41.6-100.0%, respectively. One study directly compared the sensitivity and specificity of dry self-collected vs. wet provider-collected sample transportation. Laboratory costs were similar, but overall costs were lower for self-sampling. Uptake was higher for self-sampling in five of the seven studies. Most studies (n = 106) mentioned equity factors like age (n = 69, 65.1%), education (n = 68, 64.2%) and place of residence (n = 59, 55.6%) but no analysis of their impact was provided.

Conclusion

HPV self-sampling is acceptable and cost-effective but, evidence of its accuracy shows varying sensitivity and specificity. Evidence on the accuracy of dry self-collected vs. wet provider-collected sample transportation is limited. Research evaluating HPV self-sampling's accuracy, including comparisons of transportation modes, uptake, the impact of equity factors in LMICs and comparisons with high-income countries is essential to inform cervical cancer screening uptake.

Systematic review registration

https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/34TUY.

Early adoption of innovation in HPV prevention strategies: closing the gap in cervical cancer

Cervical cancer (CC) is one of the highest prevailing causes of female cancer-related mortality globally. A significant discrepancy in incidence has been noted between high and low-middle-income countries. The origins of CC have been accredited to the human papillomavirus (HPV) with serotypes 16 and 18 being the most prevalent. HPV vaccines, with 90%-97% efficacy, have proven safe and currently function as the primary prevention method. In addition, secondary prevention by timely screening can potentially increase the 5-year survival rate by >90%. High-precision HPV DNA testing has proven to be both highly sensitive and specific for early detection and is advocated by the WHO. Lack of public awareness, poor screening infrastructure and access to vaccines, socio-cultural concerns, along with economic, workforce-associated barriers and the presence of marginalised communities unable to access services have contributed to a continued high incidence. This article comprehensively analyses the efficacy, coverage, benefits and cost-effectiveness of CC vaccines and screening strategies including the transition from cytological screening to HPV self-sampling, while simultaneously exploring the real-world disparities in their feasibility. Furthermore, it calls for the implementation of population-based approaches that address the obstacles faced in approaching the WHO 2030 targets for CC elimination.

"Barriers and Advantages of Self-Sampling Tests, for HPV Diagnosis: A Qualitative Field Experience Before Implementation in a Rural Community in Ecuador"

Introduction

Cervical cancer screening has demonstrated high efficacy in reducing cervical cancer mortality worldwide. However, clinician sampling is often perceived as an uncomfortable procedure that could reduce screening uptake. Self-sampling methods for HPV diagnosis have shown high sensitivity, which could increase acceptance and screening rates among women.

Purpose

This study aims to identify the perceived barriers and advantages of self-sampling methods versus clinician sampling for cervical cancer screening in a rural setting in Ecuador.

Patients and Methods

A qualitative study was conducted. Seven focus group discussions took place in the rural Parish of El Valle in Azuay Province, Cuenca, Ecuador. Women native to this rural area were included in the study. FGDs were recorded and transcribed, and content analysis was performed to categorize and analyze the data.

Results

A total of 45 women participated in the study. Clinician sampling was perceived as a painful and intrusive method. However, participants believed that it is more reliable compared to self-sampling methods, attributing this to the direct visualization of the cervix, which facilitates the detection of cervical pathologies. The perceived advantages of self-sampling included increased comfort, pain reduction, time savings, the ability to perform the test at home, and the potential for widespread availability through pharmacies or local traditional healers. Nevertheless, doubts about the test's reliability as well as the user's proficiency in self-testing posed barriers to the adoption of this technique.

Conclusion

Self-sampling methods offer several advantages over clinician sampling, such as enhanced privacy, comfort, and accessibility to cancer screening. Barriers primarily revolved around users' proficiency in performing the test and the reliability of the results. Providing training for using self-sampling tests could address these barriers.

Opportunities for cancer prevention at syringe services programs: acceptability of HPV self-sampling and vaccination among people who inject drugs

INTRODUCTION

Despite having a high risk of acquiring sexually transmitted infections, people who inject drugs (PWID) often do not receive recommended HPV screenings due to barriers to healthcare. Guideline-based cervical HPV screening and vaccination can prevent cervical cancer. Low-cost, low-barrier methods for cancer screening and prevention are important for vulnerable communities such as PWID.

METHODS

We examined acceptability of HPV self-sampling at a syringe services program (SSP). Participants with a cervix (n = 49) participated in patient education followed by a survey to assess willingness to perform HPV self-sampling versus standard of care.

RESULTS

59% found self-sampling to be acceptable, citing privacy, ease, and quickness. Among those opting for HPV screening delivered by a provider (n = 16), participants cited concerns about adequate sampling (81%) and test accuracy (75%). Notably, only 18% of participants reported complete HPV vaccination.

CONCLUSION

Cervical HPV self-sampling was acceptable to PWID. SSP-based efforts to provide preventative health services could place tools for cancer screening into the hands of PWID, a need-to-reach community.

Comparison of diagnostic accuracy and acceptability of self-sampling devices for human Papillomavirus detection: A systematic review

Objective

Cervical cancer screening coverage remains low in many countries worldwide. Self-sampling approach for cervical cancer screening has a good potential to improve the screening coverage. This study aims to compare different types of HPV self-sampling devices for cervical cancer screening to identify the most accurate and acceptable device(s).

Methods

A systematic review was performed on data extracted from all studies specific to HPV self-sampling devices by searching relevant articles in PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and EBSCO published from 2013 to October 2023. The study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022375682).

Results

Overall, 70 papers met the eligibility criteria for this systematic review and were included in the analysis: 22 studies reported self-sampling devices diagnostic accuracy, 32 studies reported self-sampling devices acceptability and 16 studies reported both (accuracy and acceptability). The most popular self-sampling devices were Evalyn Brush, FLOQ Swab, Cervex-Brush, and Delphi Screener. Out of overall 38 studies analyzing self-sampling devices' diagnostic accuracy, 94.7% of studies reported that self-collected specimens provided sensitivity and specificity comparable with clinician-collected samples; acceptability of Evalyn Brush, FLOQ Swab, Delphi Screener, and Colli-Pee, varied between 84.2% and 100%.

Conclusion

The self-sampling approach has a good potential to increase cervical cancer screening coverage. Evalyn Brush, Cervex-Brush, FLOQ Swab, and Delphi Screener self-sampling devices for HPV detection were the most commonly utilized and found to be the most accurate, and patient-acceptable. HPV detection accuracy using these self-sampling devices had no significant difference compared to the sampling performed by healthcare providers.

Confronting the human papillomavirus-HIV intersection: Cervical cytology implications for Kenyan women living with HIV

Background

High-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) is the primary cause of cervical cancer, leading to over 311 000 global deaths, mainly in low- and middle-income countries. Kenyan women living with HIV (WLHIV) face a disproportionate burden of HR-HPV.

Objectives

We determined the prevalence of HR-HPV infections and their association with cervical cytology findings among Kenyan WLHIV.

Method

We conducted a cross-sectional study among WLHIV attending the HIV care and treatment clinic at the Kenyatta National Hospital (KNH), Kenya's national referral hospital. Study nurses collected a cervical sample with a cytobrush for HR-HPV genotyping using Gene Xpert® assays and HPV Genotypes 14 Real-TM Quant V67-100FRT. Bivariate analysis explored the associations.

Results

We enrolled 647 WLHIV (mean age of 42.8 years), with 97.2% on antiretroviral therapy (ART) and 79% with a suppressed viral load (< 50 copies/mL plasma). The prevalence of any and vaccine-preventable HR-HPV was 34.6% and 29.4%, respectively, with HPV 52 being the most common genotype (13.4%). Among WLHIV with HR-HPV infections, 21.4% had abnormal cervical cytology. Women with multiple HR-HPV infections were more likely to have abnormal cytology compared to those with single HR-HPV infections (34.9 vs 9.3%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 6.2, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.7-14.1, P = 0.001). Women with HR-HPV infection (single or multiple) were more likely to be on the second-line ART regimen compared to those without HR-HPV infections (53.1% vs 46.7%, aOR = 2.3, 95% CI: 1.3-4.1, P = 0.005).

Conclusion

Among WLHIV at KNH, abnormal cytology was common and more frequent among women with multiple HR-HPV infections.