High-risk human papillomavirus detection in self-sampling compared to physician-taken smear in a responder population of the Dutch cervical screening: Results of the VERA study (original) (raw)
Related papers
2014
We determined whether the participation rate for a brush-based cervicovaginal self-sampling device is noninferior to the participation rate for a lavage-based one for testing for hrHPV (high-risk human papillomavirus). Additionally, positivity rates for hrHPV, the detection rates for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grades 2 and 3 or worse (CIN2+/3+), and user comfort were compared. A total of 35,477 non-responders of the regular cervical screening program aged 33-63 years were invited to participate. Eligible women (n = 30,130) were randomly assigned to receive either a brush-based or a lavage-based device, and a questionnaire for reporting user convenience. Self-sampling responders testing hrHPV-positive were invited for a physician-taken sample for cytology; triage-positive women were referred for colposcopy. A total of 5,218 women participated in the brush-based sampling group (34.6%) and 4809 women in the lavage-based group (31.9%), i.e. an absolute difference of 2.7% (95%CI 1.8-4.2). The hrHPV-positivity rates in the two groups were identical (8.3%, relative risk (RR) 0.99, 95%CI 0.87-1.13). The detection of CIN2+ and CIN3+ in the brush group (2.0% for CIN2+; 1.3% for CIN3+) was similar to that in the lavage group (1.9% for CIN2+; 1.0% for CIN3+) with a cumulative RR of 1.01, 95%CI 0.83-1.24 for CIN2+ and 1.25, 95%CI 0.92-1.70 for CIN3+. The two self-sampling devices performed similarly in user comfort. In conclusion, offering a brush-based device to non-responders is noninferior to offering a lavage-based device in terms of participation. The two self-sampling methods are equally effective in detecting hrHPV, CIN2+/CIN3+ and are both well accepted.
Cancers
Identifying and reaching women at higher risk for cervical cancer is all-important for achieving the ambitious endpoints set in 2020 by the WHO for global cervical cancer control by 2030. HPV-based (vaginal) self-sampling (SS) represents a cost-effective screening strategy, which has been successfully implemented during the last decade both in affluent and constrained settings. Among other advantages, SS strategies offer convenience, diminished costs, flexibility to obtain a sample in the office or home, avoiding a pelvic exam and uncomfortable appointment with a healthcare professional, as well as social and cultural acceptability. SS implementation has been globally boosted during the COVID-19 pandemic. In pragmatic terms, social distancing, local lockdowns, discontinuation of clinics and reallocation of human and financial resources challenged established clinician-based screening; self-collection strategies apparently surpassed most obstacles, representing a viable and flexible ...
Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2017
OBJECTIVE To provide a focused critical review of the literature on the acceptability, feasibility, and uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling among hard-to-reach women. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE A focused search to obtain relevant literature published in English between 1997 and 2015 was done using PubMed and EMBASE using search terms including HPV self-test or HPV self-sample or HPV kit in combination with acceptability or feasibility. Only studies that focused on never-screened or underscreened populations were included in this review. MAIN MESSAGE Human papillomavirus self-sampling was found to be highly acceptable and feasible among these hard-to-reach women across most studies. Mailing of self-sampling kits has been shown to increase participation among hard-to reach women. Some concerns remain regarding adherence to further follow-up among high-risk women with positive test results for HPV after screening. CONCLUSION There is a strong body of evidence to support the use...
Journal of Medical Screening
Objective Organised cervical cancer screening was started in Estonia in 2006, but participation is still low. Human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling has proved to increase screening uptake. This study addressed the feasibility of HPV self-sampling and the acceptance of this method among long-term screening non-attenders. Methods A randomised intervention study was conducted in Estonia in 2020. Women born in 1958–1983 without a Pap smear in 2013–2019 were identified in the Estonian Health Insurance Fund database. From them, 12,000 women were randomly allocated to three equal-sized study groups. The opt-out group received a questionnaire and a Qvintip® sampling device by regular mail. Two opt-in groups received a questionnaire and an e-mail invitation to order a self-sampler online; one received Qvintip and the other Evalyn® Brush. Participantś background characteristics were obtained from the Population Register. The effect of covariates on participation rate was estimated with mul...
Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) self-sampling: do women accept it?
Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 2018
This study aims to determine the acceptability of Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) self-sampling and the factors associated with willingness to buy HPV self-sampling kit in the future. A total of 164 women aged 28-60 years old from Obstetrics & Gynaecology clinics at a teaching hospital performed HPV selfsampling using the Digene HC2 DNA collection kit. After samples were taken, the participants were given self-administered questionnaires. The majority of the participants were Malay (93.9%), had attained tertiary education (65.2%) and were employed (70.1%). The acceptability was good. More than half of the participants felt that self-sampling was easy. Only 1.2% felt that the procedure was difficult to perform. Most reported no pain at all during the procedure (66.9%). The commonest concern was getting a good sample (90.1%). A number of Pap smears were found to be significantly associated with the willingness to buy the HPV self-sampling kit. HPV self-sampling has the potential to be included in the cervical cancer screening programme. IMPACT STATEMENT What is already known on this subject: HPV self-sampling is acceptable in some developed and developing countries. It is acceptable because it was easy to perform with very minimal pain or discomfort. Studies on the acceptance of self-screening are needed to plan a policy on self-sampling in the future. What the results of this study add: Our study adds new findings to the body of knowledge on self-sampling in the local population. We found that more women are willing to do the self-sampling at the clinic rather than at home. Although more than 90% expressed willingness to do selfsampling in the future, only 70% of them were willing to purchase the kit. Cost is a potential barrier to women who have the interest to perform the self-sampling. Given the global economic challenges, cost is inevitably an important predictor that we have to consider. What the implications are of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research: Future research should examine women from the rural areas and those who are resilient to Pap smear screening. In clinical practice, clinicians should acknowledge that cost is a potential barrier for women who are willing to do self-sampling. Self-sampling could be an option for women with no financial constraint to buy the kit. However, clinicians should counsel women so that they can make an informed choice in determining their screening method.
Acceptability and Feasibility of Human Papilloma Virus Self-Sampling for Cervical Cancer Screening
Journal of Women's Health, 2016
Objectives: Women in safety-net institutions are less likely to receive cervical cancer screening. Human papilloma virus (HPV) self-sampling is an alternative method of cervical cancer screening. We examine the acceptability and feasibility of HPV self-sampling among patients and clinic staff in two safety-net clinics in Miami. Materials and Methods: Haitian and Latina women aged 30-65 years with no Pap smear in the past 3 years were recruited. Women were offered HPV self-sampling or traditional Pap smear screening. The acceptability of HPV self-sampling among patients and clinic staff was assessed. If traditional screening was preferred the medical record was reviewed. Results: A total of 180 women were recruited (134 Latinas and 46 Haitian). HPV self-sampling was selected by 67% women. Among those selecting traditional screening, 22% were not screened 5 months postrecruitment. Over 80% of women agreed HPV self-sampling was faster, more private, easy to use, and would prefer to use again. Among clinic staff, 80% agreed they would be willing to incorporate HPV self-sampling into practice. Conclusions: HPV self-sampling was both acceptable and feasible to participants and clinic staff and may help overcome barriers to screening.
Self-sampling versus physician-sampling for human papillomavirus testing
International Journal of STD & AIDS, 2005
We evaluated the detection of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection using two sampling methods of cervical exfoliated cells, consisting of self-sampling of vaginal cells and cervical sampling performed by the physician. Women included were 379 patients of the general population attending outpatient clinics in Northern Greece for routine cytological cervical dysplasia screening. HPV DNA detection was similar with both sampling techniques. The HPV prevalences in self-collected samples were 4.7% and 3.7% in the physician-collected samples (P>0.05). The Kappa statistic for HPV DNA agreement between the two methods was 0.54 (95% Confidence interval = 0.33-0.75). Self-sampling of cervico-vaginal exfoliated cells could be used as an alternative option to test for HPV infection.
In most industrialized countries, screening programs for cervical cancer have shifted from cytology (Pap smear or ThinPrep) alone on clinician-obtained samples to the addition of screening for human papillomavirus (HPV), its main causative agent. For HPV testing, self-sampling instead of clinician-sampling has proven to be equally accurate, in particular for assays that use nucleic acid amplification techniques. In addition, HPV testing of self-collected samples in combination with a follow-up Pap smear in case of a positive result is more effective in detecting precancerous lesions than a Pap smear alone. Self-sampling for HPV testing has already been adopted by some countries, while others have started trials to evaluate its incorporation into national cervical cancer screening programs. Self-sampling may result in more individuals willing to participate in cervical cancer screening, because it removes many of the barriers that prevent women, especially those in low socioeconomic ...
Frontiers in public health, 2018
In most industrialized countries, screening programs for cervical cancer have shifted from cytology (Pap smear or ThinPrep) alone on clinician-obtained samples to the addition of screening for human papillomavirus (HPV), its main causative agent. For HPV testing, self-sampling instead of clinician-sampling has proven to be equally accurate, in particular for assays that use nucleic acid amplification techniques. In addition, HPV testing of self-collected samples in combination with a follow-up Pap smear in case of a positive result is more effective in detecting precancerous lesions than a Pap smear alone. Self-sampling for HPV testing has already been adopted by some countries, while others have started trials to evaluate its incorporation into national cervical cancer screening programs. Self-sampling may result in more individuals willing to participate in cervical cancer screening, because it removes many of the barriers that prevent women, especially those in low socioeconomic ...
Radiology and Oncology, 2018
Background To overcome obstacles within the Slovenian organised cervical cancer screening programme, a randomised pilot study of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling among non-attenders was performed, aiming to assess three different screening approaches. Participants and methods Non-attenders aged 30–64 years from two Slovenian regions were randomised to two HPV self-sampling groups–the opt-in (I1, n = 14.400) and the opt-out (I2, n = 9.556), with a control group (P, n = 2.600). Self-collected samples were analysed using the Hybrid Capture 2 assay. HPV-positive women were invited to a colposcopy. The overall and type-specific intention-to-screen response rates and histological outcomes with a positive predictive value (PPV) according to the women’s age, the screening approach, the level of protection resulting from previous screening history, and the region of residence were assessed. Results Of the 26.556 women enrolled, 8.972 (33.8%) responded with self-sample for HPV testing...