Randomised study shows that repeated self-sampling and HPV test has more than two-fold higher detection rate of women with CIN2+ histology than Pap smear cytology

Effectiveness of self-sampling human papillomavirus test on precancer detection and screening uptake in Japan: The ACCESS randomized controlled trial

Japan is lagging in cervical cancer prevention. The effectiveness of a self-sampling human papillomavirus (HPV) test, a possible measure to overcome this situation, has not yet been evaluated. A randomized controlled trial was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of a self-sampling HPV test on detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and screening uptake. Women between 30 and 58 years old who did not participate in the cervical cancer screening program for ≥3 years were eligible and assigned to the intervention group (cytology or self-sampling HPV test) or control group (cytology). Participants assigned to the intervention group were sent a self-sampling kit according to their ordering (opt-in strategy). A total of 7337 and 7772 women were assigned to the intervention and control groups, respectively. Screening uptake in the intervention group was significantly higher than that in the control group (20.0% vs. 6.4%; risk ratio: 3.10; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.82, 3.42). The compliance rate with cytology triage for HPV-positive women was 46.8% (95% CI: 35.5%, 58.4%). CIN2+ was detected in five and four participants in the intervention and control groups, respectively; there was no difference for intention-to-screen analysis (risk ratio: 1.32; 95% CI: 0.36, 4.93). Self-sampling of HPV test increased screening uptake; however, no difference was observed in the detection of CIN2+, probably due to the low compliance rate for cytology triage in HPV-positive women. Efforts to increase cytology triage are essential to maximize precancer detections.

Toward ovarian cancer screening with protein biomarkers using dried, self-sampled cervico-vaginal fluid

Early detection is key for increased survival in ovarian cancer, but no general screening program exists today due to lack of biomarkers and overall cost versus benefit over traditional clinical methods. Here, we used dried cervico-vaginal fluid (CVF) as sampling matrix coupled with mass spectrometry for detection of protein biomarkers. We find that self-collected CVF on paper cards yields robust results and is suitable for high-throughput proteomics. Artificial intelligence-based methods were used to identify an 11-protein panel that separates cases from controls. In validation data, the panel achieved a sensitivity of 0.97 (95% CI 0.91-1.00) at a specificity of 0.67 (0.40-0.87). Analyses of samples collected prior to development of symptoms indicate that the panel is informative also of future risk of disease. Dried CVF is used in cervical cancer screening, and our results opens the possibility for a screening program also for ovarian cancer, based on self-collected CVF samples.

[Pelvic exam in gynecology and obstetrics: Guidelines for clinical practice]

OBJECTIVE

To provide guidelines for the pelvic clinical exam in gynecology and obstetrics.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A multidisciplinary experts consensus committee of 45 experts was formed, including representatives of patients' associations and users of the health system. The entire guidelines process was conducted independently of any funding. The authors were advised to follow the rules of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE®) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence. The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasized.

METHODS

The committee studied 40 questions within 4 fields for symptomatic or asymptomatic women (emergency conditions, gynecological consultation, gynecological diseases, obstetrics, and pregnancy). Each question was formulated in a PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) format and the evidence profiles were produced. The literature review and recommendations were made according to the GRADE® methodology.

RESULTS

The experts' synthesis work and the application of the GRADE method resulted in 27 recommendations. Among the formalized recommendations, 17 present a strong agreement, 7 a weak agreement and 3 an expert consensus agreement. Thirteen questions resulted in an absence of recommendation due to lack of evidence in the literature.

CONCLUSIONS

The need to perform clinical examination in gynecological and obstetrics patients was specified in 27 pre-defined situations based on scientific evidence. More research is required to investigate the benefit in other cases.

Does self-sampling for human papilloma virus testing have the potential to increase cervical cancer screening? An updated meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized clinical trials

Objectives

A meta-analysis was conducted to examine the effectiveness of HPV self-sampling proposal on cervical cancer screening (CCS) uptake when compared with an invitation to have a clinician to collect the sample. Secondary outcomes were acceptability and preference of self-sampling compared to clinician-collected samples.

Methods

The present systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies examining the CCS uptake comparing self-sampling over invitation to be sampled by an healthcare professional and examining the proportion of women accepting or preferring self-sampling vs. clinician-collected sampling were included. The CCS uptake was also explored according to strategy of self-samplers' distribution, collection device type and screening status. Peters' test and Funnel Plot inspection were used to assess the publication bias. Quality of the studies was assessed through Cochrane Risk of Bias and NIH Quality Assessment tools.

Results

One hundred fifty-four studies were globally identified, and 482,271 women were involved. Self-sampling procedures nearly doubled the probability (RR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.7-2.0) of CCS uptake when compared with clinician-collected samples. The opt-out (RR: 2.1; 95% CI: 1.9-2.4) and the door-to-door (RR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.6-2.0) did not statistically significant differ (p = 1.177) in improving the CCS uptake. A higher relative uptake was shown for brushes (RR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.5-1.7) and swabs (RR: 2.5; 95% CI: 1.9-3.1) over clinician-collected samples. A high between-studies variability in characteristics of sampled women was shown. In all meta-analyses the level of heterogeneity was consistently high (I 2 > 95%). Publication bias was unlikely.

Conclusions

Self-sampling has the potential to increase participation of under-screened women in the CCS, in addition to the standard invitation to have a clinician to collect the sample. For small communities door-to-door distribution could be preferred to distribute the self-sampler while; for large communities opt-out strategies should be preferred over opt-in. Since no significant difference in acceptability and preference of device type was demonstrated among women, and swabs and brushes exhibited a potential stronger effect in improving CCS, these devices could be adopted.

Incidence of oncogenic HPV and HPV-related dysplasia five years after a negative HPV test by self-sampling in elderly women

PURPOSE

Cervical cancer prevention for older women can be challenging since there are no specific guidelines for this group. This study aimed to determine the incidence of oncogenic HPV and HPV-related dysplasia in elderly women 5 years after being HPV negative.

METHODS

Invited women participated five years earlier in a study where self-sampling for HPV testing was applied, at this time, they were all HPV negative. The women were now, five years later invited to perform self-sampling for HPV testing. Women with a positive result performed a repeat HPV test. Those with a positive repeat HPV test were examined by colposcopy, biopsy and cytology.

RESULTS

Of the 804 invited women, 634 (76.9%) agreed to participate in the study and a self-sampling kit was sent to them. Of these, 99.6% (632/634) sent a sample to the HPV laboratory. The participation rate in each age group was 93.3% at age 65, 74.0% at age 70, 80.7% at age 75 and 64.6% at age 80. Overall 18 women (2.8%, 95% CI 3.2 to 6.0) were HPV positive in the first test and 8 (1.3%, 95% CI 0.6 to 2.6) in the second test. Sampling for the second test was done on average 5.4 months after the first test. Fifty per cent (4/8) of the women with a positive repeat test had dysplasia in histology.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of HPV in previously HPV-negative elderly women was low. Among women who were HPV positive in a repeat test, there was a high prevalence of low grade dysplasia.

Molecular Detection Methods in HPV-Related Cancers

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is responsible for most cervical cancers and some head and neck cancers, including oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma and sinonasal carcinoma. Cervical cancer is commonly diagnosed by liquid-based cytology, followed by HPV testing using commercially available DNA polymerase chain reaction (PCR), p16 immunohistochemistry (IHC), or DNA/RNA in situ hybridization. HPV in head and neck cancers is commonly diagnosed by p16 IHC or by RT-qPCR of HPV-16 E6 and E7 oncoproteins. Droplet digital PCR has been reported as an ultrasensitive and highly precise method of nucleic acid quantification for biomarker analysis and has been used to detect oncogenic HPV in oropharyngeal and cervical cancers.

Reasons for non-attendance to cervical cancer screening and acceptability of HPV self-sampling among Bruneian women: A cross-sectional study

Objective

Uptake for cervical cancer screening remains well below the 80% target as recommended by Brunei’s National Cervical Cancer Prevention and Control plan. We conducted a pilot study to determine the reasons for non-attendance and explore their acceptance of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling as an alternative to the Pap test.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted at a primary healthcare center in Brunei, from January to December 2019. We recruited screening non-attendees, defined as women who were eligible for Pap test but who either never, or did not have one within the recommended screening interval of 3 years. This recruitment was done conveniently among women attending outpatient care and/or child health services at the primary healthcare center. Participants were first asked to complete a self-administered paper-based questionnaire on their reasons for screening non-attendance, and then invited for HPV self-sampling. Among those who agreed to participate in HPV self-sampling, they were asked to complete a second questionnaire on the self-sampling procedure and their samples were tested for high-risk HPV (hr-HPV). Results were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.

Result

We enrolled 174 screening non-attendees, out of which 97 (55.7%) also participated in HPV self-sampling. The main reasons for not attending Pap test screening were fear of bad results (16.1%, n = 28); embarrassment (14.9%, n = 26) and lack of time due to home commitments (10.3%, n = 18). When compared to those who agreed to participate in HPV self-sampling, those who declined were significantly older (p = 0.002) and less likely to agree that they are susceptible to cervical cancer (p = 0.023). They preferred to receive Pap test-related information from healthcare workers (59.0%, n = 155), social messaging platforms (28.7%, n = 51) and social media (26.4%, n = 47). HPV self-sampling kits were positively received among the 97 participants, where > 90% agreed on its ease and convenience. Nine (9.3%) tested positive for hr-HPV, out of which eight were non-16/18 HPV genotypes.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that promoting awareness on cervical cancer, clarifying any misconceptions of Pap test results, and highlighting that the disease is preventable and that early detection through screening can facilitate successful treatment would help increase screening uptake among Bruneian non-attendees. Response to HPV self-sampling was highly positive, suggesting the possibility of implementing this strategy in the local setting. Our high detection of non-16/18 HPV genotypes suggest high prevalence of other hr-HPV genotypes in Brunei. Larger studies should be conducted to further validate our findings.

Study protocol of the ACCESS trial: a randomised trial to evaluate the effectiveness of human papillomavirus testing by self-sampling in cervical cancer screening uptake and precancer detection

INTRODUCTION

Recently, the incidence of cervical cancer has increased in Japan, probably because of an interruption in human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and a low cervical cancer screening rate. There is a lack of evidence for self-sampling HPV testing as a cervical cancer screening tool in Japan. The Accelerating Cervical Cancer Elimination by Self-Sampling test trial aims to compare the effectiveness of screening using the self-sampling HPV test with that of routine screening concerning screening uptake and precancer detection.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This trial has a single-municipality, open-label, parallel, superiority and randomised design. Approximately 20 000 women who have not undergone cervical cancer screening for at least 3 years will be assigned randomly to the self-sampling arm and the control arm using a 1:1 ratio. Participants assigned to the control arm will undergo routine cervical cancer screening (cytology test) provided by Ichihara City, while those assigned to the self-sampling arm will choose the routine screening or self-sampling HPV test. HPV tests will be performed using the cobas 8800 system (Roche Diagnostics, Rotkreuz, Switzerland). Participants who will undergo the self-sampling HPV testing will be recommended to undergo routine screening. The results of the cytology test and further tests, such as colposcopy and biopsy, will be collected and used for this trial. The risk ratio and risk difference in the proportion of participants with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia two or worse between the two arms will be calculated. The test for the null hypothesis (the detection rates are equal between the two arms) will be performed using Pearson's χ² test.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial was approved by the Research Ethics Committees of the Chiba Foundation for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention and the collaborating research institutes. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

jRCT1030200276. Pre-results.

Equal prevalence of severe cervical dysplasia by HPV self-sampling and by midwife-collected samples for primary HPV screening: a randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

HPV self-sampling is an option for cervical screening. The aim of this randomised study was to investigate the compliance, prevalence of HPV, and prevalence of severe dysplasia in a vaginal self-sampling group in comparison to cervical samples collected by midwives (control arm). The hypothesis was that there would be no difference between vaginal self-sampling and cervical sampling to find high-grade cervical dysplasia or cancer.

METHODS

Vaginal HPV self-sampling kits were sent by regular mail to 14 765 randomly selected women aged 30-64 years old in the screening programme. HPV-positive women were invited for a follow-up examination by their midwife in which they provided a cervical sample for cytological and HPV co-testing. The control arm consisted of 14 839 women who met the same inclusion criteria and were invited to have cervical sampling by midwives for primary HPV screening. All HPV samples were analysed by the Aptima HPV assay (Hologic Inc.).

MAIN RESULTS

The participation rate was 33.5% in the self-sampling arm and 47.5% in the cervical sampling arm, (P < 0.0001). HPV was detected in 17.1% (95% confidence interval (CI), 16.1-18.23%) in the self-sampling arm and 4.5% (95% CI, 4.0-5.0%) in the cervical sampling arm. Histological, severe dysplasia was observed among 0.48% (95% CI, 0.3-0.72%) and 0.47% (95% CI, 0.3-0.66%) of the self-sampling and the cervical sampling groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The self-sampling approach detects a similar proportion of severe dysplasia as regular screening. Thus, our study indicates that self-sampling could replace primary HPV screening of cervical samples.

Multimodality screening and prevention of cervical cancer in sub-Saharan Africa: a collaborative model

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although cervical cancer continues to decrease in incidence throughout the developed world because of rigorous screening and vaccination campaigns, the disease remains a major cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality in resource-limited regions including sub-Saharan Africa. This review summarizes current efforts to implement cost-effective and widespread cervical cancer education, screening, and community-based interventions in Africa and the challenges faced by local healthcare workers.

RECENT FINDINGS

Effective screening with cytology (with or without high-risk human papillomavirus [HPV] DNA testing) as well as HPV self-sampling remains problematic in African countries because of a paucity of cytopathologists and resources. Accordingly, visual inspection of the cervix with acetic acid (VIA) with cryotherapy triage has gained traction in mass-screening campaigns because of low-cost supplies.

SUMMARY

Public education to facilitate screening is essential. VIA remains a strong community-based approach. The involvement of technology in teaching local providers, advertising screenings to the community, and helping improve follow-up may also improve screening efforts. Ultimately, the best form of prevention is through HPV vaccination, which also requires implementation of ongoing public education programs.

Identification of Candidate Protein Biomarkers for CIN2+ Lesions from Self-Sampled, Dried Cervico-Vaginal Fluid Using LC-MS/MS

Simple Summary

Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer among women worldwide, and screening programs increase its detection rate and survivability. The molecular screening of the presence of human papilloma viruses (HPV) as alternatives to physical examinations offers cost-efficient solutions and can be performed on self-collected samples. A persistent infection with HPV is necessary (but not sufficient) to develop cancer, and additional biomarkers are needed to increase the precision. Here, we have analysed protein biomarkers found in self-collected dried cervico–vaginal fluid (CVF) from both controls and women with cervical cancer pre-stages. Our conclusion is that protein biomarkers can be robustly detected from dried CVF and that these can aid in the detection of cervical cancer pre-stages.

Abstract

Molecular screening programs for cervical cancer detect the presence of human papilloma virus (HPV) in cell material or vaginal fluids. Persistent infection with high-risk HPV is a necessary pre-requisite, but the majority of infections do not lead to pathological states. Additional biomarkers are needed to increase the specificity of the molecular tests. Here, we have investigated the possibility of detecting protein biomarkers using mass spectrometry from dried self-sampled cervico–vaginal fluid deposited on FTA cards. We found significant intra-individual correlations (p < 2.2 × 10⁻¹⁶), although heterogenous protein profiles were obtained between individuals. Out of 3699 proteins found in total, 169 were detected in at least 95% of the samples. Using a discovery/replication design, 18 proteins were found to be significant in the discovery cohort, with higher values in those cases compared to controls. All of these were found to also have higher levels among the cases in the replication cohort, with one protein (DEAD-Box Helicase) remaining statistically significant. Finally, a predictive 7-protein multivariate model was developed with a sensitivity and specificity of 0.90 and 0.55, respectively. Our results demonstrate that robust measurements of protein biomarkers can be obtained from self-sampled dried CVF and that these could be used to predict cervical cancer pre-stages.

Promotion of Cervical Screening among Long-term Non-attendees by Human Papillomavirus Self-sampling

Cervical cancer is preventable through gynecological screening. To promote participation among non-attending women, self-collected vaginal samples for detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (hr-HPV) is an option. The aims of this study were to investigate the response of self-collected vaginal samples for hr-HPV testing among long-term non-attendees, to explore the attendance at follow-up among HPV-positive women, and to analyze the prevalence of hr-HPV and severe cervical dysplasia or cancer among the responders. A vaginal self-sampling kit was sent to 19,766 women aged 30-70 years who had not provided a cervical screening sample for ≥ 7 years in Skåne, Sweden. The self-sample was analyzed by the Aptima HPV mRNA assay (Hologic). Women testing positive for HPV were invited for follow-up. The response was 18.5% (3,646/19,757). The prevalence of HPV mRNA was 11.3% (412/3,636). Among HPV-positive women, 85.7% (353/412) attended follow-up, and of these, 44.8% (158/353) had HPV in the cervical sample. The HPV mRNA test of self-samples showed a positive predictive value of 9.3% ([33/353], 95% CI = 6.5-12.9) for detection of cytologically severe dysplasia. Histologically severe dysplasia or cancer was detected in 0.88% ([32/3,636], 95% CI = 0.6-1.2) among responders, including two cervical- and one vaginal cancer. In conclusion, almost one fifth of the long-term non-attendees participated in self-collected vaginal hr-HPV sampling. The prevalence of histologically confirmed high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or cervical cancer was not increased significantly compared to regularly screened women in Sweden. The relatively high HPV prevalence among the self-samples indicates the importance of diagnostic follow-up with cervical HPV testing and reflex-cytology of HPV-positive cases.

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.

Acceptability of self- collection for human papillomavirus detection in the Eastern Cape, South Africa

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing on vaginal self-collected and cervical clinician-collected specimens shows comparable performance. Self-sampling on FTA cards is suitable for women residing in rural settings or not attending regular screening and increases participation rate in the cervical cancer screening programme. We aimed to investigate and compare high-risk (HR)-HPV prevalence in clinician-collected and self-collected genital specimens as well as two different HPV tests on the clinician collected samples. A total of 737 women were recruited from two sites, a community health clinic (n = 413) and a referral clinic (n = 324) in the Eastern Cape Province. Cervical clinician-collected (FTA cards and Digene transport medium) and vaginal self-collected specimens were tested for HR-HPV using the hpVIR assay (FTA cards) and Hybrid Capture-2 (Digene transport medium). There was no significant difference in HR-HPV positivity between clinician-collected and self-collected specimens among women from the community-based clinic (26.4% vs 27.9%, p = 0.601) or the referral clinic (83.6% vs 79.9%, p = 0.222). HPV16, HPV35, and HPV33/52/58 group were the most frequently detected genotypes at both study sites. Self-sampling for HPV testing received a high positive response of acceptance (77.2% in the community-based clinic and 83.0% in referral clinic). The overall agreement between hpVIR assay and HC-2 was 87.7% (k = 0.754). The study found good agreement between clinician-collected and self-collected genital specimens. Self-collection can have a positive impact on a cervical screening program in South Africa by increasing coverage of women in rural areas, in particular those unable to visit the clinics and women attending clinics where cytology-based programs are not functioning effectively.

Temporal changes in the vaginal microbiota in self-samples and its association with persistent HPV16 infection and CIN2

Background

The vaginal microbiota has been reported to be associated with HPV infection and cervical cancer. This study was performed to compare the vaginal microbiota at two timepoints in women performing self-sampling and had a persistent or transient HPV16 infection. The women were tested for 12 high-risk HPV (hrHPV) types but only women with single type (HPV16) were included to reduce confounding variables.

Methods

In total 96 women were included in this study. Of these, 26 were single positive for HPV16 in the baseline test and HPV negative in the follow-up test and 38 were single positive for HPV16 in both tests and diagnosed with CIN2+ in histology. In addition, 32 women that were negative for all 12 HPV tested were included. The samples of vaginal fluid were analyzed with the Ion 16S™ Metagenomics Kit and Ion 16S™ metagenomics module within the Ion Reporter™ software.

Results

K-means clustering resulted in two Lactobacillus-dominated groups, one with Lactobacillus sp. and the other specifically with Lactobacillus iners. The two remaining clusters were dominated by a mixed non-Lactobacillus microbiota. HPV negative women had lower prevalence (28%) of the non-Lactobacill dominant cluster in the baseline test, as compared to women with HPV16 infection (42%) (p value = 0.0173). Transition between clusters were more frequent in women with persistent HPV16 infection (34%) as compared in women who cleared the HPV16 infection (19%) (p value = 0.036).

Conclusions

The vaginal microbiota showed a higher rate of transitioning between bacterial profiles in women with persistent HPV16 infection as compared to women with transient infection. This indicate an instability in the microenvironment in women with persistent HPV infection and development of CIN2+.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of repeated self-sampling for HPV testing in primary cervical screening: a randomized study

BACKGROUND

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is recommended in primary cervical screening to improve cancer prevention. An advantage of HPV testing is that it can be performed on self-samples, which could increase population coverage and result in a more efficient strategy to identify women at risk of developing cervical cancer. Our objective was to assess whether repeated self-sampling for HPV testing is cost-effective in comparison with Pap smear cytology for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more (CIN2+) in increasing participation rate in primary cervical screening.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was performed on data from a previously published randomized clinical study including 36,390 women aged 30-49 years. Participants were randomized either to perform repeated self-sampling of vaginal fluid for HPV testing (n = 17,997, HPV self-sampling arm) or to midwife-collected Pap smears for cytological analysis (n = 18,393, Pap smear arm).

RESULTS

Self-sampling for HPV testing led to 1633 more screened women and 107 more histologically diagnosed CIN2+ at a lower cost vs. midwife-collected Pap smears (€ 229,446 vs. € 782,772).

CONCLUSIONS

This study resulted in that repeated self-sampling for HPV testing increased participation and detection of CIN2+ at a lower cost than midwife-collected Pap smears in primary cervical screening. Offering women a home-based self-sampling may therefore be a more cost-effective alternative than clinic-based screening.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not registered since this trial is a secondary analysis of an earlier published study (Gustavsson et al., British journal of cancer. 118:896-904, 2018).

Human papillomavirus prevalence and risk factors among HIV-negative and HIV-positive women residing in rural Eastern Cape, South Africa

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the prevalence of high-risk (HR) human papillomavirus (HPV) and factors associated with HR-HPV infection among women from rural Eastern Cape, South Africa.

METHODS

HPV prevalence was determined by Hybrid Capture 2 assay in cervical specimens from 417 women aged ≥30 years (median 46 years) recruited from the community health clinic in the Eastern Cape.

RESULTS

HR-HPV prevalence was 28.5% (119/417), and HIV-positive women had significantly higher HR-HPV prevalence than HIV-negative women (40.6%, 63/155 vs 21.4%, 56/262, respectively; p = 0.001). HIV-positive status (odds ratio (OR) 2.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.63-3.90), having ≥3 lifetime sexual partners (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.16-3.89), having ≥1 sexual partner in the last month (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.21-2.92), ≥4 times frequency of vaginal sex in the past 1 month (OR 2.40, 95% CI 1.32-4.35), and having a vaginal discharge currently/in the previous week (OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.18-3.85) increased the risk of HR-HPV infection. In the multivariate analysis, HIV positivity remained strongly associated with HR-HPV infection (OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.17-3.22).

CONCLUSIONS

Risk factors related to sexual behaviors play a significant role in HR-HPV infection in this population. This report will inform health policymakers on HPV prevalence and contribute to discussions on the use of HPV testing as the primary cervical cancer screening test in South Africa.

HPV viral load in self-collected vaginal fluid samples as predictor for presence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

OBJECTIVE

This study was performed to evaluate the use of high-risk HPV (hrHPV) viral load in screening tests for cervical cancer to predict persistent infection and presence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+).

METHODS

We followed women between 30 and 60 years of age who performed self-sampling of vaginal fluid and subsequently a hrHPV test. Women who were hrHPV positive in their screening test repeated the hrHPV test 3-6 months later and were included in the present study.

RESULTS

Our results show that women with a persistent HPV16 infection had higher HPV viral load in their primary screening test than women with transient infections (p = 5.33e-03). This was also true for sum of viral load for all hrHPV types in the primary screening test (p = 3.88e-07). 48% of women with persistent HPV16 infection and CIN2+ had an increase in HPV16 titer in the follow-up test, as compared to only 20% of women with persistent infection but without CIN2+ lesions. For the sum of all hrHPV types, 41% of women with persistent infection and CIN2+ had an increase in titer as compared to 26% of women without CIN2 + .

CONCLUSIONS

The results show that hrHPV viral load in the primary screening HPV test is associated with the presence of CIN2+ and could be used in triaging hrHPV positive women for different follow-up strategies or recall times. Serial testing of hrHPV viral load has the potential to distinguish women with CIN2+ lesions from women with persistent infection but without CIN2+ lesions.

Clinical validation of the HPVIR high-risk HPV test on cervical samples according to the international guidelines for human papillomavirus DNA test requirements for cervical cancer screening

Background

The indicating FTA card is a dry medium used for collection of cervical samples. HPVIR is a multiplex real-time PCR test that detects 12 high-risk human papillomavirus types (hrHPV) and provides single genotype information for HPV16, − 31, − 35, − 39, − 51, − 56, and − 59 and pooled type information for HPV18/45 and HPV33/52/58. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether a strategy with cervical samples collected on the FTA card and subsequently analysed with the HPVIR test complies with the criteria of the international guidelines for a clinically validated method for cervical screening.

Methods

We performed a non-inferiority test comparing the clinical sensitivity and specificity of the candidate test (FTA card and HPVIR) with a clinically validated reference test (Cobas^® HPV test) based on liquid-based cytology (LBC) samples. Two clinical samples (LBC and FTA) were collected from 896 participants in population-based screening. For evaluation of the specificity we used 799 women without ≥ CIN2, and for clinical sensitivity we used 67 women with histologically confirmed ≥ CIN2. The reproducibility was studied by performing inter- and intra-laboratory tests of 558 additional clinical samples.

Results

The clinical sensitivity and specificity for samples collected on the FTA card and analysed using the HPVIR test were non-inferior to samples analysed with the Cobas® HPV test based on LBC samples (non-inferiority test score, p = 1.0 × 10^− 2 and p = 1.89 × 10^− 9, respectively). Adequate agreement of > 87% was seen in both the intra- and inter-laboratory comparisons.

Conclusions

Samples collected on the indicating FTA card and analysed with HPVIR test fulfil the requirements of the international guidelines and can therefore be used in primary cervical cancer screening.

Self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling test kits may increase screening for and early detection of cervical cancer and reduce its burden globally. To inform WHO self-care guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of HPV self-sampling among adult women on cervical (pre-)cancer screening uptake, screening frequency, social harms/adverse events and linkage to clinical assessment/treatment.

Methods

The included studies compared women using cervical cancer screening services with HPV self-sampling with women using standard of care, measured at least one outcome, and were published in a peer-reviewed journal. We searched PubMed, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CNIAHL), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) and Embase through October 2018. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and the Evidence Project tool for non-randomised studies. Meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects models to generate pooled estimates of relative risk (RR).

Results

33 studies in 34 articles with 369 017 total participants met the inclusion criteria: 29 RCTs and 4 observational studies. All studies examined HPV self-sampling; comparison groups were standard of care (eg, Pap smear, visual inspection with acetic acid, clinician-collected HPV testing). 93% of participants were from high-income countries. All 33 studies measured cervical cancer screening uptake. Meta-analysis found greater screening uptake among HPV self-sampling participants compared with control (RR: 2.13, 95% CI 1.89 to 2.40). Effect size varied by HPV test kit dissemination method, whether mailed directly to home (RR: 2.27, 95% CI 1.89 to 2.71), offered door-to-door (RR: 2.37, 95% CI 1.12 to 5.03) or requested on demand (RR: 1.28, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.82). Meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference in linkage to clinical assessment/treatment between arms (RR: 1.12, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.57). No studies measured screening frequency or social harms/adverse events.

Conclusion

A growing evidence base, mainly from high-income countries and with significant heterogeneity, suggests HPV self-sampling can increase cervical cancer screening uptake compared with standard of care, with a marginal effect on linkage to clinical assessment/treatment.

Systematic review registration number

PROSPERO CRD42018114871.

Predictive Value of HPV Testing in Self-collected and Clinician-Collected Samples Compared with Cytology in Detecting High-grade Cervical Lesions

BACKGROUND

Self-sampling has become an attractive proposition now that human papillomavirus (HPV) primary testing is being incorporated into cervical cancer screening programs worldwide. We compared predictive values of HPV testing based on self- and physician-collected samples, and cytology, in detecting high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN).

METHODS

The Cervical And Self-Sample In Screening (CASSIS) study enrolled 1,217 women ages 16-70 years prior to scheduled colposcopies. Vaginal specimens were self-collected using the validated HerSwab device. Cervical specimens were collected by gynecologists. Specimens were tested for presence of high-risk HPV (hrHPV) by the Cobas 4800 HPV test. We estimated positive predictive values (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for a subset of women (n = 700) who underwent cervical biopsy and cytology at the actual CASSIS visit.

RESULTS

hrHPV was detected in 329 women (47%) with HerSwab and in 327 (46.7%) with physician sampling. Respective values for HPV16/18 were 119 (17%) and 121 (17.3%). On histology, 134 women had CIN1, 49 had CIN2, 48 had CIN3, 5 had CIN2/CIN3, and 3 had cancers. PPVs for CIN2⁺ of any hrHPV were 28% (95% CI, 23.2-33.1) and 29.7% (95% CI, 24.8-34.9) for HerSwab and physician samples, respectively. Corresponding values for HPV16/18 were 43.7% (95% CI, 34.6-53.1) and 43.8% (95% CI, 34.8-53.1). PPV of cytology (ASC-US+) was 26.6% (95% CI, 21.6-32.0). Corresponding NPVs (same order as PPVs) were 96.4% (95% CI, 93.9-98.1), 97.8% (95% CI, 95.6-99), 90.9% (95% CI, 88.2-93.1), 91% (95% CI, 88.4-93.2), and 94.7% (95% CI, 91.8-96.8).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results confirm that HPV self-sampling has comparable performance with a physician-collected sample in detecting cervical lesions.

IMPACT

HPV self-sampling has the potential to increase coverage in cervical cancer screening.

Identification of Candidate Plasma Protein Biomarkers for Cervical Cancer Using the Multiplex Proximity Extension Assay

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is recommended as the primary test in cervical cancer screening, with co-testing by cytology for HPV-positive women to identify cervical lesions. Cytology has low sensitivity and there is a need to identify biomarkers that could identify dysplasia that are likely to progress to cancer. We searched for plasma proteins that could identify women with cervical cancer using the multiplex proximity extension assay (PEA). The abundance of 100 proteins were measured in plasma collected at the time of diagnosis of patients with invasive cervical cancer and in population controls using the Olink Multiplex panels CVD II, INF I, and ONC II. Eighty proteins showed increased levels in cases compared with controls. We identified a signature of 11 proteins (PTX3, ITGB1BP2, AXIN1, STAMPB, SRC, SIRT2, 4E-BP1, PAPPA, HB-EGF, NEMO and IL27) that distinguished cases and controls with a sensitivity of 0.96 at a specificity of 1.0. This signature was evaluated in a prospective replication cohort with samples collected before, at or after diagnosis and achieved a sensitivity of 0.78 and a specificity 0.56 separating samples collected at the time of diagnosis of invasive cancer from samples collected prior to diagnosis. No difference in abundance was seen between samples collected prior to diagnosis or after treatment as compared with population controls, indicating that this protein signature is mainly informative close to time of diagnosis. Further studies are needed to determine the optimal window in time prior to diagnosis for these biomarker candidates.

Dynamics of genotype-specific HPV clearance and reinfection in rural Ghana may compromise HPV screening approaches

Persistent Human Papillomavirus (HPV) infection is a prerequisite for cervical cancer development. Few studies investigated clearance of high-risk HPV in low-and-middle-income countries. Our study investigated HPV clearance and persistence over four years in women from North Tongu District, Ghana.

In 2010/2011, cervical swabs of 500 patients were collected and HPV genotyped (nested multiplex PCR) in Accra, Ghana. In 2014, 104 women who previously tested positive for high-risk HPV and remained untreated were re-tested for HPV. Cytobrush samples were genotyped (GP5+/6+ PCR & Luminex-MPG readout) in Berlin, Germany. Positively tested patients underwent colposcopy and treatment if indicated.

Of 104 women, who tested high-risk HPV+ in 2010/2011, seven (6,7%; 95%CI: 2.7–13.4%) had ≥1 persistent high-risk‐infection after ~4 years (mean age 39 years). Ninety-seven (93,3%; 95%CI: 86.6–97.3%) had cleared the original infection, while 22 (21.2%; 95%CI: 13.8–30.3%) had acquired new high-risk infections with other genotypes. Persistent types found were HPV 16, 18, 35, 39, 51, 52, 58, and 68. Among those patients, one case of CIN2 (HPV 68) and one micro-invasive cervical cancer (HPV 16) were detected.

This longitudinal observational data suggest that single HPV screening rounds may lead to over-referral. Including type-specific HPV re-testing or additional triage methods could help reduce follow-up rates.

•

High-risk HPV genotype-specific clearance rates of 93.3% after 4 years.

•

New infections with other high-risk HPV were 21.2%.

•

New infections may overestimate women at risk if non-genotyping repeat HPV-testing is used for triage.

•

Type-specific HPV genotyping reduces follow-up rates, for example by colposcopy.

Detecting cervical precancer and reaching underscreened women by using HPV testing on self samples: updated meta-analyses

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) assays on self samples and the efficacy of self sampling strategies to reach underscreened women.

DESIGN

Updated meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline (PubMed), Embase, and CENTRAL from 1 January 2013 to 15 April 2018 (accuracy review), and 1 January 2014 to 15 April 2018 (participation review).

REVIEW METHODS

Accuracy review: hrHPV assay on a vaginal self sample and a clinician sample; and verification of the presence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) by colposcopy and biopsy in all enrolled women or in women with positive tests. Participation review: study population included women who were irregularly or never screened; women in the self sampling arm (intervention arm) were invited to collect a self sample for hrHPV testing; women in the control arm were invited or reminded to undergo a screening test on a clinician sample; participation in both arms was documented; and a population minimum of 400 women.

RESULTS

56 accuracy studies and 25 participation trials were included. hrHPV assays based on polymerase chain reaction were as sensitive on self samples as on clinician samples to detect CIN2+ or CIN3+ (pooled ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.97 to 1.02). However, hrHPV assays based on signal amplification were less sensitive on self samples (pooled ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 0.89). The specificity to exclude CIN2+ was 2% or 4% lower on self samples than on clinician samples, for hrHPV assays based on polymerase chain reaction or signal amplification, respectively. Mailing self sample kits to the woman's home address generated higher response rates to have a sample taken by a clinician than invitation or reminder letters (pooled relative participation in intention-to-treat-analysis of 2.33, 95% confidence interval 1.86 to 2.91). Opt-in strategies where women had to request a self sampling kit were generally not more effective than invitation letters (relative participation of 1.22, 95% confidence interval 0.93 to 1.61). Direct offer of self sampling devices to women in communities that were underscreened generated high participation rates (>75%). Substantial interstudy heterogeneity was noted (I²>95%).

CONCLUSIONS

When used with hrHPV assays based on polymerase chain reaction, testing on self samples was similarly accurate as on clinician samples. Offering self sampling kits generally is more effective in reaching underscreened women than sending invitations. However, since response rates are highly variable among settings, pilots should be set up before regional or national roll out of self sampling strategies.

Cervical dysplasia in elderly women performing repeated self-sampling for HPV testing

Background

About 30% of the cervical cancer cases in Sweden occur in women older than 60. The primary aim was to evaluate the acceptability of repeated self-sampling at home for HPV-testing in elderly women. The prevalence of HPV and HPV related dysplasia as well as the sensitivity of cytology was evaluated.

Methods

Repeated self-sampling at home for HPV testing was offered 375 women in each of the four age groups 60, 65, 70 and 75 years. Women with two consecutive positive HPV tests were examined with sampling for histology and cytology.

Findings

A self-sample was provided by 59.5% (893/1500) of the invited women. The overall prevalence of HPV was 4.4% (95% CI 3.2–6.0, n = 39) in the first test, and 2.5% were persistent positive in the second test (95% C 1.6–3.8, n = 22) collected on average 5.5 months later. Dysplasia, was found in 1.8% (16/893) (95% CI 1.1–3.0) and CIN 2+ in 1.0% (9/893) (95%CI 0.5–2.0) of the women. Of the 16 women with dysplasia in histology, 13 (81.2%) had a normal cytology.

Interpretation

Repeated self-sampling at home combined with HPV testing was well accepted among elderly women. A high prevalence of CIN was diagnosed by histology. Cytology showed extremely low sensitivity and should not be recommended for this age group.

Randomised study of HPV prevalence and detection of CIN2+ in vaginal self-sampling compared to cervical specimens collected by medical personnel

We conducted a randomised study to compare vaginal self-sampling with assisted sampling by medical personnel on the cervix for HPV testing in primary screening. The first aim was to determine if the HPV prevalence is independent of sampling location (vagina versus cervix) and the person performing the sampling. The second aim was to evaluate if the two sampling strategies differed in the detection rate of CIN2+. In total, 19,523 women were randomised into two groups, with 9926 invited to perform self-sampling (SS arm) using the Rover VIBA-brush and 9597 offered assisted sampling using the cytobrush (AS arm). All samples were applied to the indicating FTA elute card and analysed for high-risk HPV using the hpVIR real-time PCR assay. The outcome for the first aim was HPV prevalence and for the second aim the number of CIN2+ based on histology. In the SS arm, 52.7% of invited women participated in the study, as compared to 34.2% in the AS arm. All samples contained sufficient amount of nuclear DNA for a valid HPV result, with vaginal samples having a higher DNA amount than cervical samples (p < 4.62 × 10^-11 ). HPV prevalence was 4.6% in the SS arm and 4.1% in the AS arm (p = 5.5 × 10^-2 ), and the distribution of HPV types similar between arms. There was no difference in the prevalence of CIN2+ per 1000 women screened between arms (p = 0.86). The results show that vaginal self-sampling is an equivalent alternative to sampling by medical personnel for HPV typing and identification of CIN2+.