Inexpensive population screening for abnormal cells from the uterine cervix and valid results using the vaginal cytopipette

Self-sampling for cervical cancer screening: Empowering women to lead a paradigm change in cancer control

In this new era of precision medicine and patient-centred care, the advent of self-sampling in cervical cancer screening is among the most disruptive innovations in cancer control and prevention[...]

Vaginal self-sampling as a diagnosis tool in low-income countries and potential applications for exploring the infectious causes of miscarriage

Gynecological health is a challenge in low-income countries. Personal opposition to perineal examination has been overcome by the use of vaginal self-sampling. Here, we review the use of this procedure notably in low-income countries and the main infectious causes of miscarriage. Vaginal self-sampling was mainly used for human papillomavirus detection but also to detect microorganisms causing sexually transmitted infections or bacterial vaginosis. 58 studies have been performed in low-resource countries, mainly studies performed to detect human papillomavirus in urban and peri-urban areas and demonstrating excellent acceptability. Several infectious causes of miscarriage could be tested using self-vaginal samples. In the future, such strategies coupled with a rapid-identification point-of-care method could allow the development of screening and treatment programs in rural areas in low-resource countries.

Primary screening for high risk HPV by home obtained cervicovaginal lavage is an alternative screening tool for unscreened women

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Self sampling is considered an adjuvant tool to facilitate the participation of women in cervical cancer screening programmes. This study aimed to evaluate whether cervicovaginal lavage could be an alternative for the cervical smear in cytology and human papillomavirus (HPV) testing and to assess the acceptance of the self sampling device by women.

METHODS

Fifty six women with abnormal cervical cytology (very mild dyskaryosis or worse) and 15 women with normal cervical cytology obtained a self collected cervicovaginal lavage at home and filled in a questionnaire on the use of the device. At the colposcopy clinic the gynaecologist performed the same procedure followed by a cervical smear for cytology and HPV DNA testing.

RESULTS

The self sampling device was acceptable to 88% of the women. The concordance between the cytology results in the smear and the lavage by the doctor and the patient was 54% and 41%, respectively (kappa = 0.28 and 0.14). The concordance between high risk HPV detection in the smear and the lavage by the doctor and the patient was 93% and 78%, respectively (kappa = 0.82 and 0.53). Ninety one per cent of the women with high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) had a high risk HPV positive test in the smear, compared with 91% and 81% in the lavages taken by the doctor and the patient, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

HPV DNA testing by home obtained samples is useful as a screening tool for cervical cancer, whereas cervical cytology by self sampling is not. Although the sensitivity for high grade CIN by high risk HPV testing in the lavage by the patient is not significantly lower than that in the cervical smear, self sampling for HPV DNA is a feasible alternative method in women who decline to participate in population based cervical cancer screening programmes. However, participation in the screening programme remains the best option.