Impact of intensified testing for urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis infections: a randomised study with 9-year follow-up

Screening for chlamydia and/or gonorrhea in primary health care: systematic reviews on effectiveness and patient preferences

BACKGROUND

We conducted systematic reviews on the benefits and harms of screening compared with no screening or alternative screening approaches for Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) in non-pregnant sexually active individuals, and on the relative importance patients' place on the relevant outcomes. Findings will inform recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.

METHODS

We searched five databases (to January 24, 2020), trial registries, conference proceedings, and reference lists for English and French literature published since 1996. Screening, study selection, and risk of bias assessments were independently undertaken by two reviewers, with consensus for final decisions. Data extraction was conducted by one reviewer and checked by another for accuracy and completeness. Meta-analysis was conducted where appropriate. We used the GRADE approach to rate the certainty of the evidence. The Task Force and content experts provided input on determining thresholds for important effect sizes and on interpretation of findings.

RESULTS

Of 41 included studies, 17 and 11 reported on benefits and harms of screening, respectively, and 14 reported on patient preferences. Universal screening for CT in general populations 16 to 29 years of age, using population-based or opportunistic approaches achieving low screening rates, may make little-to-no difference for a female's risk of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) (2 RCTs, n=141,362; 0.3 more in 1000 [7.6 fewer to 11 more]) or ectopic pregnancy (1 RCT, n=15,459; 0.20 more per 1000 [2.2 fewer to 3.9 more]). It may also not make a difference for CT transmission (3 RCTs, n=41,709; 3 fewer per 1000 [11.5 fewer to 6.9 more]). However, benefits may be achieved for reducing PID if screening rates are increased (2 trials, n=30,652; 5.7 fewer per 1000 [10.8 fewer to 1.1 more]), and for reducing CT and NG transmission when intensely screening high-prevalence female populations (2 trials, n=6127; 34.3 fewer per 1000 [4 to 58 fewer]; NNS 29 [17 to 250]). Evidence on infertility in females from CT screening and on transmission of NG in males and both sexes from screening for CT and NG is very uncertain. No evidence was found for cervicitis, chronic pelvic pain, or infertility in males from CT screening, or on any clinical outcomes from NG screening. Undergoing screening, or having a diagnosis of CT, may cause a small-to-moderate number of people to experience some degree of harm, mainly due to feelings of stigmatization and anxiety about future infertility risk. The number of individuals affected in the entire screening-eligible population is likely smaller. Screening may make little-to-no difference for general anxiety, self-esteem, or relationship break-up. Evidence on transmission from studies comparing home versus clinic screening is very uncertain. Four studies on patient preferences found that although utility values for the different consequences of CT and NG infections are probably quite similar, when considering the duration of the health state experiences, infertility and chronic pelvic pain are probably valued much more than PID, ectopic pregnancy, and cervicitis. How patients weigh the potential benefits versus harms of screening is very uncertain (1 survey, 10 qualitative studies); risks to reproductive health and transmission appear to be more important than the (often transient) psychosocial harms.

DISCUSSION

Most of the evidence on screening for CT and/or NG offers low or very low certainty about the benefits and harms. Indirectness from use of comparison groups receiving some screening, incomplete outcome ascertainment, and use of outreach settings was a major contributor to uncertainty. Patient preferences indicate that the potential benefits from screening appear to outweigh the possible harms. Direct evidence about which screening strategies and intervals to use, which age to start and stop screening, and whether screening males in addition to females is necessary to prevent clinical outcomes is scarce, and further research in these areas would be informative. Apart from the evidence in this review, information on factors related to equity, acceptability, implementation, cost/resources, and feasibility will support recommendations made by the Task Force.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration number CRD42018100733 .

The Immune Characteristics of the Epididymis and the Immune Pathway of the Epididymitis Caused by Different Pathogens

The epididymis is an important male accessory sex organ where sperm motility and fertilization ability develop. When spermatozoa carrying foreign antigens enter the epididymis, the epididymis shows "immune privilege" to tolerate them. It is well-known that a tolerogenic environment exists in the caput epididymis, while pro-inflammatory circumstances prefer the cauda epididymis. This meticulously regulated immune environment not only protects spermatozoa from autoimmunity but also defends spermatozoa against pathogenic damage. Epididymitis is one of the common causes of male infertility. Up to 40% of patients suffer from permanent oligospermia or azoospermia. This is related to the immune characteristics of the epididymis itself. Moreover, epididymitis induced by different pathogenic microbial infections has different characteristics. This article elaborates on the distribution and immune response characteristics of epididymis immune cells, the role of epididymis epithelial cells (EECs), and the epididymis defense against different pathogenic infections (such as uropathogenic Escherichia coli, Chlamydia trachomatis, and viruses to provide therapeutic approaches for epididymitis and its subsequent fertility problems.

Screening is not associated with reduced incidence of gonorrhoea or chlamydia in men who have sex with men (MSM); an ecological study of 23 European countries

Background: Increasing rates of antimicrobial resistance has motivated a reassessment of if intensive screening for gonorrhoea and chlamydia is associated with a reduction in the prevalence of these infections in men who have sex with men (MSM).

Methods: Spearman’s correlation was used to evaluate the country-level correlation between the intensity of self-reported sexual transmitted infection (STI) screening in MSM (both anal and urethral screening, taken from a large internet survey of MSM) and the incidence (taken from ECDC surveillance figures) and prevalence (taken from a literature review of studies estimating prevalence in MSM attending STI clinics) of gonorrhoea and chlamydia.

Results: The intensity of both anal and genital screening was found to be positively associated with country level gonorrhoea incidence rates (rho 0.74; p=0.0004; rho=0.73; p=0.0004, respectively) and Ct incidence rates (rho 0.71; p=0.001; rho=0.78; p=0.0001, respectively). No associations were found between anal or genital screening intensity and Ng prevalence in clinic populations (Table 2).

Conclusions: We found no evidence of a negative association between screening intensity and the prevalence of gonorrhoea or chlamydia in MSM. Randomized controlled trials are urgently required to evaluate if the high antimicrobial exposure resulting from intensive screening programmes is justified.

Screening is not associated with reduced incidence of gonorrhoea or chlamydia in men who have sex with men (MSM); an ecological study of 23 European countries

Background: Increasing rates of antimicrobial resistance has motivated a reassessment of if intensive screening for gonorrhoea and chlamydia is associated with a reduction in the prevalence of these infections in men who have sex with men (MSM). Methods: Spearman's correlation was used to evaluate the country-level correlation between the intensity of self-reported sexual transmitted infection (STI) screening in MSM (both anal and urethral screening, taken from a large internet survey of MSM) and the incidence (taken from ECDC surveillance figures) and prevalence (taken from a literature review of studies estimating prevalence in MSM attending STI clinics) of gonorrhoea and chlamydia. Results: The intensity of both anal and genital screening was found to be positively associated with country level gonorrhoea incidence rates (rho 0.74; p=0.0004; rho=0.73; p=0.0004, respectively) and Ct incidence rates (rho 0.71; p=0.001; rho=0.78; p=0.0001, respectively). No associations were found between anal or genital screening intensity and Ng prevalence in clinic populations (Table 2). Conclusions: We found no evidence of a negative association between screening intensity and the prevalence of gonorrhoea or chlamydia in MSM. Randomized controlled trials are urgently required to evaluate if the high antimicrobial exposure resulting from intensive screening programmes is justified.

Screening for chlamydia and/or gonorrhea in primary health care: protocol for systematic review

BACKGROUND

Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae are the most commonly reported sexually transmitted infections in Canada. Existing national guidance on screening for these infections was not based on a systematic review, and recommendations as well as implementation considerations (e.g., population groups, testing and case management) should be explicit and reflect the quality of evidence. The aim of this systematic review is to synthesize research on screening for these infections in sexually active individuals within primary care. We will also review evidence on how people weigh the relative importance of the potential outcomes from screening, rated as most important by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTFPHC) with input from patients and stakeholders.

METHODS

We have developed a peer-reviewed strategy to comprehensively search MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and PsycINFO for English and French literature published 1996 onwards. We will also search trial registries and conference proceedings, and mine references lists. Screening, study selection, risk of bias assessments, and quality of findings across studies (for each outcome) will be independently undertaken by two reviewers with consensus for final decisions. Data extraction will be conducted by one reviewer and checked by another for accuracy and completeness. The CTFPHC and content experts will provide input for decisions on study design (i.e., when and whether to include uncontrolled studies for screening effectiveness) and for interpretation of the findings.

DISCUSSION

The results section of the review will include a description of all studies, results of all analyses, including planned subgroup and sensitivity analyses, and evidence profiles and summary of findings tables incorporating assessment based on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methods to communicate our confidence in the estimates of effect. We will compare our findings to others and discuss limitations of the review and available literature. The findings will be used by the CTFPHC-supplemented by consultations with patients and stakeholders and from other sources on issues of feasibility, acceptability, costs/resources, and equity-to inform recommendations on screening to support primary health care providers in delivering preventive care.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration number CRD42018100733.

Population effectiveness of opportunistic chlamydia testing in primary care in Australia: a cluster-randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Screening young adults who are sexually active for genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection is promoted in several high-income countries, but its effectiveness at the population level is highly debated. We aimed to investigate the effects of opportunistic chlamydia testing in primary care on the estimated chlamydia prevalence in the population aged 16-29 years in Australia.

METHODS

We did a cluster-randomised controlled trial. Clusters were rural towns with a minimum of 500 women and men aged 16-29 years and no more than six primary care clinics. We randomly allocated each cluster using a computer-generated minimisation algorithm to receive a multifaceted, clinic-based chlamydia testing intervention or to continue usual care. The intervention included computerised reminders to test patients, an education package, payments for chlamydia testing, and feedback on testing rates. The primary outcome was chlamydia prevalence, estimated before randomisation (survey 1) and at the end of the trial (survey 2) in patients aged 16-29 years who attended the clinics. Analyses were done by intention to treat. General practitioners and clinic staff were aware of group allocation, whereas patients and laboratory staff who performed the chlamydia tests were not. This trial was completed on Dec 31, 2015, and is registered (ACTRN12610000297022).

FINDINGS

Between Dec 14, 2010, and Sept 14, 2015, 26 clusters (63 clinics) received the chlamydia testing intervention and 26 (67 clinics) continued usual care. Over a mean duration of 3·1 years (SD 0·3), 93 828 young adults attended intervention clinics and 86 527 attended control clinics. The estimated chlamydia prevalence decreased from 5·0% (95% CI 3·8 to 6·2) at survey 1 to 3·4% (2·7 to 4·1) at survey 2 in the intervention clusters (difference -1·6%, 95% CI -2·9 to -0·3) and from 4·6% (95% CI 3·5 to 5·7) at survey 1 to 3·4% (2·4 to 4·5) at survey 2 in the control clusters (difference -1·1%, -2·7 to 0·5). The unadjusted odds ratio for the difference between intervention and control clusters was 0·9 (95% CI 0·5 to 1·5).

INTERPRETATION

These findings, in conjunction with evidence about the feasibility of sustained uptake of opportunistic testing in primary care, indicate that sizeable reductions in chlamydia prevalence might not be achievable.

FUNDING

Australian Government Department of Health, National Health and Medical Research Council, Victorian Department of Health and Human Services, and New South Wales Ministry of Health.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in the Lifetime Risk of Chlamydia trachomatis Diagnosis and Adverse Reproductive Health Outcomes Among Women in King County, Washington

Background

Chlamydia trachomatis is the most common reportable infection in the United States and can cause pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) and tubal factor infertility (TFI).

Methods

We created life tables to estimate the "lifetime" risk of chlamydia diagnosis among women aged 15-34 years in King County, Washington, between 1992 and 2014. We estimated the lifetime risk of chlamydia-associated PID and TFI incorporating published estimates of the risk of sequelae.

Results

There were 51464 first chlamydia diagnoses in 1992-2014. For women born between 1980 and 1984, the lifetime risk of chlamydia diagnosis was 19.8% overall and 14.0% for non-Hispanic white, 64.9% for non-Hispanic black, and 32.6% for Hispanic women. The cumulative risk of chlamydia by age 24 increased overall from 13.9% to 17.3% among women born between 1975 and 1994 but declined among non-Hispanic black women, among whom risk by age 24 declined from 57.3% among women born between 1980 and 1984 to 38.6% among women born between 1990 and 1994. The lifetime risk of chlamydia-associated PID among women born between 1980 and 1984 ranged from 0.33% to 1.14%. Among non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Hispanic women, the lifetime risk of chlamydia-associated TFI was 0.04%, 0.20%, and 0.10%, respectively.

Conclusions

Over 60% of non-Hispanic black women had at least 1 chlamydia diagnosis by age 34 in the birth cohorts most affected, a risk almost 5 times that in non-Hispanic whites. An estimated 1 in 500 non-Hispanic black women develops chlamydia-associated TFI. More effective control measures are needed.

Sexually transmitted infections: challenges ahead

WHO estimated that nearly 1 million people become infected every day with any of four curable sexually transmitted infections (STIs): chlamydia, gonorrhoea, syphilis, and trichomoniasis. Despite their high global incidence, STIs remain a neglected area of research. In this Commission, we have prioritised five areas that represent particular challenges in STI treatment and control. Chlamydia remains the most commonly diagnosed bacterial STI in high-income countries despite widespread testing recommendations, sensitive and specific non-invasive testing techniques, and cheap effective therapy. We discuss the challenges for chlamydia control and evidence to support a shift from the current focus on infection-based screening to improved management of diagnosed cases and of chlamydial morbidity, such as pelvic inflammatory disease. The emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistance in Neisseria gonorrhoeae is globally recognised. We review current and potential future control and treatment strategies, with a focus on novel antimicrobials. Bacterial vaginosis is the most common vaginal disorder in women, but current treatments are associated with frequent recurrence. Recurrence after treatment might relate to evidence that suggests sexual transmission is integral to the pathogenesis of bacterial vaginosis, which has substantial implications for the development of effective management approaches. STIs disproportionately affect low-income and middle-income countries. We review strategies for case management, focusing on point-of-care tests that hold considerable potential for improving STI control. Lastly, STIs in men who have sex with men have increased since the late 1990s. We discuss the contribution of new biomedical HIV prevention strategies and risk compensation. Overall, this Commission aims to enhance the understanding of some of the key challenges facing the field of STIs, and outlines new approaches to improve the clinical management of STIs and public health.

The natural history of Chlamydia trachomatis infection in women: a multi-parameter evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The evidence base supporting the National Chlamydia Screening Programme, initiated in 2003, has been questioned repeatedly, with little consensus on modelling assumptions, parameter values or evidence sources to be used in cost-effectiveness analyses. The purpose of this project was to assemble all available evidence on the prevalence and incidence of Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) in the UK and its sequelae, pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), ectopic pregnancy (EP) and tubal factor infertility (TFI) to review the evidence base in its entirety, assess its consistency and, if possible, arrive at a coherent set of estimates consistent with all the evidence.

METHODS

Evidence was identified using 'high-yield' strategies. Bayesian Multi-Parameter Evidence Synthesis models were constructed for separate subparts of the clinical and population epidemiology of CT. Where possible, different types of data sources were statistically combined to derive coherent estimates. Where evidence was inconsistent, evidence sources were re-interpreted and new estimates derived on a post-hoc basis.

RESULTS

An internally coherent set of estimates was generated, consistent with a multifaceted evidence base, fertility surveys and routine UK statistics on PID and EP. Among the key findings were that the risk of PID (symptomatic or asymptomatic) following an untreated CT infection is 17.1% [95% credible interval (CrI) 6% to 29%] and the risk of salpingitis is 7.3% (95% CrI 2.2% to 14.0%). In women aged 16-24 years, screened at annual intervals, at best, 61% (95% CrI 55% to 67%) of CT-related PID and 22% (95% CrI 7% to 43%) of all PID could be directly prevented. For women aged 16-44 years, the proportions of PID, EP and TFI that are attributable to CT are estimated to be 20% (95% CrI 6% to 38%), 4.9% (95% CrI 1.2% to 12%) and 29% (95% CrI 9% to 56%), respectively. The prevalence of TFI in the UK in women at the end of their reproductive lives is 1.1%: this is consistent with all PID carrying a relatively high risk of reproductive damage, whether diagnosed or not. Every 1000 CT infections in women aged 16-44 years, on average, gives rise to approximately 171 episodes of PID and 73 of salpingitis, 2.0 EPs and 5.1 women with TFI at age 44 years.

CONCLUSIONS AND RESEARCH RECOMMENDATIONS

The study establishes a set of interpretations of the major studies and study designs, under which a coherent set of estimates can be generated. CT is a significant cause of PID and TFI. CT screening is of benefit to the individual, but detection and treatment of incident infection may be more beneficial. Women with lower abdominal pain need better advice on when to seek early medical attention to avoid risk of reproductive damage. The study provides new insights into the reproductive risks of PID and the role of CT. Further research is required on the proportions of PID, EP and TFI attributable to CT to confirm predictions made in this report, and to improve the precision of key estimates. The cost-effectiveness of screening should be re-evaluated using the findings of this report.

FUNDING

The Medical Research Council grant G0801947.

Screening for genital chlamydia infection

BACKGROUND

Genital infections caused by Chlamydia trachomatis are the most prevalent bacterial sexually transmitted infection worldwide. Screening of sexually active young adults to detect and treat asymptomatic infections might reduce chlamydia transmission and prevent reproductive tract morbidity, particularly pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) in women, which can cause tubal infertility and ectopic pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects and safety of chlamydia screening versus standard care on chlamydia transmission and infection complications in pregnant and non-pregnant women and in men.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Sexually Transmitted Infections Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL, DARE, PsycINFO and Web of Science electronic databases up to 14 February 2016, together with World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also handsearched conference proceedings, contacted trial authors and reviewed the reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adult women (non-pregnant and pregnant) and men comparing a chlamydia screening intervention with usual care and reporting on a primary outcome (C. trachomatis prevalence, PID in women, epididymitis in men or incidence of preterm delivery). We included non-randomised controlled clinical trials if there were no RCTs for a primary outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We resolved disagreements by consensus or adjudication by a third reviewer. We described results in forest plots and conducted meta-analysis where appropriate using a fixed-effect model to estimate risk ratios (RR with 95% confidence intervals, CI) in intervention vs control groups. We conducted a pre-specified sensitivity analysis of the primary outcome, PID incidence, according to the risks of selection and detection bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six trials involving 359,078 adult women and men. One trial was at low risk of bias in all six specific domains assessed. Two trials examined the effect of multiple rounds of chlamydia screening on C. trachomatis transmission. A cluster-controlled trial in women and men in the general population in the Netherlands found no change in chlamydia test positivity after three yearly invitations (intervention 4.1% vs control 4.3%, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.09, 1 trial, 317,304 participants at first screening invitation, low quality evidence). Uptake of the intervention was low (maximum 16%). A cluster-randomised trial in female sex workers in Peru found a reduction in chlamydia prevalence after four years (adjusted RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.98, 1 trial, 4465 participants, low quality evidence).Four RCTs examined the effect of chlamydia screening on PID in women 12 months after a single screening offer. In analysis of four trials according to the intention-to-treat principle, the risk of PID was lower in women in intervention than control groups, with little evidence of between-trial heterogeneity (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.94, I2 7%, 4 trials, 21,686 participants, moderate quality evidence). In a sensitivity analysis, the estimated effect of chlamydia screening in two RCTs at low risk of detection bias (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.17) was compatible with no effect and was lower than in two RCTs at high or unclear risk of detection bias (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.83).The risk of epididymitis in men invited for screening, 12 months after a single screening offer, was 20% lower risk for epididymitis than in those not invited; the confidence interval was wide and compatible with no effect (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.42, 1 trial, 14,980 participants, very low quality evidence).We found no RCTs of the effects of chlamydia screening in pregnancy and no trials that measured the harms of chlamydia screening.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence about the effects of screening on C. trachomatis transmission is of low quality because of directness and risk of bias. There is moderate quality evidence that detection and treatment of chlamydia infection can reduce the risk of PID in women at individual level. There is an absence of RCT evidence about the effects of chlamydia screening in pregnancy.Future RCTs of chlamydia screening interventions should determine the effects of chlamydia screening in pregnancy, of repeated rounds of screening on the incidence of chlamydia-associated PID and chlamydia reinfection in general and high risk populations.

Background review for the '2015 European guideline on the management of Chlamydia trachomatis infections'

SummaryChlamydia trachomatis infections are major public health concerns globally. Of particular grave concern is that the majority of persons with anogenital Chlamydia trachomatis infections are asymptomatic and accordingly not aware of their infection, and this silent infection can subsequently result in severe reproductive tract complications and sequelae. The current review paper provides all background, evidence base and discussions for the 2015 European guideline on the management of Chlamydia trachomatis infections (Lanjouw E, et al. Int J STD AIDS 2015). Comprehensive information and recommendations are included regarding the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of anogenital, pharyngeal and conjunctival Chlamydia trachomatis infections in European countries. However, Chlamydia trachomatis also causes the eye infection trachoma, which is not a sexually transmitted infection. The 2015 European Chlamydia trachomatis guideline provides up-to-date guidance regarding broader indications for testing and treatment of Chlamydia trachomatis infections; clearer recommendation of using validated nucleic acid amplification tests only for diagnosis; advice on (repeated) Chlamydia trachomatis testing; recommendation of increased testing to reduce the incidence of pelvic inflammatory disease and prevent exposure to infection and recommendations to identify, verify and report Chlamydia trachomatis variants. Improvement of access to testing, test performance, diagnostics, antimicrobial treatment and follow-up of Chlamydia trachomatis patients are crucial to control its spread.

2015 European guideline on the management of Chlamydia trachomatis infections

Chlamydia trachomatis infections, which most frequently are asymptomatic, are major public health concerns globally. The 2015 European C. trachomatis guideline provides: up-to-date guidance regarding broader indications for testing and treatment of C. trachomatis infections; a clearer recommendation of using exclusively-validated nucleic acid amplification tests for diagnosis; advice on (repeated) C. trachomatis testing; the recommendation of increased testing to reduce the incidence of pelvic inflammatory disease and prevent exposure to infection; and recommendations to identify, verify and report C. trachomatis variants. Improvement of access to testing, test performance, diagnostics, antimicrobial treatment and follow-up of C. trachomatis patients are crucial to control its spread. For detailed background, evidence base and discussions, see the background review for the present 2015 European guideline on the management of Chlamydia trachomatis infections (Lanjouw E, et al. Int J STD AIDS. 2015).

Home-based versus clinic-based specimen collection in the management of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae infections

BACKGROUND

Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) are the most frequent causes of bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Management strategies that reduce losses in the clinical pathway from infection to cure might improve STI control and reduce complications resulting from lack of, or inadequate, treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of home-based specimen collection as part of the management strategy for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae infections compared with clinic-based specimen collection in sexually-active people.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Sexually Transmitted Infections Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS on 27 May 2015, together with the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also handsearched conference proceedings, contacted trial authors and reviewed the reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of home-based compared with clinic-based specimen collection in the management of C. trachomatis and N. gonorrhoeae infections.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted study authors for additional information. We resolved any disagreements through consensus. We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. The primary outcome was index case management, defined as the number of participants tested, diagnosed and treated, if test positive.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten trials involving 10,479 participants were included. There was inconclusive evidence of an effect on the proportion of participants with index case management (defined as individuals tested, diagnosed and treated for CT or NG, or both) in the group with home-based (45/778, 5.8%) compared with clinic-based (51/788, 6.5%) specimen collection (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60 to 1.29; 3 trials, I² = 0%, 1566 participants, moderate quality). Harms of home-based specimen collection were not evaluated in any trial. All 10 trials compared the proportions of individuals tested. The results for the proportion of participants completing testing had high heterogeneity (I² = 100%) and were not pooled. We could not combine data from individual studies looking at the number of participants tested because the proportions varied widely across the studies, ranging from 30% to 96% in home group and 6% to 97% in clinic group (low-quality evidence). The number of participants with positive test was lower in the home-based specimen collection group (240/2074, 11.6%) compared with the clinic-based group (179/967, 18.5%) (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.86; 9 trials, I² = 0%, 3041 participants, moderate quality).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Home-based specimen collection could result in similar levels of index case management for CT or NG infection when compared with clinic-based specimen collection. Increases in the proportion of individuals tested as a result of home-based, compared with clinic-based, specimen collection are offset by a lower proportion of positive results. The harms of home-based specimen collection compared with clinic-based specimen collection have not been evaluated. Future RCTs to assess the effectiveness of home-based specimen collection should be designed to measure biological outcomes of STI case management, such as proportion of participants with negative tests for the relevant STI at follow-up.

Testing and screening for chlamydia in general practice: a cross-sectional analysis

OBJECTIVES

Chlamydia screening is widely advocated. General practice registrars are an important stage of clinical behaviour development. This study aimed to determine rates of, and factors associated with, registrars' chlamydia testing including asymptomatic screening.

METHODS

A cross-sectional analysis of data from Registrars Clinical Encounters in Training (ReCEnT), a cohort study of registrars' consultations. Registrars record details of 60 consecutive consultations in each GP-term of training. Outcome factors were chlamydia testing, asymptomatic screening and doctor-initiated screening.

RESULTS

Testing occurred in 2.5% of 29,112 consultations (398 registrars) and in 5.8% of patients aged 15-25. Asymptomatic screening comprised 47.5% of chlamydia tests, and 55.6% of screening tests were doctor-initiated. Chlamydia testing was associated with female gender of doctor and patient, younger patient age, and patients new to doctor or practice. Asymptomatic screening was associated with practices where patients incur no fees, and in patients new to doctor or practice. Screening of female patients was more often doctor-initiated.

CONCLUSIONS

GP registrars screen for chlamydia disproportionately in younger females and new patients.

IMPLICATIONS

Our findings highlight potential opportunities to improve uptake of screening for chlamydia, including targeted education and training for registrars, campaigns targeting male patients, and addressing financial barriers to accessing screening services.

Risk factors for Chlamydia trachomatis infection in adolescents: results from a representative population-based survey in Germany, 2003-2006

Infections with Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) can lead to severe sequelae; however, they are not notifiable in Germany. We tested urine samples from participants of KiGGS (German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents) for CT infections and linked the results to demographic and behavioural data from 1,925 participants (girls aged 15-17 years and boys aged 16-17 years) to determine a representative prevalence of CT infection in adolescents in Germany and to assess associated risk factors. Prevalence of CT infection was 2.2% (95% CI: 1.4-3.5) in girls and 0.2% (95% CI: 0.1-0.7) in boys. CT infection in girls was associated with higher use of alcohol, marijuana and cigarettes, lower social status, oral contraceptive use, pregnancy, repeated lower abdominal pain and higher rates of doctors' consultations within the preceding three months and consultation of gynaecologists within the last 12 months. In multiple logistic regression, we identified two predictors for CT infection: marijuana consumption often or several times within the last 12 months (F(1,164)=7.56; p<0.05) and general health status less than 'very good' (F(1,164)=3.83; p=0.052). Given our findings, we recommend enhancing sex education before sexual debut and promoting safe sex practices regardless of the contraceptive method used. Well-informed consumption of alcohol should be promoted, the risky behaviour of people intoxicated through consumption of marijuana highlighted and doctors' awareness of CT screening enhanced.

Screening and treating Chlamydia trachomatis genital infection to prevent pelvic inflammatory disease: interpretation of findings from randomized controlled trials

We critically reviewed randomized controlled trials evaluating chlamydia screening to prevent pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) and explored factors affecting interpretation and translation of trial data into public health prevention. Taken together, data from these trials offer evidence that chlamydia screening and treatment is an important and useful intervention to reduce the risk of PID among young women. However, the magnitude of benefit to be expected from screening may have been overestimated based on the earliest trials. It is likely that chlamydia screening programs have contributed to declines in PID incidence through shortening prevalent infections, although the magnitude of their contribution remains unclear. Program factors such as screening coverage as well as natural history factors such as risk of PID after repeat chlamydia infection can be important in determining the impact of chlamydia screening on PID incidence in a population. Uptake of chlamydia screening is currently suboptimal, and expansion of screening among young, sexually active women remains a priority. To reduce transmission and repeat infections, implementation of efficient strategies to treat partners of infected women is also essential. Results of ongoing randomized evaluations of the effect of screening on community-wide chlamydia prevalence and PID will also be valuable.

Home-based chlamydia and gonorrhoea screening: a systematic review of strategies and outcomes

Background

In many countries, low Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) screening rates among young people in primary-care have encouraged screening programs outside of clinics. Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) make it possible to screen people in homes with self-collected specimens. We systematically reviewed the strategies and outcomes of home-based CT/NG screening programs.

Methods

Electronic databases were searched for home-based CT and/or NG screening studies published since January 2005. Screening information (e.g. target group, recruitment and specimen-collection method) and quantitative outcomes (e.g. number of participants, tests and positivity) were extracted. The screening programs were classified into seven groups on the basis of strategies used.

Results

We found 29 eligible papers describing 32 home-based screening programs. In seven outreach programs, people were approached in their homes: a median of 97% participants provided specimens and 76% were tested overall (13717 tests). In seven programs, people were invited to receive postal test-kits (PTKs) at their homes: a median of 37% accepted PTKs, 79% returned specimens and 19% were tested (46225 tests). PTKs were sent along with invitation letters in five programs: a median of 33% returned specimens and 29% of those invited were tested (15126 tests). PTKs were requested through the internet or phone without invitations in four programs and a median of 32% returned specimens (2666 tests). Four programs involved study personnel directly inviting people to receive PTKs: a median of 46% accepted PTKs, 21% returned specimens and 9.1% were tested (341 tests). PTKs were picked-up from designated locations in three programs: a total of 6765 kits were picked-up and 1167 (17%) specimens were returned for screening. Two programs used a combination of above strategies (2395 tests) but the outcomes were not reported separately. The overall median CT positivity was 3.6% (inter-quartile range: 1.7-7.3%).

Conclusions

A variety of strategies have been used in home-based CT/NG screening programs. The screening strategies and their feasibility in the local context need to be carefully considered to maximize the effectiveness of home-based screening programs.

Systematic screening with information and home sampling for genital Chlamydia trachomatis infections in young men and women in Norway: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

As most genital Chlamydia trachomatis infections are asymptomatic, many patients do not seek health care for testing. Infections remain undiagnosed and untreated. We studied whether screening with information and home sampling resulted in more young people getting tested, diagnosed and treated for chlamydia in the three months following the intervention compared to the current strategy of testing in the health care system.

METHOD

We conducted a population based randomized controlled trial among all persons aged 18-25 years in one Norwegian county (41 519 persons). 10 000 persons (intervention) received an invitation by mail with chlamydia information and a mail-back urine sampling kit. 31 519 persons received no intervention and continued with usual care (control). All samples from both groups were analysed in the same laboratory. Information on treatment was obtained from the Norwegian Prescription Database (NorPD). We estimated risk ratios and risk differences of being tested, diagnosed and treated in the intervention group compared to the control group.

RESULTS

In the intervention group 16.5% got tested and in the control group 3.4%, risk ratio 4.9 (95% CI 4.5-5.2). The intervention led to 2.6 (95% CI 2.0-3.4) times as many individuals being diagnosed and 2.5 (95% CI 1.9-3.4) times as many individuals receiving treatment for chlamydia compared to no intervention in the three months following the intervention.

CONCLUSION

In Norway, systematic screening with information and home sampling results in more young people being tested, diagnosed and treated for chlamydia in the three months following the intervention than the current strategy of testing in the health care system. However, the study has not established that the intervention will reduce the chlamydia prevalence or the risk of complications from chlamydia.

Chlamydia trachomatis infection in fertile and subfertile women in Rwanda: prevalence and diagnostic significance of IgG and IgA antibodies testing

BACKGROUND

In many developing countries, little is known about the prevalence of genital Chlamydia trachomatis infections and complications, such as infertility, thus preventing any policy from being formulated regarding screening for C. trachomatis of patients at risk for infertility. The objective of the present study was to determine the prevalence of C. trachomatis and evaluate the diagnostic utility of serological markers namely anti-C. trachomatis IgG and IgA antibodies in women attending an infertility clinic.

METHODS

Serum and vaginal swab specimens of 303 women presenting with infertility to the infertility clinic of the Kigali University Teaching Hospital and 312 fertile controls who recently delivered were investigated. Two commercial species-specific ELISA were used to determine serum IgG and IgA antibodies to C. trachomatis and vaginal swabs specimens were tested by PCR. Hysterosalpingography (HSG) was performed in subfertile women.

RESULTS

The PCR prevalence of C. trachomatis infection was relatively low and did not differ significantly among subfertile and fertile women (3.3 versus 3.8%). Similarly, no significant differences in overall prevalence rates of C. trachomatis IgG and IgA among both groups were observed. The only factor associated with C. trachomatis infection in our study population was age <25 years. The seroprevalence of IgG in both assays (86.4% for ANILabsystems and 90.9% for Vircell) was significantly higher in the group of PCR C. trachomatis-positive women compared with that of PCR-negative women. Evidence of tubal pathology identified by HSG was found in 185 patients in the subfertile group (67.8%). All the serological markers measured in this study had very low sensitivities and negative predictive values in predicting tubal pathology. The specificities for ANILabsystems IgG, Vircell IgG, Anilabsystem IgA and positive C. trachomatis DNA to predict tubal pathology were 84, 86, 95 and 98%, respectively, whereas their respective positive predictive values were 73, 76, 81 and 80%.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of C. trachomatis in our study population in Rwanda appears to be low and women aged <25 years are more likely to have genital infection with C. trachomatis. Since serological testing for Chlamydia shows an excellent negative predictive value for lower genital tract infection, specific peptide-based serological assays may be of use for screening in low prevalence settings. Our data suggest that C. trachomatis is not the primary pathogen responsible for tubal pathology in Rwandan women.