The effect of self-sampled HPV testing on participation to cervical cancer screening in Italy: a randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN96071600)

Evaluating Opt-In Vaginal Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling: Participation Rates and Detection of High-Grade Lesions (CIN2+) among Unscreened Japanese Women Aged 30-39

Cervical cancer incidence is increasing among Japanese women, which is partly attributed to low screening rates. This study examined the implementation of opt-in human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling among Japanese women aged 30-39 years who had not undergone cervical cancer screening, focusing on those requiring preconception care. The responses to the opt-in approach and effectiveness in detecting cervical squamous intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse (CIN2+) were evaluated. Participants used the Evalyn® Brush for self-sampling, with HPV testing conducted using the Cobas 4800 system (version 2.2.0). Out of 3489 eligible, unscreened women from four municipalities in Fukui Prefecture, only 10.6% (370/3489) requested the self-sampling kit. Of these, 77.3% (286/370) returned the kit (HPV testing rate: 8.2% (286/3489)). The HPV positivity rate was 13.7% (39/285), yet only 61.5% (24/39) of those with positive HPV results proceeded to cytology testing. Subsequently, three cases of CIN2+ were detected (10.5/1000). While this study demonstrated a reasonable kit return rate and indicated the capability of opt-in HPV self-sampling to detect CIN2+ cases in unscreened women, the low ordering rate of kits and suboptimal compliance for follow-up cytology testing highlight significant challenges. The findings suggest the need for more effective strategies to enhance participation in cervical cancer screening programs.

Rates of Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cervical Cancer: A Study in a Province in the South of Italy

In Italy, cervical cancer represents the fifth most prevalent cancer in women under 50 years of age and is one of the most commonly detected lesions globally. Given the developing burden of the disease and the availability of both primary and secondary prevention measures, their accurate surveillance is of paramount importance. The aim of this study was to evaluate the trends in cervical cancer screening adherence in the period between 2020 and 2022, as well as to evaluate positive tests, identifying the most frequently associated genotypes and the vaccination coverage. The study sample was made up of 6880 women from the health district of Messina. We highlighted that there was a high proportion of positive results in the investigated period, with a high prevalence of HSIL. Moreover, HPV vaccination coverage was clearly inadequate, as was adherence to screening, both far away from WHO goals. This finding is probably linked to inadequate communication and awareness of the issue in the population and to the lack of data relating to tests carried out privately. In accordance with existing data in the literature, the introduction of the HPV-DNA test in Sicily made it possible to identify women positive for the genotypes most frequently involved in the etiopathogenesis of neoplastic lesions (genotypes 16 and 18), as well as for those in the "others" category, which should be investigated because some of them could have an impact on carcinogenicity and, for this reason, a future vaccine including them could represent a new prevention weapon.

Preferred Location for Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling for Cervical Cancer Screening

OBJECTIVE

To examine associations among women's preferred locations for human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling in relation to their demographic, social, and health characteristics and their perceived benefits and concerns regarding this procedure.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional, descriptive survey.

SETTING

Online distribution between March 2022 and April 2022.

PARTICIPANTS

People who were assigned female sex at birth and were eligible for cervical cancer screening (N = 367: cis-gender women, n = 364; another gender identity, n = 3).

METHODS

We used quota sampling to obtain a racially and ethnically diverse sample. We conducted bivariate analyses to examine differences in participants' preferred locations for HPV self-sampling by sociodemographic and health characteristics. We used a multinomial logistic regression model to examine the associations between preferred HPV self-sampling location, characteristics of participants, and perceived benefits and concerns regarding this procedure.

RESULTS

In our sample, 43% (n = 158) of participants preferred HPV self-sampling at the office of a health care provider, 50% (n = 182) preferred HPV self-sampling anywhere (office or home), and 7% (n = 27) did not feel comfortable with HPV self-sampling anywhere. Participants 39 to 45 years of age were more likely to prefer HPV self-sampling anywhere (office or home) than participants 27 to 32 years of age, OR = 2.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.21, 5.06]. Participants who preferred HPV self-sampling anywhere perceived greater benefit related to limited geographic access to a clinic compared to those who preferred office only, OR = 1.82, 95% CI [1.08, 3.07]. Participants who preferred HPV self-sampling anywhere had less concern related to performing the procedure accurately than those who preferred office only, OR = 0.44, 95% CI [0.31, 0.62].

CONCLUSION

HPV self-sampling is an alternative strategy to increase cervical cancer screening. As providers consider implementation of HPV self-sampling, our findings suggest that office and home-based collection strategies should be considered to increase access to cervical cancer screening.

Cost-effectiveness of Human Papillomavirus Self-collection Intervention on Cervical Cancer Screening Uptake among Underscreened U.S. Persons with a Cervix

BACKGROUND

We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-collection (followed by scheduling assistance for those who were HPV+ or inconclusive) compared with scheduling assistance only and usual care among underscreened persons with a cervix (PWAC).

METHODS

A decision tree analysis was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), or the cost per additional PWAC screened, from the Medicaid/state and clinic perspectives. A hypothetical cohort represented 90,807 low-income, underscreened individuals. Costs and health outcomes were derived from the MyBodyMyTest-3 randomized trial except the usual care health outcomes were derived from literature. We performed probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) to evaluate model uncertainty.

RESULTS

Screening uptake was highest in the self-collection alternative (n = 65,721), followed by the scheduling assistance alternative (n = 34,003) and usual care (n = 18,161). The self-collection alternative costs less and was more effective than the scheduling assistance alternative from the Medicaid/state perspective. Comparing the self-collection alternative with usual care, the ICERs were $284 per additional PWAC screened from the Medicaid/state perspective and $298 per additional PWAC screened from the clinic perspective. PSAs demonstrated that the self-collection alternative was cost-effective compared with usual care at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $300 per additional PWAC screened in 66% of simulations from the Medicaid/state perspective and 58% of simulations from the clinic perspective.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with usual care and scheduling assistance, mailing HPV self-collection kits to underscreened individuals appears to be cost-effective in increasing screening uptake.

IMPACT

This is the first analysis to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of mailed self-collection in the United States.

Acceptability of self-sampling human papillomavirus test for cervical cancer screening in Japan: A questionnaire survey in the ACCESS trial

PURPOSE

In terms of medical policy for cervical cancer prevention, Japan lags far behind other industrialized countries. We initiated a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the self-sampling human papillomavirus (HPV) test as a tool to raise screening uptake and detection of pre-cancer. This study was conducted to explore the acceptability and preference of self-sampling using a subset of the data from this trial.

METHODS

A pre-invitation letter was sent to eligible women, aged 30-59 years who had not undergone cervical cancer screening for three or more years. After excluding those who declined to participate in this trial, the remaining women were assigned to the self-sampling and control groups. A second invitation letter was sent to the former group, and those wanting to undergo the self-sampling test ordered the kit. A self-sampling HPV kit, consent form, and a self-administered questionnaire were sent to participants who ordered the test.

RESULTS

Of the 7,340 participants in the self-sampling group, 1,196 (16.3%) administered the test, and 1,192 (99.7%) answered the questionnaire. Acceptability of the test was favorable; 75.3-81.3% of participants agreed with positive impressions (easy, convenient, and clarity of instruction), and 65.1-77.8% disagreed with negative impressions (painful, uncomfortable, and embarrassing). However, only 21.2% were confident in their sampling procedure. Willingness to undergo screening with a self-collected sample was significantly higher than that with a doctor-collected sample (89.3% vs. 49.1%; p<0.001). Willingness to undergo screening with a doctor-collected sample was inversely associated with age and duration without screening (both p<0.001), but that with a self-collected sample was not associated.

CONCLUSIONS

Among women who used the self-sampling HPV test, high acceptability was confirmed, while concerns about self-sampling procedures remained. Screening with a self-collected sample was preferred over a doctor-collected sample and the former might alleviate disparities in screening rates.

A comparative study on behavior, awareness and belief about cervical cancer among rural and urban women in Vietnam

Cervical cancer is the second most common gynecologic cancer in Vietnam but based on the literature, only ~25% of Vietnamese women reported ever being screened for cervical cancer. To inform strategies to reduce the cervical cancer burden in Southern Vietnam where disease incidence is higher than the national average, this study examined behaviors, awareness, barriers, and beliefs about cervical cancer screening among rural and urban women in this geographical region. In October-November 2021, we conducted a cross-sectional study among 196 rural and 202 urban women in Southern Vietnam; participants completed a cervical cancer screening questionnaire. Descriptive analyses and rural-urban differences in screening behavior, awareness, barriers, and beliefs are presented. About half of the rural and urban participants reported ever being screened for cervical cancer. Most participants showed high perceived severity of cervical cancer and benefits of screening. Further, they reported that they would screen if it was recommended by doctors and/or friends/family. However, most women showed low awareness and perceived susceptibility to cervical cancer. Logistical and psychosocial barriers to physician-based screening methods were reported. Based on our results, the World Health Organization 2030 goals for cervical cancer screening are not currently met in Southern Vietnam. Increasing health literacy and engaging doctors and family members/social networks emerged as important avenues to improve screening. HPV (Human papillomavirus) self-sampling is also a potential approach to increase uptake of cervical cancer screening given the identified psychosocial and logistical barriers.

Offering HPV self-sampling kits: an updated meta-analysis of the effectiveness of strategies to increase participation in cervical cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing on self-samples represents a great opportunity to increase cervical cancer screening uptake among under-screened women.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were performed to update the evidence on the efficacy of strategies for offering self-sampling kits for HPV testing compared to conventional invitations and to compare different self-sampling invitation scenarios. Four experimental invitational scenarios were considered. Women in the control group were invited for screening according to existing practice: collection of a cervical specimen by a healthcare professional. Random-effects models were used to pool proportions, relative participation rates and absolute participation differences.

RESULTS

Thirty-three trials were included. In the intention-to-treat analysis, all self-sampling invitation scenarios were more effective in reaching under-screened women compared to controls. Pooled participation difference (PD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for experimental vs. control was 13.2% (95% CI = 11.0-15.3%) for mail-to-all, 4.4% (95% CI = 1.2-7.6%) for opt-in, 39.1% (95% CI = 8.4-69.9%) for community mobilisation & outreach and 28.1% (23.5-32.7%) for offer at healthcare service. PD for the comparison opt-in vs. mail-to-all, assessed in nine trials, was -8.2% (95% CI = -10.8 to -5.7%).

DISCUSSION

Overall, screening participation was higher among women invited for self-sampling compared to control, regardless of the invitation strategy used. Opt-in strategies were less effective than send-to-all strategies.

HPV and Cervical Cancer: A Review of Epidemiology and Screening Uptake in the UK

Cervical cancer is the fourth most common malignancy in females worldwide, and a leading cause of death in the United Kingdom (UK). The human papillomavirus (HPV) is the strongest risk factor for developing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cancer. Across the UK, the national HPV immunisation programme, introduced in 2008, has been successful in protecting against HPV-related infections. Furthermore, the National Health Service (NHS) implemented the cytology-based cervical cancer screening service to all females aged 25 to 64, which has observed a decline in cervical cancer incidence. In the UK, there has been an overall decline in age-appropriate coverage since April 2010. In 2019, the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted NHS cancer screening and immunisation programmes, leading to a 6.8% decreased uptake of cervical cancer screening from the previous year. Engagement with screening has also been associated with social deprivation. In England, incidence rates of cervical cancer were reported to be 65% higher in the most deprived areas compared to the least, with lifestyle factors such as cigarette consumption contributing to 21% of cervical cancer cases. In this article, we provide an update on the epidemiology of cervical cancer, and HPV pathogenesis and transmission, along with the current prevention programmes within the NHS.

Assessing the implementation fidelity of HPV self-collection offered by community health workers during home visits (the EMA strategy): a case study in a low-middle-resource setting in Argentina

BACKGROUND

In Argentina, HPV  self-collection offered by community health workers was demonstrated to be effective to improve cervical cancer screening uptake. Based on these findings, the EMA strategy was scaled up in nine Argentinian provinces. However, there is no evidence about the degree of fidelity-in relation to the core components proposed by the National Program on Cervical Cancer Prevention-with which this strategy was implemented in the new jurisdictions. We carried out a fidelity evaluation of the EMA strategy scaling-up aimed at evaluating the level of adherence to the core components of the EMA strategy, and how different moderating factors affected the implementation fidelity.

METHODS

This descriptive study used a multi-method approach involving quantitative and qualitative evaluations of the implementation fidelity using the Conceptual Framework for Implementation Fidelity. Evaluation of the degree of adherence to the core components of the EMA strategy was carried out through the analysis of a self-administered survey of health promoters, observations, and secondary data from the National Screening Information System. The analysis of moderating factors was carried out through analysis of field notes, and semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders.

RESULTS

Our results showed that the core components with highest fidelity were training, sample handling, and transportation. Regarding the offer of HPV self-collection, we found some adaptations such as locations in which health promoters offered HPV self-collection, and fewer pieces of information provided to women during the offer. In the follow-up and treatment core component, we found a reduced adherence to triage and colposcopy. Some contextual factors had a negative impact on implementation fidelity, such as urban insecurity and the reduction in the number of health promoters that offered HPV self-collection. Moderating factors that contributed to achieve high level of fidelity included a well-defined strategy with clear steps to follow, permanent feedback and high level of engagement among implementers.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows how the analysis of fidelity and adaptations of HPV self-collection in real-world contexts are key to measure and maximize its effectiveness in low-middle-income settings.

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.

Human papillomavirus self-sampling with mRNA testing benefits routine screening

High risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) based screening provides the possibility of vaginal self-sampling as a tool to increase screening attendance. In order to evaluate the impact and feasibility of opt-in self-sampling in the Finnish setting, we invited a randomized population of 5350 women not attending screening after age group invitation or after reminder, to attend HPV self-sampling-based screening in the autumn of 2018 in Helsinki. Out of those, 1282 (24.0%) expressed their interest and ordered the sampling package. Eventually 787 women (14.7% of the total invited population) took part in screening, 770 women by providing a vaginal sample within 2 months from invitation and 17 by providing a pap smear in the laboratory. Self-taken samples were collected in Aptima Multitest vials and tested using the Aptima HPV mRNA assay. A high proportion, 158/770 (20.5%) of the samples were positive in the Aptima HPV assay. One hundred and forty-one samples were further submitted to Aptima HPV Genotyping and extended genotyping by a Luminex based assay. Of those, 23 samples (16.3%) were HPV 16 positive and 7 (5.0%) were positive for HPV 18/45; extended genotyping revealed multiple high-risk and low-risk HPV genotypes. At follow-up seven cases of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) were diagnosed, which represents 4.4% of HPV positive women and 0.9% of screened women, whereas the rate was 0.5% in routine screening. Our findings suggest that self-sampling with HPV mRNA testing is a feasible approach to improve screening efficacy in a high-risk population among original nonattendees.

Implementation of a self-sampling HPV test for non-responders to cervical cancer screening in Japan: secondary analysis of the ACCESS trial

A self-sampling human papillomavirus (HPV) test could improve the morbidity and mortality of cervical cancer in Japan. However, its effectiveness and feasibility have not been demonstrated sufficiently. Hence, we launched a randomized controlled trial, which is ongoing, and report the results of a secondary analysis. To ensure autonomous participation with a minimum selection bias, opt-out consent was obtained from women who met the inclusion criteria, and written consent was obtained from those who underwent a self-sampling test. The number of women who met the inclusion criteria was 20,555; 4283 and 1138 opted out before and after the assignment, respectively. Of the 7340 women in the self-sampling arm, 1372 (18.7%) ordered and 1196 (16.3%) underwent the test. Younger women in their 30 s and 40 s tended to undertake the test more frequently than older women in their 50 s (P for trend < 0.001). Invalid HPV test results were rare (1.3%), and neither adverse events nor serious complaints were reported. Despite adopting the opt-out procedure, more women than expected declined to participate, suggesting the need for a waiver of consent or assignment before consent to reduce selection bias. A self-sampling HPV test can be implemented in Japan and would be more accessible to young women, the predominant group affected by cervical cancer.

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

Introduction. Self-sampling has the potential to increase cervical cancer (CC) screening among women with HIV in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, our understanding of how HPV self-collection studies have been conducted in women with HIV is limited. The purpose of this scoping review was to examine the extent to which the HPV self-sampling has been applied among women with HIV in LMICs. Method: We conducted multiple searches in several databases for articles published between 2000 and January 2022. With the combination of keywords relating to HPV self-sampling, LMICs, and women with HIV, we retrieved over 9000 articles. We used pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria to select relevant studies for this review. Once a study met the inclusion criteria, we created a table to extract each study’s characteristics and classified them under common themes. We used a qualitative descriptive approach to summarize the scoping results. Results: A total of 12 articles were included in the final review. Overall, 3178 women were enrolled in those studies and 2105 (66%) of them were women with HIV. The self-sampling participation rate was 92.6%. The findings of our study show that 43% of the women with HIV in 8 of the studies reviewed tested positive for high-risk HPV (hr-HPV) genotypes, indicating 4 out of 10 women with HIV in the studies are at risk of cervical cancer. The prevalence of the hr-HPV in women with HIV was 18% higher than that of HIV-negative women. Most women in the study found the self-sampling experience acceptable, easy to use, convenient, and comfortable. Self-sampling performance in detecting hr-HPV genotypes is comparable to clinician-performed sampling. However, limited access (i.e., affordability, availability, transportation), limited knowledge about self-screening, doubts about the credibility of self-sampling results, and stigma remain barriers to the wide acceptance and implementation of self-sampling. In conclusion, the findings of this review highlight that (a) the prevalence of hr-HPV is higher among women with HIV than HIV-negative women, (b) self-sampling laboratory performance is similar to clinician-performed sampling, (c) the majority of the women participated in self-sampling, which could likely increase the cervical cancer screening uptake, and (d) women with HIV reported a positive experience with self-sampling. However, personal, environmental, and structural barriers challenge the application of self-sampling in LMICs, and these need to be addressed.

Operational experiences from the general implementation of HPV self-sampling to Danish screening non-attenders

The Danish cervical cancer screening program is a cost-free cancer prevention program for all Danish resident women aged 23-64 years. The coverage is 73%, but screening attendance is slowly declining. Notwithstanding, almost half of all newly diagnosed cervical cancers are found amongst screening non-attenders. To increase screening attendance, the Capital Region of Denmark implemented HPV self-sampling as an alternative offer to women not attending the regular screening offer. This was an opt-in offer to 57,717 screening non-attending women in 2017-2018. They received an invitation letter and could opt-in by letter, phone, e-mail, or website. Invitation and return-of-kit reminders were used in the set-up. HPV positive women were recommended to go to their General Practitioner (GP) for a follow-up sample. HPV negative women returned to the ordinary screening program. Of all invited women, 15,501 opted-in (27%). The purpose designed website was the most frequent used method of response, 63% opted in by the HPV-self sampling website. Use of invitation and return-of-kit reminders generated 8.6% and 6.1% additional responses and participation, respectively, underlining the importance of timely communication. Overall, 17% returned the HPV self-sampling kit for analysis. In addition, 14% had a regular clinician collected screening sample after receiving the invitation for self-sampling, leading to a total screening of 31% of the invited women. HPV prevalence was 15% and 92% of the women positive for HPV adhered to the recommended follow-up.

Clinical validation of full HR-HPV genotyping HPV Selfy assay according to the international guidelines for HPV test requirements for cervical cancer screening on clinician-collected and self-collected samples

BACKGROUND

According to international guidelines, Human Papillomavirus (HPV) DNA tests represent a valid alternative to Pap Test for primary cervical cancer screening, provided that they guarantee balanced clinical sensitivity and specificity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more (CIN2+) lesions. The study aimed to assess whether HPV Selfy (Ulisse BioMed - Trieste, Italy), a full-genotyping HPV DNA test that detects and differentiates 14 high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) types, meets the criteria for primary cervical cancer screening described in the international guidelines, on clinician-collected as well as on self-collected samples.

METHODS

For each participant woman, consecutively referring to Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Giuliano Isontina (Trieste, Italy) and CRO-National Cancer Institute (Aviano, Italy) for the cervical cancer screening program, the following samples were tested: (a) a clinician-collected cervical specimen, analyzed with the reference test (Hybrid Capture®2 test, HC2) and HPV Selfy; and (b) a self-collected vaginal sample, analyzed with HPV Selfy. Enrolled women were also asked to fulfill a questionnaire about self-sampling acceptability. As required by guidelines, a non-inferiority test was conducted to compare the clinical performance of the test under evaluation with its reference test.

RESULTS

HPV Selfy clinical sensitivity and specificity resulted non-inferior to those of HC2. By analysis of a total of 889 cervical liquid-based cytology samples from a screening population, of which 98 were from women with CIN2+, HPV Selfy showed relative sensitivity and specificity for CIN2+ of 0.98 and 1.00 respectively (non-inferiority score test: P = 0.01747 and P = 0.00414, respectively); the test reached adequate intra- and inter-laboratory reproducibility. Moreover, we demonstrated that the performance of HPV Selfy on self-collected vaginal samples was non-inferior to the performance obtained on clinician-collected cervical specimen (0.92 relative sensitivity and 0.97 relative specificity). Finally, through HPV Selfy genotyping, we were able to describe HPV types prevalence in the study population.

CONCLUSIONS

HPV Selfy fulfills all the requirements of the international Meijer's guidelines and has been clinically validated for primary cervical cancer screening purposes. Moreover, HPV Selfy has also been validated for self-sampling according to VALHUDES guidelines. Therefore, at date, HPV Selfy is the only full-genotyping test validated both for screening purposes and for self-sampling. Trial registration ASUGI Trieste n. 16008/2018; CRO Aviano n.17149/2018.

Feasibility of sending a direct send HPV self-sampling kit to long-term non-attenders in an organized cervical screening program

INTRODUCTION

Non-participation in screening is a main risk factor for cervical cancer. Human-papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling may be an alternative to repeated invitations for non-attenders. Several studies have concluded that participation among non-attenders increases significantly when offering self-sampling kits for HPV. However, participation rates are highly variable between settings, and therefore pilots to determine optimal implementation strategy have been recommended before routine roll out.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All women who had not participated in the organized screening program for at least 10 years aged 33-62 in one Swedish county were identified through screening registers. HPV self-sampling kits were sent to all eligible women. Participation was defined as returning a self-sample kit or attending routine screening within 6 months. Women who did not submit the kit within 8 weeks were randomized to receive a written reminder. HPV-positive women were referred directly to colposcopy without prior triage. Biopsies for histopathologic confirmation were used as gold standard.

RESULTS

Among eligible women, 150/741 (20.2%) returned the self-sample kit or attended routine screening. A randomized written reminder was sent out to 319/591 non-responders and another 11 women returned the kit. In total, 23/147 (16.3%) of returned kits were HPV positive. Out of the 23 HPV-positive women, 17 (74%) attended colposcopy; 10/17 (59%) had a histopathological high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) or cervical cancer. The most common HPV type was HPV 52, and 2 out of 3 women with HPV 16 had a histopathologically confirmed cancer.

CONCLUSION

The direct send kit strategy and referral of all HPV-positive women to colposcopy without prior triage appears to be feasible if resources are available and should be prioritized given the high prevalence of HSIL lesions and cancer among non-attenders. A written reminder might further increase attendance.

Cervical Cancer Screening Postpandemic: Self-Sampling Opportunities to Accelerate the Elimination of Cervical Cancer

The persisting burden of cervical cancer in underserved populations and low-resource regions worldwide, worsened by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, requires proactive strategies and expanded screening options to maintain and improve screening coverage and its effects on incidence and mortality from cervical cancer. Self-sampling as a screening strategy has unique advantages from both a public health and individual patient perspective. Some of the barriers to screening can be mitigated by self-sampling, and resources can be better allocated to patients at the highest risk of developing cervical cancer. This review summarizes the implementation options for self-sampling and associated challenges, evidence in support of self-sampling, the available devices, and opportunities for expansion beyond human papillomavirus testing.

Interventions targeted at women to encourage the uptake of cervical screening

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the Cochrane review published in Issue 5, 2011. Worldwide, cervical cancer is the fourth commonest cancer affecting women. High-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is causative in 99.7% of cases. Other risk factors include smoking, multiple sexual partners, the presence of other sexually transmitted diseases and immunosuppression. Primary prevention strategies for cervical cancer focus on reducing HPV infection via vaccination and data suggest that this has the potential to prevent nearly 90% of cases in those vaccinated prior to HPV exposure. However, not all countries can afford vaccination programmes and, worryingly, uptake in many countries has been extremely poor. Secondary prevention, through screening programmes, will remain critical to reducing cervical cancer, especially in unvaccinated women or those vaccinated later in adolescence. This includes screening for the detection of pre-cancerous cells, as well as high-risk HPV. In the UK, since the introduction of the Cervical Screening Programme in 1988, the associated mortality rate from cervical cancer has fallen. However, worldwide, there is great variation between countries in both coverage and uptake of screening. In some countries, national screening programmes are available whereas in others, screening is provided on an opportunistic basis. Additionally, there are differences within countries in uptake dependent on ethnic origin, age, education and socioeconomic status. Thus, understanding and incorporating these factors in screening programmes can increase the uptake of screening. This, together with vaccination, can lead to cervical cancer becoming a rare disease.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions aimed at women, to increase the uptake, including informed uptake, of cervical screening.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Issue 6, 2020. MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS databases up to June 2020. We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to increase uptake/informed uptake of cervical screening.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Where possible, the data were synthesised in a meta-analysis using standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

Comprehensive literature searches identified 2597 records; of these, 70 met our inclusion criteria, of which 69 trials (257,899 participants) were entered into a meta-analysis. The studies assessed the effectiveness of invitational and educational interventions, lay health worker involvement, counselling and risk factor assessment. Clinical and statistical heterogeneity between trials limited statistical pooling of data. Overall, there was moderate-certainty evidence to suggest that invitations appear to be an effective method of increasing uptake compared to control (risk ratio (RR) 1.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.49 to 1.96; 141,391 participants; 24 studies). Additional analyses, ranging from low to moderate-certainty evidence, suggested that invitations that were personalised, i.e. personal invitation, GP invitation letter or letter with a fixed appointment, appeared to be more successful. More specifically, there was very low-certainty evidence to support the use of GP invitation letters as compared to other authority sources' invitation letters within two RCTs, one RCT assessing 86 participants (RR 1.69 95% CI 0.75 to 3.82) and another, showing a modest benefit, included over 4000 participants (RR 1.13, 95 % CI 1.05 to 1.21). Low-certainty evidence favoured personalised invitations (telephone call, face-to-face or targeted letters) as compared to standard invitation letters (RR 1.32, 95 % CI 1.11 to 1.21; 27,663 participants; 5 studies). There was moderate-certainty evidence to support a letter with a fixed appointment to attend, as compared to a letter with an open invitation to make an appointment (RR 1.61, 95 % CI 1.48 to 1.75; 5742 participants; 5 studies). Low-certainty evidence supported the use of educational materials (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.54; 63,415 participants; 13 studies) and lay health worker involvement (RR 2.30, 95% CI 1.44 to 3.65; 4330 participants; 11 studies). Other less widely reported interventions included counselling, risk factor assessment, access to a health promotion nurse, photo comic book, intensive recruitment and message framing. It was difficult to deduce any meaningful conclusions from these interventions due to sparse data and low-certainty evidence. However, having access to a health promotion nurse and attempts at intensive recruitment may have increased uptake. One trial reported an economic outcome and randomised 3124 participants within a national screening programme to either receive the standard screening invitation, which would incur a fee, or an invitation offering screening free of charge. No difference in the uptake at 90 days was found (574/1562 intervention versus 612/1562 control, (RR 0.94, 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.03). The use of HPV self-testing as an alternative to conventional screening may also be effective at increasing uptake and this will be covered in a subsequent review. Secondary outcomes, including cost data, were incompletely documented. The majority of cluster-RCTs did not account for clustering or adequately report the number of clusters in the trial in order to estimate the design effect, so we did not selectively adjust the trials. It is unlikely that reporting of these trials would impact the overall conclusions and robustness of the results. Of the meta-analyses that could be performed, there was considerable statistical heterogeneity, and this should be borne in mind when interpreting these findings. Given this and the low to moderate evidence, further research may change these findings. The risk of bias in the majority of trials was unclear, and a number of trials suffered from methodological problems and inadequate reporting. We downgraded the certainty of evidence because of an unclear or high risk of bias with regards to allocation concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data and other biases.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence to support the use of invitation letters to increase the uptake of cervical screening. Low-certainty evidence showed lay health worker involvement amongst ethnic minority populations may increase screening coverage, and there was also support for educational interventions, but it is unclear what format is most effective. The majority of the studies were from developed countries and so the relevance of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), is unclear. Overall, the low-certainty evidence that was identified makes it difficult to infer as to which interventions were best, with exception of invitational interventions, where there appeared to be more reliable evidence.

Investigating the decrease in participation in the Dutch cervical cancer screening programme: The role of personal and organisational characteristics

Declining attendance in the Dutch cervical cancer screening programme was recently observed, coinciding with preparations for implementing primary hrHPV-based screening, which was implemented in January 2017. We aimed to investigate which factors were related to decreased attendance. We conducted a population-based cohort study including all women aged 30 to 60 years who were eligible for screening between 2014 and 2018. Attendance was defined as participation in the screening programme within 15 months of the start of the invitation-eligible year. We used data from the Dutch pathology archive (PALGA) linked with data from Statistics Netherlands to investigate population characteristics (position in the household, household income, socio-economic status, number of people in the household, migration background, age) and data from the five Dutch screening organisations (SO) to investigate the effect of cessing self-inviting GP's ('inviting organisation'). SO's were termed SO 1 to 5. Higher attendance rates were observed in women who were employed (60.8%), married (62.9%), Dutch (61.2%), in the highest income bracket (63.4%), living in households with four persons (65.3%) and women who were invited by their GP (69.8%). Differences in personal characteristics did not explain the decline in attendance rates. By adjusting for whether the GP or the SO sent the invitation, the differences in attendance rates between 2014 and 2015 and 2016 and between 2014 and 2015 and 2017-2018 were explained in some screening organisations. Removing the possibility for GPs to send invitations explains some of the decline in participation, although this did not account for the total change in attendance.

Current Status and Future Perspectives of Molecular Prevention Strategies for Cervical Cancers

Cervical cancer continues to be a global health problem; despite the potential for prevention through organised screening programmes that can detect and treat pre-cancerous lesions and also more recently, the availability of HPV (Human Papilloma Virus) vaccines. While routine screening with Pap smear testing has reduced the burden of cervical cancer in the high-income countries, the implementation of organised Pap-based screening programmes has not been found feasible in low-resource settings due to a lack of health care delivery infrastructure and limited health budgets. The well-established causal relationship between cervical cancer development and high-risk-HPV (HR-HPV) infection and the subsequent appreciation of the greater sensitivity of HPV testing over Pap smear cytology eventually lead to HPV testing being incorporated in the primary cervical cancer prevention programmes. An organised cervical cancer screening programme incorporating HR-HPV testing and HPV vaccine administration are currently considered to be the two major interventions for a comprehensive cervical cancer control programme worldwide. However, there are concerns that the requirement of a sophisticated infrastructure with its associated costs may make cervical cancer screening using molecular prevention by HPV testing impracticable to be implemented, especially in resource-poor, low-income countries. Visual Inspection with Acetic acid (VIA) represents one of the alternative methods for cervical cancer screening proposed for the countries with low- to middle-income resources and has gained popularity in India following the successful completion of two randomised controlled trials, but this method but has low sensitivity to detect cervical pre-cancers. More recently, the cost-effectiveness analysis of many studies including randomised controlled trials, even from the low-resource settings, has found that HPV testing is followed by treatment for HPV-positive women to be an effective and cost-effective screening strategy as compared to other screening methods including VIA. The incorporation of self-sampling and HPV testing by partial genotyping has the potential to significantly add to the effectiveness and the cost-effectiveness. The current status and future perspectives of molecular prevention strategies for cervical cancer prevention is further discussed.

Mailed self-sample HPV testing kits to improve cervical cancer screening in a safety net health system: protocol for a hybrid effectiveness-implementation randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Almost 20% of U.S. women remain at risk for cervical cancer due to their inability or unwillingness to participate in periodic clinic-based screening. Self-sampling has been shown to be an effective strategy for screening women for high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) infection in specific contexts. However, its effectiveness among medically underserved women in safety net health systems has not been evaluated. Furthermore, it is also unclear whether implementation strategies such as patient navigation can be used to improve the success of self-sample screening programs by addressing patient-level barriers to participation.

METHODS/DESIGN

The Prospective Evaluation of Self-Testing to Increase Screening (PRESTIS) trial is a hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation pragmatic randomized controlled trial of mailed self-sample HPV testing. The aim is to assess the effectiveness of mailed self-sample HPV testing kits to improve cervical cancer screening participation among patients in a safety net health system who are overdue for clinic-based screening, while simultaneously assessing patient navigation as an implementation strategy. Its setting is a large, urban safety net health system that serves a predominantly racial/ethnic minority patient population. The trial targets recruitment of 2268 participants randomized to telephone recall (enhanced usual care, n = 756), telephone recall with mailed self-sample HPV testing kit (intervention, n = 756), or telephone recall with mailed self-sample HPV testing kit and patient navigation (intervention + implementation strategy, n = 756). The primary effectiveness outcome is completion of primary screening, defined as completion and return of mailed self-sample kit or completion of a clinic-based Pap test. Secondary effectiveness outcomes are predictors of screening and attendance for clinical follow-up among women with a positive screening test. Implementation outcomes are reach, acceptability, fidelity, adaptations, and cost-effectiveness.

DISCUSSION

Hybrid designs are needed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of self-sample HPV testing in specific populations and settings, while incorporating and evaluating methods to optimize its real-world implementation. The current manuscript describes the rationale and design of a hybrid type 2 trial of self-sample HPV testing in a safety net health system. Trial findings are expected to provide meaningful data to inform screening strategies to ultimately realize the global goal of eliminating cervical cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03898167 . Registered on 01 April 2019.

TRIAL STATUS

Study start data: February 13, 2020. Recruitment status: Enrolling by invitation. Estimated primary completion date: February 15, 2023. Estimated study completion date: May 31, 2024. Protocol version 1.6 (February 25, 2020).

Detection of HPV E6 oncoprotein from urine via a novel immunochromatographic assay

Cervical cancer is a significant public health problem, especially in low- and middle-income countries, where women have little access to cervical cancer screening; consequently 80% of cervical cancer related mortality occurs in these regions. The development of screening methods that need less infrastructure thus represents an urgent medical need. The study aims to compare the detection rates of high-risk human papillomavirus 16 and 18 E6 oncoprotein in urine, vaginal self-collected, and cervical scrapes of women using the OncoE6^™ Cervical Test and compare the HPV16 and/or HPV18 E6 detection rates with the HPV DNA testing. Paired urine, vaginal self-collected and cervical specimens were collected from 124 women who participated in cervical cancer screening or treatment in this proof-of-concept study and underwent to HPV16/18-E6 testing and high-risk HPV DNA testing prior to treatment of cervical neoplasia or cancer. Concordance between urinary, vaginal and cervical HPV16/18-E6 and HPV-DNA testing was evaluated for patients classified as negative group (<CIN2) and histological positive group (CIN2, CIN3 and invasive carcinoma). Overall, HPV16/18-E6 oncoprotein was detected in 30.6% of cervical samples, 20.3% of self-collected vaginal samples and 21% of urine samples. Regarding the clinical sensitivity, the HPV16/18-E6 oncoprotein was not detected in CIN2 cases, and was detected at low rates in CIN3 cases. The clinical sensitivity of the HPV16/18-E6 oncoprotein for detecting invasive cervical cancer was 70% for cervical scrapes, 55% for self-collected vaginal samples and 52% for urine samples. This study reports the urinary detection of E6 oncoprotein in vivo for the first time and our results suggest that this detection is only for invasive/microinvasive lesions. Then, further protocol development and standardization to achieve a clinical sensitivity for CIN2/3 detection close to what can be achieved for invasive lesions using the physician collected cervical is needed.

Evaluation of satisfaction with three different cervical cancer screening modalities: clinician-collected Pap test vs. HPV test by self-sampling vs. HPV test by urine sampling

OBJECTIVE

Human papillomavirus testing by self-sampling and urine sampling might be alternatives to Papanicolaou test (Pap test) for cervical cancer screening (CCS), and may increase compliance and adherence thereto. The present study aimed to explore satisfaction and preferences for cervical screening modalities among Korean women.

METHODS

In total, 732 women aged between 20 and 69 years responded to a questionnaire designed to survey the women's perceived satisfaction for the 3 CCS modalities: clinician-collected Pap test, self-collected vaginal sampling (self-sampling) and urine sampling.

RESULTS

Overall satisfaction was significantly higher with both the self-sampling and urine sampling than the clinician-collected Pap test (odds ratio [OR]=2.01; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.48-3.00 and OR=2.47; 95% CI=1.75-3.48, respectively). Psychological distress, including embarrassment, pain, anxiety, discomfort, and stress, with self-sampling and urine sampling were significantly lower than that with the Pap test. 52% of participants reported preferences for self-sampling in the next screening round.

CONCLUSIONS

Korean women were more likely to report satisfaction with alternative modalities (self-sampling and urine sampling) for CCS in comparison to the Pap test. This suggests that self-collected modalities may help with improving CCS uptake rates by eliminating burden related with the Pap test. However, further studies for test accuracy and cost-effective analysis of the alternative modalities should be conducted in order to apply CCS.

Efficacy of strategies to increase participation in cervical cancer screening: GPs offering self-sampling kits for HPV testing versus recommendations to have a pap smear taken - A randomised controlled trial

Background

Cervical cancer is preventable by early detection and treatment of pre-cancerous lesions. The current screening policy in Belgium (3-yearly cytology on Pap smears) covers 60% of the target population. Offering self-samples by GPs can overcome barriers for women who are currently not screened.

Methods

Women aged 25–64 who did not have a Pap smear since three years and consulted a GP practice in a Flemish municipality between November 2014 and April 2015 were allocated in a 1:1 ratio to either the intervention arm where women were given a vaginal self-sampling kit or control arm where women were encouraged to make an appointment for having a Pap smear taken by a clinician.

Results

Eighty-eight consenting women were randomised. 35 (78%) out of 45 women in the self-sampling arm participated in screening compared to 22 (51%) out of 43 women in the control arm (p = 0.009). This difference remained significant after adjusting for covariates (age category, education level, time interval since last Pap smear, past Pap smear-taker).

Conclusion

GPs offering self-sampling kits resulted in a high participation. Larger trials should confirm this effect and evaluate feasibility of this approach.4. The authors would also like to include the following sentence in the acknowledgement “The laboratory AML (Antwerp, Belgium) is acknowledged for the free HPV testing on the self-samples."

Developing SMS Content to Promote Papanicolaou Triage Among Women Who Performed HPV Self-collection Test: Qualitative Study

Background

SMS interventions are effective in promoting a variety of health behaviors; however, there is limited information regarding the use of SMS for cervical cancer screening and follow-up care. The Application of Communication and Information Technologies to Self-Collection study aims to evaluate a multicomponent mobile health intervention to increase triage adherence among women with human papillomavirus (HPV)–positive self-collected tests in Jujuy, Argentina. Here, we describe the formative results used to design the content of the SMS to be tested in the trial.

Objective

This study aimed to understand the cultural and contextual elements, women’s beliefs, and perceptions regarding the use of SMS by the health care system and women’s preferences about the message content.

Methods

We conducted five focus groups (FGs), stratified by rural or urban residence and age. All participants were aged 30 years or older and had performed HPV self-collection. Participatory techniques, including brainstorming, card-based classification, and discussions were used to debate the advantages and disadvantages of messages. We openly coded the discussions for agreements and preferences regarding the SMS content. Messages for both HPV-negative and HPV-positive women were validated through interviews with health authorities and 14 HPV-tested women. The final versions of the messages were pilot-tested.

Results

A total of 48 women participated in the FGs. Participants rejected receiving both negative and positive HPV results by SMS because, for them, the delivery of results should be done in a face-to-face interaction with health professionals. They stressed the importance of the SMS content informing them that results were available for pick up and reflecting the kind of relationship that they have with the community health workers and the nearest health center. Women considered that a personalized SMS was important, as was the use of a formal yet warm tone. Owing to confidentiality issues, not using the word “HPV” was also a key component of the desired SMS content; therefore, the final message included the term “self-collection” without the mention of HPV infection. Results from the validation stage and pilot test showed high acceptability of the final version of the message.

Conclusions

The results suggest that SMS is accepted when notifying women about the availability of the HPV test result, but it should not replace the delivery of results in face-to-face, doctor-patient encounters. In addition, messages must be tailored and must have a persuasive tone to motivate women to adhere to the triage.

Comparison of two invitation-based methods for human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling with usual care among un- and under-screened Māori, Pacific and Asian women: study protocol for a randomised controlled community trial to examine the effect of self-sampling on participation in cervical-cancer screening

Background

Māori, Pacific and Asian women in New Zealand have lower cervical-cancer screening rates than European women, and there are persistent inequities in cervical cancer outcomes for Māori and Pacific women. Innovative ways to address access barriers are required. New Zealand is transitioning to screening with human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing, which could allow women themselves, rather than a clinician, to take the sample. Internationally, self-sampling has been found to increase screening participation rates. The aim of this open-label community-based randomised controlled trial is to investigate whether self-sampling increases screening participation among un- and under-screened Māori, Pacific and Asian women in New Zealand.

Methods/design

We aim to invite at least 3550 un- or under-screened (≥5 years overdue) Māori, Pacific and Asian women (1050, 1250, 1250 respectively), aged 30–69 years, for screening. The three study arms are: usual care in which women are invited to attend a clinic for a standard clinician-collected cytology test; clinic-based self-sampling in which women are invited to take a self-sample at their usual general practice; and mail-out self-sampling in which women are mailed a kit and invited to take a self-sample at home. Women will be randomised 3:3:1 to the clinic and mail-out self-sampling groups, and usual care. There is also a nested sub-study in which non-responding women in all allocation groups, when they subsequently present to the clinic for other reasons, are offered clinic or home-kit self-sampling. The primary outcome will be the proportion of women who participate (by taking a self-sample or cytology test).

Discussion

This trial is the first to evaluate the effectiveness of mailed self-sampling in New Zealand and will be one of the first internationally to evaluate the effectiveness of opportunistic in-clinic invitations for self-sampling. The trial will provide robust evidence on the impact on participation proportions from different invitation approaches for HPV self-sampling in New Zealand un- and under-screened Māori, Pacific and Asian women.

Trial registration

ANZCTR Identifier: ACTRN12618000367246 (date registered 12/3/2018) https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=371741&isReview=true; UTN: U1111–1189-0531.

Experience with HPV self-sampling and clinician-based sampling in women attending routine cervical screening in the Netherlands

Several countries offer HPV self-sampling for screening non-attendees. It is assumed that screening attendees also prefer self-sampling to clinician-based sampling, however, little research has been conducted with respect to this. Women participating in the IMPROVE-study were randomised (1:1) to self- or clinician-collected HPV testing, and HPV-positive women were retested using the other collection method. Three different questionnaires were sent out among a subset of participating women: Q1) HPV-positive women from both study groups were asked about their experiences with self-sampling and clinician-based sampling (n = 497); Q2) HPV-negative women from the self-sampling group were asked about their experiences with self-sampling (n = 2366); and Q3) HPV-negative women in the clinician-collection group were asked about their experiences with clinician-based sampling (n = 2092). Response rates ranged from 71.6 to 79.4%. Women reported significantly lower levels of shame, nervousness, discomfort and pain during self-sampling compared to clinician-based sampling. However, trust in correct sampling was significantly higher during clinician-based sampling. The majority of women in group Q1 preferred self-sampling (76.5%) to clinician-based sampling (11.9%) in future screening, while 11.6% of women reported to have no preference for either method. To conclude, women from a regular screening population have a positive attitude towards self-sampling but express some concerns with respect to accuracy. The majority prefers self-sampling to clinician-based sampling in future screening. Based on these results, a screening approach where women can choose for either self-sampling or clinician-based sampling seems highly justifiable.

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.

Prevention of Cervical Cancer: Guideline of the DGGG and the DKG (S3 Level, AWMF Register Number 015/027OL, December 2017) - Part 2 on Triage, Treatment and Follow-up

Aims Annual opportunistic screening for cervical carcinoma has been done in Germany since 1971. The creation of this S3 guideline meets an important need, outlined in the National Cancer Plan, with regard to screening for cervical cancer, as this guideline aims to provide important information and support for planned organized screening for cervical cancer in Germany. Methods With the financial support of German Cancer Aid, 21 professional societies developed evidence-based statements and recommendations (classified using the GRADE system) for the screening, management and treatment of precancerous conditions of the cervix. Two independent scientific institutes compiled systematic reviews for this guideline. Recommendations The second part of this short summary deals with the triage, treatment and follow-up care of cervical dysplasia. With regard to those women who do not participate in screening, the guideline authors recommend sending out repeat invitation letters or an HPV self-collection kit. Colposcopy should be carried out for further investigation if cytology findings are Pap II-p and HPV test results are positive or if the results of an HPV 16 or HPV 18 screening test are positive. A single abnormal Pap smear should be triaged and investigated using HPV testing or p16/Ki67 dual staining.

HPV-based cervical screening: Rationale, expectations and future perspectives of the new Dutch screening programme

Based on scientific data showing that HPV testing provides better protection against cervical precancer and cancer than cytology, in 2011 the Dutch Health Council advised the Minister of Welfare, Health and Sports to replace cytology by HPV testing in the Dutch population-based screening programme. After a successful evaluation of the feasibility of HPV-based screening in 2014, primary HPV testing for cervical screening was implemented in 2017. The Netherlands has been one of the first countries worldwide to implement nationwide HPV-based screening and its experience with the new programme is therefore followed with great interest. In this manuscript, we present an overview of the studies that were instrumental in the choice of HPV assay and triage strategy, the adjustment of screening starting and exit ages and intervals, and the implementation of HPV self-sampling. Finally, we review the cost-effectiveness of the proposed new screening algorithm and we explore future perspectives. The rationale behind the new Dutch HPV-based screening programme, which is based on risk management, could serve as a guidance to other countries that are planning to implement HPV-based screening in the near future.

Performance of human papillomavirus testing on self-collected versus clinician-collected samples for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse: a randomised, paired screen-positive, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing on self-collected samples is a potential alternative to HPV testing on clinician-collected samples, but non-inferiority of its clinical accuracy remains to be assessed in the regular screening population. The IMPROVE study was done to evaluate the clinical accuracy of primary HPV testing on self-collected samples within an organised screening setting.

METHODS

In this randomised, non-inferiority trial, women aged 29-61 years were invited to participate in the study as part of their regular screening invitation in the Netherlands. Women who provided informed consent were randomly allocated (1:1, with a block size of ten stratified by age) to one of two groups: a self-sampling group, in which women were requested to collect their own cervicovaginal sample using an Evalyn Brush (Rovers Medical Devices BV, Oss, Netherlands); or a clinician-based sampling group, in which samples were collected by a general practitioner with a Cervex-Brush (Rovers Medical Devices BV). All samples were tested for HPV using the clinically validated GP5+/6+ PCR enzyme immunoassay (Labo Biomedical Products BV, Rijswijk, Netherlands). HPV-positive women in both groups were retested with the other collection method and triaged by cytology and repeat cytology in accordance with current Dutch screening guidelines. Primary endpoints were detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and grade 3 or worse (CIN3+). Non-inferiority of HPV testing on self-collected versus clinician-collected samples was evaluated against a margin of 90% for the relative sensitivity and 98% for the relative specificity. This study is registered at the Dutch Trial register (NTR5078) and has been completed.

FINDINGS

Of the 187 473 women invited to participate, 8212 were randomly allocated to the self-sampling group and 8198 to the clinician-based sampling group. After exclusion of women who met the exclusion criteria or who did not return their sample, 7643 women were included in the self-sampling group and 6282 in the clinician-based sampling group. 569 (7·4%) self-collected samples and 451 (7·2%) clinician-collected samples tested positive for HPV (relative risk 1·04 [95% CI 0·92-1·17]). Median follow-up duration for HPV-positive women was 20 months (IQR 17-22). The CIN2+ sensitivity and specificity of HPV testing did not differ between self-sampling and clinician-based sampling (relative sensitivity 0·96 [0·90-1·03]; relative specificity 1·00 [0·99-1·01]). For the CIN3+ endpoint, relative sensitivity was 0·99 (0·91-1·08) and relative specificity was 1·00 (0·99-1·01).

INTERPRETATION

HPV testing done with a clinically validated PCR-based assay had similar accuracy on self-collected and clinician-collected samples in terms of the detection of CIN2+ or CIN3+ lesions. These findings suggest that HPV self-sampling could be used as a primary screening method in routine screening.

FUNDING

Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Sport (Netherlands), and the European Commission.

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.

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+.

Randomised trial of HPV self-sampling among non-attenders in the Slovenian cervical screening programme ZORA: comparing three different screening approaches

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 and/or traditional cytology within one year of enrolment. Response rates were 37.7%, 34.0% and 18.4% (p < 0.050) for opt-out, opt-in and control groups. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)2+ was diagnosed in 3.9/1.000, 3.4/1.000, and 3.1/1.000 women (p > 0.050), respectively. PPV of the HPV self-sampling was 12.0% and 9.6% for CIN2+ and CIN3+. The highest PPV was obtained in non-attenders in screening programme for more than 10-years and concordant results of HPV testing with 40.8% for CIN2+ and 38.8% for CIN3+.

Conclusions

The results of our study show that a high response to HPV self-sampling can be achieved also in an opt-in approach, if women are encouraged to choose between self-sampling at home and screening with gynaecologist. In addition, clinically important risk difference for a high-grade cervical lesion exists in the case of a positive result of HPV testing on self-collected samples, depending on the length of the interval since last screening. Stratified management of these women should be strongly considered. Women who were not screened with cytology for at least 10 years should be referred to immediate colposcopy for histology verification instead to delayed re-testing.

VALHUDES: A protocol for validation of human papillomavirus assays and collection devices for HPV testing on self-samples and urine samples

BACK GROUND

Systematic reviews have concluded that hrHPV DNA testing using target-amplification tests is as accurate on vaginal self-samples as on clinician-taken specimens for the detection of cervical precancer. However, insufficient evidence is available for specific HPV assay/self-sample device combinations.

OBJECTIVES

The VALHUDES protocol is designed as a diagnostic test accuracy study that aims to compare the clinical sensitivity and specificity of particular hrHPV assay(s) on vaginal self-samples and first-void-urine, collected in agreement with standardized protocols, with hrHPV testing on matched clinician-taken samples.

STUDY DESIGN

Five hundred enrolled women referred to a colposcopy clinic are invited to collect a first-void urine sample and one or more vaginal self-samples with particular devices before collection of a cervical sample by a clinician. Sample sets are subsequently analysed in a laboratory accredited for HPV testing. Disease verification for all enrolled patients is provided by colposcopy combined with histological assessment of biopsies.

RESULTS

A first VALHUDES study has started in Belgium in December 2017 with enrolment from four colposcopy centres. The following assays are foreseen to be evaluated: RealTime High Risk HPV assay (Abbott), cobas-4800 and -6800 (Roche), Onclarity (BD), Xpert HPV (Cepheid) and Anyplex II HPV HR (Seegene).

CONCLUSION

Given empirical evidence that the relative accuracy of HPV-testing on self- vs clinician-samples is robust across clinical settings, the VALHUDES protocol offers a framework for validation of HPV assay/self-sample device combinations that can be translated to a primary screening setting.

Feasibility, validity and acceptability of self-collected samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in rural Malawi

Aim

The World Health Organization (WHO) recently endorsed human papillomavirus (HPV) testing as a cervical cancer screening method in countries without established programs. Self-collection for HPV testing may be an effective way to expand screening. Our objective was to assess the feasibility, validity, and acceptability of self-collection for HPV testing in a population of care-seeking, unscreened women in rural Malawi.

Methods

We enrolled women reporting to a rural Malawian clinic from January to August 2015. Participants were offered the option to self-collect a vaginal sample and the study clinician collected a cervical sample for HPV testing. Using the clinician-collected sample as the reference standard, we calculated a kappa statistic, sensitivity, and specificity by hr-HPV type. Participants also received a brief survey assessing acceptability of the procedure.

Results

Among the 199 enrolled women, 22% had any high risk-HPV. Comparing self- and clinician-collected samples for HPV testing, we found generally high agreement (ϰ = 0.66-0.90) and high specificity (98%-100%), but varied sensitivity (50%-91%) for different types of hr-HPV. We also found that self-collection was acceptable, with 98% of women reporting it was easy to do and 99% reporting willingness to do so again.

Conclusions

WHO guidelines recommend that treatment is available immediately after a positive screening test for clinic-based cervical cancer screening programs. Our findings demonstrate that self-collection of samples for HPV testing is a feasible and acceptable method of cervical cancer screening in this rural Malawian population. High agreement between the self- and clinician-collected samples and high levels of acceptability among women in the study suggest that self-collection of vaginal samples for HPV testing may be effectively incorporated into screening programs among rural, largely unscreened populations.

A randomized, controlled trial of two strategies of offering the home-based HPV self-sampling test to non- participants in the Flemish cervical cancer screening program

We conducted a randomized, controlled trial to evaluate different strategies of offering an HPV-self sampling program, and compared this with two control groups. All total of 35,354 women who did not participate in the Flemish cancer screening program were included in the study: 9,118 received a HPV self-collection brush (RIATOL qPCR HPV genotyping test (qPCR [E6/E7]); 9,098 were offered the opportunity to order an HPV-selfsampling brush, 8,830 received the recall letter; 8,849 received no intervention. Within 12 months after the mailing, 18.7% of the women who had received the brush, participated by returning a self-sample sample, while 10.6% women allocated to the opt- in group did so. 10.5% women who received the standard recall letter, had a PAP smear taken within a period of 12 months; while 8% women did so without receiving an intervention at all. Participation in postmenopausal women was higher than in women younger than 50 in both self-sampling arms. Screening by means of the self-sample kit increased by age, contradictory when screening is performed by a PAP smear. Of those testing hrHPV positive (9.5%), 88.9% attended for follow up cytology. The mean DNA concentration, found in the self-sampler, decreased by age, causing a higher number of inconclusive results. Our results support the efficacy of a self-sampling strategy to increase participation in the Flemish screening program. Self-sampling seems particularly acceptable to postmenopausal non-responders. Future research should focus on the performance of different self-sampling devices in post-menopausal women as low DNA concentrations exponentially increased over age.

Preventing cervical cancer using HPV self-sampling: direct mailing of test-kits increases screening participation more than timely opt-in procedures - a randomized controlled trial

Background

Cervical cancer screening participation remains insufficient in most countries. Our aim was to evaluate whether offering a HPV self-sampling kit, either mailed directly to the woman’s home or using timely opt-in procedures for ordering the kit, increased screening participation compared with a standard second reminder.

Methods

In this randomized, controlled effectiveness trial, 9791 Danish women aged 30–64 who were due to receive the second reminder were equally randomized to either: 1) direct mailing of a second reminder and a self-sampling kit (directly mailed group); 2) mailing of a second reminder that offered a self-sampling kit to be ordered by e-mail, text message, phone, or webpage (opt-in group); or 3) mailing of a second reminder to attend regular cytology screening (control group). In an intention-to-treat analysis, we estimated the participation rate at 180 days post intervention, by returning a self-sample or attending regular cytology screening. We calculated the proportion of women with a positive HPV self-sample who attended for cervical cytology triage at the general practitioner within 90 days.

Results

Participation was significantly higher in the directly mailed group (38.0%) and in the opt-in group (30.9%) than in the control group (25.2%) (participation difference (PD): 12.8%, 95% CI: 10.6–15.0% and PD: 5.7%, 95% CI: 3.5–7.9%, respectively). Within 90 days, 107 women (90.7%, 95% CI: 83.9–95.3%) with a HPV-positive self-sample attended follow-up.

Conclusions

Offering the opportunity of HPV self-sampling as an alternative to regular cytology screening increased participation; the direct mailing strategy was the most effective invitation strategy. A high compliance with follow-up was seen.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials NCT02680262. Registered 10 February 2016.

Strategies to reach marginalized women for cervical cancer screening: A qualitative study of stakeholder perspectives

Background

Self-sampling for human papillomavirus (hpv) has the potential to reach marginalized populations that are underserved for cervical cancer screening. However, before implementing an alternative screening strategy such as self-sampling for under- and never-screened women, the key processes, facilitators, and barriers to reform need to be understood.

Methods

A descriptive qualitative study was conducted that involved semi-structured interviews with Canadian and international cancer screening health care providers and policy-makers. Respondents were purposively selected from a list of thirty stakeholders generated through an environmental scan. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using directed content analysis.

Results

Nineteen stakeholders participated in the interviews. Most respondents thought that self-sampling was an appropriate cervical screening alternative for hard-to-reach populations, as it addressed barriers to cervical screening related to various social determinants of health. All respondents emphasized that transitioning to hpv primary screening would catalyze a policy shift towards self-sampling. Clinician respondents were less enthusiastic about self-sampling strategies since that discouraged women's appointments with primary care providers, because cervical screening offered an opportunity to discuss other preventive health topics. There also was little consensus between respondents on whether the state of evidence was satisfactory to integrate a self-sampling option into policy, or whether more Canadian research was needed.

Conclusion

Canadian cervical cancer screening stakeholders should collaborate to identify the knowledge gaps that researchers should address and leverage the existing literature to implement tailored, patient-centred alternative cervical screening strategies. The transition to hpv primary screening would be a key first step in the broad implementation of hpv self-sampling in Canada.

Mailed Human Papillomavirus Self-Collection With Papanicolaou Test Referral for Infrequently Screened Women in the United States

BACKGROUND

Testing for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection using mailed, self-collected samples is a promising approach to increase screening in women who do not attend clinic screening at recommended intervals.

METHODS

To assess this intervention among high-risk women in the United States, 429 women without a Papanicolaou (Pap) test in 4 or more years (overdue by US guidelines) were recruited from the general population. Participants aged 30 to 65 years were mailed a kit to self-collect a cervicovaginal sample at home, return the sample by mail, and receive HPV results by telephone, with referral to follow-up cytological Pap testing at a local clinic. Cervicovaginal self-samples were collected with a Viba brush, stored in Scope mouthwash, and tested by Hybrid Capture 2. Data were collected in 2010 to 2011 and analyzed in 2017.

RESULTS

Two-thirds (64%) of participants returned a self-collected sample, of whom 15% tested HPV DNA positive. Human papillomavirus self-test-positive women reported higher rates of follow-up Pap tests (82%) than did those with self-test negative results (51%). No demographic differences were found in self-test return rate or HPV positivity. High acceptability was reported in participant surveys: most women (81%) had "mostly positive" overall thoughts about the self-test, and most reported being comfortable receiving the kit in the mail (99%), returning their self-collected sample by mail (82%), and receiving their test results by telephone (97%).

CONCLUSIONS

Conducting HPV self-testing through population-based recruitment, mailed kit delivery and return by mail, and results delivery by telephone has the potential to reach a broad segment of US underscreened women.

Rationale and design of the HOME trial: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of home-based human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling for increasing cervical cancer screening uptake and effectiveness in a U.S. healthcare system

Women who delay or do not attend Papanicolaou (Pap) screening are at increased risk for cervical cancer. Trials in countries with organized screening programs have demonstrated that mailing high-risk (hr) human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling kits to under-screened women increases participation, but U.S. data are lacking. HOME is a pragmatic randomized controlled trial set within a U.S. integrated healthcare delivery system to compare two programmatic approaches for increasing cervical cancer screening uptake and effectiveness in under-screened women (>3.4years since last Pap) aged 30-64years: 1) usual care (annual patient reminders and ad hoc outreach by clinics) and 2) usual care plus mailed hrHPV self-screening kits. Over 2.5years, eligible women were identified through electronic medical record (EMR) data and randomized 1:1 to the intervention or control arm. Women in the intervention arm were mailed kits with pre-paid envelopes to return samples to the central clinical laboratory for hrHPV testing. Results were documented in the EMR to notify women's primary care providers of appropriate follow-up. Primary outcomes are detection and treatment of cervical neoplasia. Secondary outcomes are cervical cancer screening uptake, abnormal screening results, and women's experiences and attitudes towards hrHPV self-sampling and follow-up of hrHPV-positive results (measured through surveys and interviews). The trial was designed to evaluate whether a programmatic strategy incorporating hrHPV self-sampling is effective in promoting adherence to the complete screening process (including follow-up of abnormal screening results and treatment). The objective of this report is to describe the rationale and design of this pragmatic trial.

Acceptability and ease of use of mailed HPV self-collection among infrequently screened women in North Carolina

OBJECTIVES

Self-collection of cervico-vaginal samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing has the potential to make cervical cancer screening more accessible to underscreened women. We evaluated the acceptability and ease of use of home-based HPV self-collection within a diverse population of low-income, infrequently screened women.

METHODS

Participants were low-income women from North Carolina who had not received Pap testing in 4 or more years. Eligible women received a self-collection kit containing instructions and a brush for home-based sample collection. A total of 227 women returned a self-collected sample by mail and completed a questionnaire to assess their experiences with HPV self-collection. We described acceptability measures and used logistic regression to identify predictors of overall positive thoughts about the self-collection experience.

RESULTS

Nearly all women were willing to perform HPV self-collection again (98%) and were comfortable receiving the self-collection kit in the mail (99%). Overall, 81% of participants reported positive thoughts about home-based self-collection. Women with at least some college education and those who were divorced, separated or widowed were more likely to report overall positive thoughts. Aspects of self-collection that participants most commonly reported liking included convenience (53%), ease of use (32%) and privacy (23%). The most frequently reported difficulties included uncertainty that the self-collection was done correctly (16%) and difficulty inserting the self-collection brush (16%).

CONCLUSIONS

Home-based self-collection for HPV was a highly acceptable screening method among low-income, underscreened women and holds the promise to increase access to cervical cancer screening in this high-risk population.

A tailored within-community specimen collection strategy increased uptake of cervical cancer screening in a cross-sectional study in Ghana

Background

The implementation of cervical cancer screening strategies has reported different rates of success in different countries due to population specific factors that limit women’s participation. We report observations and the development of a community-based specimen collection strategy which resulted from interactions with women in the study communities, following an initial low response to a hospital based cervical cancer screening strategy.

Method

Women were recruited by a house survey and invited to report at a hospital either within a week or after a week for self and health-personnel specimen collections. However, due to the very low response and subsequent interactions with the women of the communities, another strategy was developed that required recruited women report at a central location within their respective communities for specimen collections at times that did not interfere with their daily routines.

Results

For specimen collection, of the 156 participants who opted to report after a week at the hospital, 60 (38.5%) reported. Of the 118 participants who opted to report within 1 week at the hospital, 55 (46.6%) reported. Of the 103 participants were invited to report at a specified location within the community, 98 (95.1%) reported. An overall response rate of 60.4% was attained. Almost 89.7% (226 of 253) of the women performed both self and health personnel sample collection.

Conclusion

The community-based strategy with self-specimen collection and HPV testing holds great potential for increasing women’s participation in cervical cancer screening in Ghana as compared to the hospital based strategy.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-017-4631-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Emerging role of HPV self-sampling in cervical cancer screening for hard-to-reach women: Focused literature review

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 usefulness of HPV self-sampling in increasing participation of hard-to-reach women in screening programs (level I evidence). Convenience, privacy, ease of use, and, likely, cost-effectiveness of HPV self-sampling are driving forces in its emerging role in cervical cancer screening among hard-to-reach women. Key barriers to participation could be addressed by overcoming disparities in HPV-related knowledge and perceptions about cervical cancer screening.

[Health agents' perspective on the incorporation of self-collected samples in HPV screening programs]

The objective of this study was to analyze health agents' perception of self-collecting of samples for HPV testing among women and the degree of agreement by the agents to incorporate this approach into their daily tasks. A self-administered questionnaire was applied to 127/191 health agents that participated in the EMA Project (Proyecto Evaluación Modalidad Autotoma) in the province of Jujuy, Argentina, in 2012-2013. The health agents with and without the experience of offering self-collected sampling expressed a high degree of agreement towards adoption of the strategy (78.7%), given its potential to prevent cervical cancer and its contribution to health care for the women under their coverage. However, the health agents identified the extra work and problems linking to the formal health system as the main barriers to offering this modality in the future. The study found that self-collecting of samples is a practice that can be adopted by health agents in the province of Jujuy, but that it should be accompanied by support measures from the formal health system.

Offering self-sampling to cervical screening non-attenders in primary care

Objectives To assess the feasibility and acceptability of offering self-sampling for Human Papillomavirus (HPV) testing to cervical screening non-attenders when they consult primary care for any reason. Methods In a pilot implementation study, six general practices in London, UK, offered self-sampling kits during consultation to women aged 25-64 who were at least six months overdue for cervical screening (no cytology test recorded in the past 3.5 years if aged 25-49, or 5.5 years if aged 50-64). Eligible women were identified using an automated real-time search (during consultation) of the general practice electronic medical record system. Women collected samples either in clinic or at home (dry flocked swabs analysed using Roche Cobas®4800). Results Of approximately 5000 eligible women, 3131 consulted primary care between January and December 2014 (mean recruitment period 9.5 months). Of these, 21% (652) were offered kits, 14% (443) accepted, and 9% (292) returned a self-sample. The proportion of eligible women offered kits varied considerably among practices (11-36%). Sample return rates increased with kit offered rates ( r = 0.8, p = 0.04). Of 39 HPV positive women 85% (33) attended follow-up, including two with invasive cancers (stage 2A1 and 1A1). Conclusions Offering self-sampling to cervical screening non-attenders opportunistically in primary care is feasible. Return rates could be increased if more women were offered kits. A large trial is needed to identify how self-sampling is best integrated into the national screening programme, and to identify determinants of uptake.

Human papillomavirus self-sampling for screening nonattenders: Opt-in pilot implementation with electronic communication platforms

In organized cervical screening programs, typically 25% of the invited women do not attend. The Copenhagen Self‐sampling Initiative (CSi) aimed to gain experiences on participation among screening nonattenders in the Capital Region of Denmark. Here, we report on the effectiveness of different communication platforms used in the pilot with suggestions for strategies prior to a full‐implementation. Moreover, an innovative approach using self‐sampling brushes with unique radio frequency identification chips allowed for unprecedented levels patient identification safety. Nonattenders from the capital region of Denmark were identified via the organized national invitation module. Screening history was obtained via the nationwide pathology registry. Twenty‐four thousand women were invited, and as an alternative to the regular communication platforms (letter and phone), women could request a home test via a mobile‐friendly webpage. Instruction material and video‐animation in several languages were made available online. Chi‐square test was used to test differences. Out of all invited, 31.7% requested a home test, and 20% returned it to the laboratory. In addition, 10% were screened at the physician after receiving the invitation. Stratified by screening history, long‐term unscreened women were less likely to participate than intermittently screened women (28% vs. 16%, p < 0.001). Of all contacts received, 64% (63–65) came via letter, and 31% (95CI: 30–32%) via webpage/mobile‐app. Self‐sampling was well‐accepted among nonattenders. Adopting modern technology‐based platforms into the current organized screening program would serve as a convenient communication method between health authority and citizens, allowing easy access for the citizen and reducing the work load in administrating self‐sampling approaches.

What's new?

Our implementation study is the first to evaluate opt‐in self‐sampling for 24,000 screening nonattenders, which can be basis for future routine implementation. Women could respond through a variety of communication channels (regular mail, phone and custom‐made web/mobile‐app). Our study utilized self‐sampling brushes with a novel RFID‐chip for secure patient‐identification, eliminating inconveniences for the women to fill out forms on returning the brush and loss of brushes due to missing identification.

Evaluation of scaling-up of HPV self-collection offered by community health workers at home visits to increase screening among socially vulnerable under-screened women in Jujuy Province, Argentina

BACKGROUND

Self-collection has been proposed as a strategy to increase cervical screening coverage among hard-to-reach women. However, evaluations of the implementation of this strategy on a large scale are scarce. This paper describes the process and measurement of the scaling-up of self-collection offered by community health workers during home visits as a strategy to reach under-screened women aged 30+ with public health coverage, defined as the target women.

METHODS

We used an adaptation of the Health System Framework to analyze key drivers of scaling-up. A content analysis approach was used to collect and analyze information from different sources. The RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) model was used to evaluate the impact of the strategy.

RESULTS

HPV self-collection was scaled-up in the province of Jujuy in 2014 after a RCT (Self-collection Modality Trial, initials EMA in Spanish) was carried out locally in 2012 and demonstrated effectiveness of the strategy to increase screening uptake. Facilitators of scaling-up were the organizational capacity of the provincial health system, sustainable funding for HPV testing, and local consensus about the value of the technology. Reach: In 2014, 9% (2983/33,245) of target women were screened through self-collection in the Jujuy public health sector. Effectiveness: In 2014, 17% (n = 5657/33,245) of target women were screened with any HPV test (self-collected and clinician-collected tests) vs. 11.7% (4579/38,981) in 2013, the pre-scaling-up period (p < 0.0001).

IMPLEMENTATION

Training about the strategy was provided to 84.2% (n = 609/723) of total community health workers (CHWs). Of 414 HPV+ women, 77.5% (n = 320) had follow-up procedures. Of 113 women with positive triage, 66.4% (n = 75) had colposcopic diagnosis. Treatment was provided to 80.7% of CIN2+ women (n = 21/26). Adoption: Of trained CHWs, 69.3% (n = 422/609) had at least one woman with self-collection; 85.2% (n = 315/368) of CHWs who responded to an evaluation survey were satisfied with self-collection strategy. Maintenance: During 2015, 100.0% (723/723) CHWs were operational and 63.8% (461/723) had at least one woman with self-collection.

CONCLUSIONS

The strategy was successfully scaled-up, with a high level of adoption among CHWs, which resulted in increased screening among socially vulnerable under-screened women.

Feasibility of Cervical Cancer Screening Utilizing Self-sample Human Papillomavirus Testing Among Mexican Immigrant Women in Harris County, Texas: A Pilot Study

Here we evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of self-sample human papillomavirus (HPV) testing (self-HPV) among a sample of predominantly Mexican immigrant women who never or sporadically attend for Pap testing. Immigrant women who had not had a Pap test in the past 3 years (n = 100) were recruited. Participants self-collected a cervical sample for HPV testing. High-risk (HR) HPV-positive women were referred for clinical follow-up. Acceptability of self-HPV was high, with 99% reporting that they would be willing to use self-HPV regularly. Nineteen women (19%) tested positive for HR-HPV. Of these, 50% obtained clinical follow-up within 3 months. For those who did not, the primary barrier to follow-up was difficulty obtaining healthcare coverage. In conclusion, self-HPV is highly acceptable to Mexican immigrant women who otherwise do not attend for Pap testing. While the approach addresses critical barriers to primary screening, questions remain as to whether uninsured HR-HPV positive women are able to attend for clinical follow-up.