Acceptability and Feasibility of Human Papilloma Virus Self-Sampling for Cervical Cancer Screening

Primary human papillomavirus testing by clinician- versus self-collection: Awareness and acceptance among cervical cancer screening-eligible women

OBJECTIVES

Primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing by clinician-collection is endorsed by U.S. guideline organizations for cervical cancer screening, but uptake remains low and insights into patients' understanding are limited. This study aims to primarily address patient awareness of primary HPV screening by clinician-collection and acceptance of primary HPV screening by clinician- and self-collection, and secondarily assess factors associated with awareness and acceptance.

SETTING

Primary care practices affiliated with an academic medical center.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey study of screening-eligible women aged 30-65 years was conducted to assess awareness and acceptability of primary HPV screening. We analyzed bivariate associations of respondent characteristics with awareness of primary HPV screening by clinician-collection, willingness to have clinician- or self-collected primary HPV testing, and reasons for self-collection preference.

RESULTS

Respondents (n = 351; response rate = 23.4%) reported cervical cancer screening adherence of 82.8% but awareness of clinician-collected primary HPV as an option was low (18.9%) and only associated with HPV testing with recent screening (p = 0.003). After reviewing a description of primary HPV screening, willingness for clinician-collected (81.8%) or home self-collected (76.1%) HPV testing was high, if recommended by a provider. Acceptability of clinician-collected HPV testing was associated with higher income (p = 0.009) and for self-collection was associated with higher income (p = 0.002) and higher education (p = 0.02). Higher education was associated with reporting self-collection as easier than clinic-collection (p = 0.02). Women expected self-collection to be more convenient (94%), less embarrassing (85%), easier (85%), and less painful (81%) than clinician-collection.

CONCLUSIONS

Educational interventions are needed to address low awareness about the current clinician-collected primary HPV screening option and to prepare for anticipated federal licensure of self-collection kits. Informing women about self-collection allows them to recognize benefits which could address screening barriers.

Opportunities for cancer prevention at syringe services programs: acceptability of HPV self-sampling and vaccination among people who inject drugs

INTRODUCTION

Despite having a high risk of acquiring sexually transmitted infections, people who inject drugs (PWID) often do not receive recommended HPV screenings due to barriers to healthcare. Guideline-based cervical HPV screening and vaccination can prevent cervical cancer. Low-cost, low-barrier methods for cancer screening and prevention are important for vulnerable communities such as PWID.

METHODS

We examined acceptability of HPV self-sampling at a syringe services program (SSP). Participants with a cervix (n = 49) participated in patient education followed by a survey to assess willingness to perform HPV self-sampling versus standard of care.

RESULTS

59% found self-sampling to be acceptable, citing privacy, ease, and quickness. Among those opting for HPV screening delivered by a provider (n = 16), participants cited concerns about adequate sampling (81%) and test accuracy (75%). Notably, only 18% of participants reported complete HPV vaccination.

CONCLUSION

Cervical HPV self-sampling was acceptable to PWID. SSP-based efforts to provide preventative health services could place tools for cancer screening into the hands of PWID, a need-to-reach community.

Comparison of diagnostic accuracy and acceptability of self-sampling devices for human Papillomavirus detection: A systematic review

Objective

Cervical cancer screening coverage remains low in many countries worldwide. Self-sampling approach for cervical cancer screening has a good potential to improve the screening coverage. This study aims to compare different types of HPV self-sampling devices for cervical cancer screening to identify the most accurate and acceptable device(s).

Methods

A systematic review was performed on data extracted from all studies specific to HPV self-sampling devices by searching relevant articles in PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and EBSCO published from 2013 to October 2023. The study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022375682).

Results

Overall, 70 papers met the eligibility criteria for this systematic review and were included in the analysis: 22 studies reported self-sampling devices diagnostic accuracy, 32 studies reported self-sampling devices acceptability and 16 studies reported both (accuracy and acceptability). The most popular self-sampling devices were Evalyn Brush, FLOQ Swab, Cervex-Brush, and Delphi Screener. Out of overall 38 studies analyzing self-sampling devices' diagnostic accuracy, 94.7% of studies reported that self-collected specimens provided sensitivity and specificity comparable with clinician-collected samples; acceptability of Evalyn Brush, FLOQ Swab, Delphi Screener, and Colli-Pee, varied between 84.2% and 100%.

Conclusion

The self-sampling approach has a good potential to increase cervical cancer screening coverage. Evalyn Brush, Cervex-Brush, FLOQ Swab, and Delphi Screener self-sampling devices for HPV detection were the most commonly utilized and found to be the most accurate, and patient-acceptable. HPV detection accuracy using these self-sampling devices had no significant difference compared to the sampling performed by healthcare providers.

Self-Collection for Primary HPV Testing: Perspectives on Implementation From Federally Qualified Health Centers

INTRODUCTION

Primary testing for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) by self-collection could result in higher rates of cervical cancer screening. Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in the US serve a large proportion of women who have low income and no health insurance and are medically underserved - risk factors for being insufficiently screened for cervical cancer. Although the implementation of self-collection for HPV testing is not yet widespread, health care entities need to prepare for its eventual approval by the US Food and Drug Administration. We conducted focus groups and interviews among clinical and administrative staff and leadership to gather data on key logistical concerns that must be addressed before implementing self-collection for HPV testing in FQHCs.

METHODS

We identified focus group and interview participants from 6 FQHCs in North Carolina. We conducted focus groups with clinical and administrative staff (N = 45) and semistructured interviews with chief executive officers, senior-level administrators, chief medical officers, and clinical data managers (N = 24). Transcripts were coded by using codebooks derived from research questions and notes taken during data collection. Themes emerged on implementation of self-collection for HPV testing. We applied the constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to themes to identify domains of potential barriers and facilitators to implementation.

RESULTS

Clinical personnel reported that offering self-collection for HPV testing is acceptable and feasible and can increase cervical cancer screening rates. Uncertainties emerged about accuracy of results, workflow disruptions, financial implications, and effects on clinic quality measures.

CONCLUSION

Implementing self-collection for HPV testing was considered feasible and acceptable by participants. However, important health service delivery considerations, including financial implications, must be addressed before integrating self-collection for HPV testing into the standard of care.

Determinants of Low-Income Women's Participation in Self-Collected Samples for Cervical Cancer Detection: Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior

BACKGROUND

Low-income women (LIW) are underrepresented in physician-provided cervical cancer screening. Providing women with an option for Human Papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling would increase cervical cancer screening. However, little is known about LIW's attitude towards self-sampling for cervical cancer. We determined the associations between the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) constructs and LIW intention for participation in the HPV self-sampling.

METHODS

A 44-item survey was administered among women receiving food from a food pantry in central Texas. Independent variables included TPB constructs (i.e., attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived control). The outcome variables were intentions and preference for self-sampling. Both variables were measured on a 5-point scale. Hierarchical linear regression models were used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

A sample of 241 participants (age 50.13 ± 9.60 years) comprising non-Hispanic White (40%), Black/African American (27%), and Hispanic (30%) participated in the study. The participants were current with a pap test (54.8%) and preferred self-sampling (42%). The participant's attitudes and subjective norms were significantly associated with their intention for self-sampling, accounting for 38.7% of the variance (p < .001). Women who were overdue for pap testing versus current with pap testing had increased odds of preferring self-sampling (OR = 1.72, 95% CI: 1.27, 6.04).

CONCLUSIONS

The key predictors for LIW's intention for self-sampling included attitudes and subjective norms. Future research should use the TPB as a framework to examine whether intention predicts self-sampling behavior among LIW.

Interventions to increase cervical screening uptake among immigrant women: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Numerous intervention studies have attempted to increase cervical screening uptake among immigrant women, nonetheless their screening participation remains low. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarise the evidence on interventions to improve cervical screening among immigrant women globally and identify their effectiveness. Databases PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, PsycINFO, ERIC, CINAHL and CENTRAL were systematically searched from inception to October 12, 2021, for intervention studies, including randomised and clinical controlled trials (RCT, CCT) and one and two group pre-post studies. Peer-reviewed studies involving immigrant and refugee women, in community and clinical settings, were eligible. Comparator interventions were usual or minimal care or attention control. Data extraction, quality appraisal and risk of bias were assessed by two authors independently using COVIDENCE software. Narrative synthesis of findings was carried out, with the main outcome measure defined as the cervical screening uptake rate difference pre- and post-intervention followed by random effects meta-analysis of trials and two group pre-post studies, using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software, to calculate pooled rate ratios and adjustment for publication bias, where found. The protocol followed PRISMA guidelines and was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42020192341). 1,900 studies were identified, of which 42 (21 RCTS, 4 CCTs, and 16 pre-post studies) with 44,224 participants, were included in the systematic review, and 28 with 35,495 participants in the meta-analysis. Overall, the uptake difference rate for interventions ranged from -6.7 to 96%. Meta-analysis demonstrated a pooled rate ratio of 1.15 (95% CI 1.03-1.29), with high heterogeneity. Culturally sensitive, multicomponent interventions, using different modes of information delivery and self-sampling modality were most promising. Interventions led to at least 15% increase in cervical screening participation among immigrant women. Interventions designed to overcome logistical barriers and use multiple channels to communicate culturally appropriate health promotion messages are most effective at achieving cervical screening uptake among immigrant women.

Development of a Point-of-Care Cervico-Vaginal Sampling/Testing Device for the Colorimetric Detection of Cervical Cancer

This paper reports the colorimetric analysis of cervical-cancer-affected clinical samples by the in situ formation of gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) formed with cervico-vaginal fluids collected from healthy and cancer-affected patients in a clinical setup, termed "C-ColAur". We evaluated the efficacy of the colorimetric technique against the clinical analysis (biopsy/Pap smear) and reported the sensitivity and specificity. We investigated if the aggregation coefficient and size of the nanoparticles responsible for the change in color of the AuNPs (formed with clinical samples) could also be used as a measure of detecting malignancy. We estimated the protein and lipid concentrations in the clinical samples and attempted to investigate if either of these components was solely responsible for the color change, enabling their colorimetric detection. We also propose a self-sampling device, CerviSelf, that could enable the rapid frequency of screening. We discuss two of the designs in detail and demonstrate the 3D-printed prototypes. These devices, in conjugation with the colorimetric technique C-ColAur, have the potential to be self-screening techniques, enabling women to undergo rapid and frequent screening in the comfort and privacy of their homes, allowing a chance at an early diagnosis and improved survival rates.

Understanding the effect of new U.S. cervical cancer screening guidelines and modalities on patients' comprehension and reporting of their cervical cancer screening behavior

With recent shifts in guideline-recommended cervical cancer screening in the U.S., it is important to accurately measure screening behavior. Previous studies have indicated the U.S. National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), a resource for measuring self-reported screening adherence, has lower validity among non-White racial/ethnic groups and non-English speakers. Further, measuring diverse population groups' comprehension of items and attitudes toward HPV self-sampling merits investigation as it is a modality likely to be recommended in the U.S. soon. This study cognitively tested NHIS items assessing recency of and reasons for receiving cervical cancer screening and attitudes toward HPV self-sampling. We conducted cognitive interviews between April 2021 - April 2022 in English and Spanish with individuals screened in the past two years by either a medical center in metropolitan Seattle, Washington or a safety-net healthcare system in Dallas, Texas. Interviews probed understanding of reasons for screening, experiences with abnormal results, and interest in HPV self-sampling. We completed 32 interviews in Seattle and 42 interviews in Dallas. A majority of participants were unaware that two different tests for cervical cancer screening exist (Pap and HPV). Many did not know which type(s) of test they received. Dallas participants had more limited and inaccurate knowledge of HPV compared to Seattle participants, and fewer responded favorably toward HPV self-sampling (32% vs. 55%). To improve comprehension and accurate reporting of cervical cancer screening, we suggest specific refinements to currently used survey questions. Attitudes toward self-sampling should be explored further as differences may exist by region and/or sociodemographic factors.

Leveraging COVID-era innovation for cervical cancer screening: Clinician awareness and attitudes toward self-sampling and rapid testing for HPV detection

Cervical cancer screening rates are declining in the US, with persistent disparities among vulnerable populations. Strategies to better reach under-screened communities are needed. The COVID pandemic sparked major shifts in healthcare delivery, including the accelerated development and adoption of rapid diagnostic testing, broadened access to remote care, and growing consumer demand for self-testing, which could be leveraged for cervical cancer. Rapid tests for the detection of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) have the potential to improve cervical cancer screening coverage, and if coupled with patient-collected cervicovaginal samples, create an opportunity for self-testing. The objectives of this study were: 1) to examine whether COVID influenced clinician perspectives of rapid testing as a screening modality; and 2) to assess clinician awareness, perceived benefits and limitations, and willingness to adopt point-of-care HPV testing, patient self-sampling, and rapid HPV self-testing with self-collected samples. The methodology adopted consisted of an online cross-sectional survey (n = 224) and in-depth interviews (n = 20) were conducted with clinicians who perform cervical cancer screening in Indiana, ranked in the top ten states for cervical cancer mortality and with marked disparities across socio-demographic groups. The main findings show that about half the clinicians reported that the COVID pandemic had influenced their views on rapid testing as a screening modality both positively (greater public acceptability of rapid testing and impact on patient care) and negatively (concerns regarding accuracy of rapid tests). The majority of clinicians (82%) were willing to adopt rapid HPV testing at the point-of-care, while only 48% were willing to adopt rapid HPV self-testing with self-collected samples. In-depth interviews revealed provider concerns around patients' ability to collect their own sample, report results correctly, and return to the clinic for follow-up and other preventive care. Addressing clinician concerns about self-sampling and rapid HPV testing, such as ensuring that rapid tests include sample adequacy controls, is necessary to mitigate barriers to adoption for cervical cancer screening.

Cervical Cancer Screening

Cervical cancer screening is an essential component of preventative health care. Although rates of cervical cancer have decreased over the last 50 years, survival has not changed dramatically, and there are significant discrepancies in disease detection by race. Multiple national organizations contribute to the recommendations for cervical cancer screening timing, testing modalities, and management. This article aims to summarize the current understanding of cervical cancer pathogenesis, options for cervical cancer screening, and the shift in guidelines toward risk-based clinical management.

Clinician practices, knowledge, and attitudes regarding primary human papillomavirus testing for cervical cancer screening: A mixed-methods study in Indiana

Primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, in which a high-risk HPV test is administered without cytology, was first included in 2018 US cervical cancer screening guidelines. Subsequent guidelines endorsed primary HPV testing as the preferred method for cervical cancer screening following evidence of its clinical and economic benefits, although many sources still indicate it as an option along with cytology and HPV/Pap co-testing. Primary HPV testing could be key to improving the declining cervical cancer screening rates in the US; however its adoption has been slow as clinicians are hesitant to make the change. Indiana ranks in the top ten states for cervical cancer mortality, with marked race-ethnic disparities in cervical cancer screening and low HPV vaccination rates. To examine clinician practices, knowledge, and attitudes regarding primary HPV testing, in 2021 we conducted an online cross-sectional survey (n = 224) and in-depth interviews (n = 20) with Indiana clinicians practicing cervical cancer screening. Only 3 % reported using primary HPV testing for eligible patients, and only 50 % were willing to adopt it as the preferred cervical cancer screening method for the recommended patient group. In a multivariable logistic regression model, knowledge of the effectiveness (aOR 2.58 [1.41-4.72]) and perceived benefit (aOR 7.35 [3.65-14.81]) of primary HPV testing predicted willingness to adopt. In-depth interviews revealed knowledge gaps, uncertainty, and perceived limitations of this method as the reasons for limited uptake of primary HPV testing. Targeted messages about the benefits and effectiveness may enhance clinician knowledge, acceptance, and adoption.

A Scoping Literature Review on Evidence-Based Strategies to Increase Cervical Cancer Screening

Previous reviews of strategies to increase cervical cancer screening are more than 10 years old, the U.S. continues to fall short of the Healthy People 2030 cervical cancer screening goal, and guidelines were revised in 2018, therefore an updated review of the existing literature is needed. We conducted a scoping review using electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, and Ovid Medline that included publication dates between 2012 and 2021 to answer the question, "Which strategies implemented in U.S. primary care settings have been most successful in increasing rates of cervical cancer screening since the 2012 US Preventative Services Task Force cervical cancer screening guidelines were published?" We mapped findings to pre-specified implementation strategy categories. After initially identifying 399 articles, we excluded 350 due to duplicates or not meeting review criteria, leaving 49 articles for full review. We excluded 37 of these during full-text review and identified 2 additional articles from the manual search of reference lists for a total of 14 studies for abstraction. Eleven articles reported on strategies resulting in increased cervical cancer screening, and 3 did not. Clinic workflow re-design strategies showed the greatest promise in improving cervical cancer screening rates, education strategies for patients had mixed results, and quality management strategies were not effective. These findings suggest clinical workflow re-structures and patient education strategies can increase cervical cancer screening in primary care settings. Results are particularly important in settings that care for underserved populations, as these settings may need additional implementation strategies to decrease cervical cancer screening disparities.

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.

Racial/ethnic inequalities in cervical cancer screening in the United States: An outcome reclassification to better inform interventions and benchmarks

In the United states (U.S.), prevailing understanding suggests significant racial/ethnic inequalities in cervical cancer screening exist. However, recent findings elsewhere in North America indicate the magnitude of these inequalities depend on the way screening is defined: lifetime screening versus up-to-date screening. As those who have never been screened are most at risk for invasive cancer, an improved understanding of inequalities in this outcome is necessary to better inform interventions. To describe racial/ethnic inequalities in 1) never screening and 2) not being up-to-date with screening among women who have been screened at least once in their lifetime, three years (2014-2016) of the U.S. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey were utilized to estimate cervical cancer screening prevalence ratios via Poisson regression (N = 123,070). The sample was limited to women age 21 to 65 years. Women from racial/ethnic minority groups were more likely to never have been screened in comparison to White women, particularly women of Asian descent (Prevalence Ratio (PR) = 3.8, 95% CI = 3.3-4.3). However, among women who had been screened at least once in their lifetime, an inverse association was observed between being a member of a racial/ethnic minority group and not being up-to-date with screening (e.g. PR_{asian vs white} = 0.7, 95% CI = 0.6-0.9). Physicians and public health institutions concerned with monitoring racial/ethnic inequalities should consider adding lifetime screening as a primary benchmark, as this outcome implies different intervention targets to address inequalities and the differential burden of cervical cancer.

Acceptability of Human Papilloma Virus Self-Sampling for Cervical Cancer Screening in a Cohort of Patients from Romania (Stage 2)

(1) Background: Low patient’s adherence to conventional cervical cancer screening methods determined the need to take into consideration alternative approaches, and vaginal HPV self-sampling is one of them. We aimed to evaluate, using an online survey, the Romanian women’s acceptability of vaginal HPV self-sampling. (2) Methods: A 13-questions online survey was distributed on three Facebook groups, and the results were summarized. (3) Results: Despite of good educational background, 10.8% (n = 60) of the respondents did not know what a Pap smear is, and 33% (n = 183) were not informed about the free national cervical cancer screening program. Multivariate analysis revealed an increased likelihood of vaginal self-sampling acceptance among respondents who did not know about Pap test (OR: 7.80; 95%CI: 1.062−57.431; p = 0.021), national cervical cancer screening program (OR: 1.96; 95%CI: 1.010−3.806; p = 0.02), HPV infection (OR: 7.35; 95%CI: 3.099−17.449; p< 0.001) or HPV test (OR: 1.67; 95%CI: 0.950−2.948; p = 0.03). Moreover, women who did not previously undergo a cervical cancer screening program were more likely to accept the new screening method (OR: 1.62; 95%CI: 0.878−3.015; p = 0.04). (4) Conclusions: Our results showed high acceptability rates of vaginal HPV self-sampling among participants.

Acceptability and efficacy of vaginal self-sampling for genital infection and bacterial vaginosis: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND & AIM

Screening for genital infection (GI) such as bacterial vaginosis (BV) and yeast infection, for sexually transmitted infection (STI), and for asymptomatic carriage of group B streptococcus (GBS) in pregnant women are common reason for medical appointments. The diagnosis and control of GIs, STIs, and GBS are major issues, for fertility and overall well-being of affected women. Conventional testing is performed using vaginal/cervical classical sampling (VCS); this procedure requires pelvic examination performed by health care professionals which raises concerns among women. Vaginal-self-sampling (VSS), as an alternative to VCS, might capture more women. The aim was first to show non-inferiority of VSS compared with VCS to screen for GIs, STIs, and GBS; second to determine the feasibility of VSS.

METHODS

VSS and VCS from 1027 women were collected by health care professionals and simultaneously carried out on each patient. GIs, STIs, and GBS were systematically screened in both paired VSS and VCS samples. Non-inferiority of VSS compared with VCS was assessed using z statistic for binomial proportions.

RESULTS

Prevalence of GIs were 39.7% using VSS and 38.1% using VCS (p = 0.0016). Prevalence of STIs was 8.5% (VSS) vs 8.1% (VCS) (p = 0.0087). Prevalence of GBS was 13.4% (VSS) and 11.5% (VCS) (p = 0.0001). Most participants (84%) recommended the use of VSS.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that VSS was not inferior to VCS for the detection of GIs, STIs, and GBS. This study provides evidence that VSS can be used as a universal specimen for detection of lower genital tract infections in women.

STUDY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER

ID-RCB 2014-A01250-4.

Evaluating Culturally-targeted Fear Appeal Messages for HPV Self-Sampling among Jamaican Women: A Qualitative Formative Research Study

Despite the disproportionate burden of cervical cancer among Caribbean women, evaluations of targeted communication interventions to increase screening behaviors are sparsely represented in extant literature. Informed by data on the cognitive, affective and sociocultural factors associated with low cervical screening in the English-speaking island of Jamaica, the current study aimed to explore how theory-based message design, coupled with innovative solutions, might increase screening. In this formative research study, we first described the process used to develop culturally-targeted fear appeal messages embedded within an HPV self-sampling kit developed by the researchers. Then, we shared the results of an evaluation of the kit, which was reviewed by 36 Jamaican women in 8 focus groups, to understand the potential impact of the messages and the utility of HPV self-sampling to increase screening behaviors in this population. The results provide data on effective messages for cervical cancer prevention among Jamaican women, which may be further applicable to underscreened women in the English-speaking Caribbean. Additionally, results from this research suggest support for HPV self-sampling to address salient cultural and structural barriers to screening, which provides an impetus for experimental research in message design to inform policy and practice.

Comparison of cervical cancer screening by self-sampling papillomavirus test versus pap-smear in underprivileged women in France

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare cervical cancer screening by pap smear (PS) versus preliminary HPV testing based on self-collected samples (SC-HPV).

METHODS

Interventional study among underprivileged women from 25 to 65 years old in four French cities. The control group (CG) was referred for a PS. The experimental group (EG) conducted a SC-HPV test followed by a PS in case of positivity. Differences on screening completion and cytological abnormalities were analysed by logistic and Cox regression.

RESULTS

383 women were assigned to the EG and 304 to the CG. The screening completion proportion was 39.5% in the CG compared to 71.3% in the EG (HR = 2.48 (CI 95% [1.99-3.08]; p < 0.001). The proportion of cytological abnormalities was 2.0% in the CG and 2.3% in the EG (OR = 1.20 (CI 95% [0.42-3.40]; p = 0.7). The proportion of participants lost to follow-up was 60.5% in the CG and 63.2% in the EG HPV positive (p = 0.18).

CONCLUSION

Providing an SC-HPV-test increased the participation of underprivileged women in CCS. Nevertheless, the significant number of lost to follow-up in both groups can undermine the initial benefits of the strategy for HPV positive women. Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03118258.

HPV self-sampling for cervical cancer screening: a systematic review of values and preferences

INTRODUCTION

The WHO recommends human papillomavirus (HPV) cervical self-sampling as an additional screening method and HPV DNA testing as an effective approach for the early detection of cervical cancer for women aged ≥30 years. This systematic review assesses end user's values and preferences related to HPV self-sampling.

METHODS

We searched four electronic databases (PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature and Embase) using search terms for HPV and self-sampling to identify articles meeting inclusion criteria. A standardised data extraction form was used to capture study setting, population, sample size and results related to values and preferences.

RESULTS

Of 1858 records retrieved, 72 studies among 52 114 participants published between 2002 and 2018 were included in this review. Almost all studies were cross-sectional surveys. Study populations included end users who were mainly adolescent girls and adult women. Ages ranged from 14 to 80 years. Most studies (57%) were conducted in high-income countries. Women generally found HPV self-sampling highly acceptable regardless of age, income or country of residence. Lack of self-confidence with collecting a reliable sample was the most commonly cited reason for preferring clinician-collected samples. Most women preferred home-based self-sampling to self-sampling at a clinic. The cervical swab was the most common and most accepted HPV DNA sampling device.

CONCLUSIONS

HPV self-sampling is generally a highly accepted method of cervical cancer screening for end users globally. End user preferences for self-sampling device, method and setting can inform the development of new and expanded interventions to increase HPV screening.

Acceptability of a multicomponent, community-based, HPV self-test intervention among Jamaican women

Jamaican women do not participate in routine Pap test screening as recommended, despite the availability of free Pap test services at community clinics. This low uptake has been associated with cultural and structural barriers such as limited knowledge and awareness, fear of pain associated with Pap tests, fear of diagnosis, modesty or self-consciousness, medical mistrust, and discontent with healthcare services. This study suggests that a multicomponent, community-based intervention that includes education and self-testing for the virus that causes cervical cancer (i.e., Human Papillomavirus, HPV) might increase screening rates. Community outreach workers were hired and recruited 163 women from two low socioeconomic status communities in Kingston, aged 30 to 65 years, and who had not had a Pap test in at least 3 years, to use an HPV self-test kit. Almost all the women (95.6%) used and returned the kit and reported in structured interviews that it was easy to use and preferable to visiting a doctor. Paired samples t-tests revealed that participants perceived higher threat of cervical cancer, greater susceptibility to cancer, greater sense of self-efficacy, and more positive screening social norms at post-test than at pretest. Among returners, 22% had an oncogenic HPV type detected in their sample. Findings demonstrate high acceptability of the HPV self-test among Jamaican women and, therefore, the potential of HPV self-test tools to increase screening uptake. Community-based approaches to disseminate this tool, such as outreach workers and educational small group sessions, appear to be culturally appropriate and effective in this context.

Self-collection of samples for HPV testing to increase participation in cervical cancer screening by immigrant women: An integrative review

OBJECTIVE

To examine methods and results of studies assessing self-collection of cervico-vaginal samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing by immigrant women for insights into how future research using this method with unique subpopulations of women may improve the rates of cervical cancer screening (CCS) compared to current strategies.

DATA SOURCES

Four electronic databases were systematically searched through March 2020, with no limits applied. A manual review of reference lists was also completed.

STUDY SELECTION

The search resulted in 63 articles. After removal of duplicates, 36 were reviewed against inclusion criteria. A manual review of reference lists yielded two additional studies. The final sample included 15 relevant publications representing 13 unique empirical studies.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data related to study methodology and empirical results were extracted into table form.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The methods of the studies were summarized and synthesized, including diversity of participants, community engagement, including collaboration with public health nurses or community health workers. In addition, methods and findings related to the educational components of the studies, and empirical findings related to various cultural groups, were described.

CONCLUSION

To reduce health disparities in CCS, researchers should focus on diverse groups, such as immigrant women, to understand important individual and group-specific factors that may influence screening, including whether self-collection of samples for HPV testing along with appropriate education and support for follow-up will address these factors.

Variation in Cervical Cancer Screening Preferences among Medically Underserved Individuals in the United States: A Systematic Review

Underutilization of effective screening is one driver of disparities in cervical cancer incidence and mortality. Consideration of patient preferences could help to improve screening rates in populations facing substantial barriers to preventive care. We conducted a systematic review of the literature on cervical cancer screening preferences among medically underserved patients in the United States. We searched six electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, and PsycINFO) for articles published through February 2019 (Prospero ID: CRD42019125431). Among the 43 articles included, 23 reported screening modality preferences, 11 reported preferences related to provider demographics and attributes, six reported screening scheduling and results delivery preferences, and nine reported preferences related to health education and communication. This review demonstrates the wide variety of medically underserved patient preferences related to cervical cancer screening. It also draws attention to two key preference trends that emerged despite heterogeneity in study design, populations, and preference assessment. Consistent preferences for human papillomavirus self-testing over traditional Pap testing highlight a key potential mechanism for increasing cervical cancer screening uptake among medically underserved populations. In addition, preferences for gender- and language-concordant providers underscore the need for continued efforts toward expanding diversity among medical professionals.

"The best thing is that you are doing it for yourself" - perspectives on acceptability and feasibility of HPV self-sampling among cervical cancer screening clients in Tanzania: a qualitative pilot study

Background

Cervical cancer is the most common type of cancer in sub-Saharan Africa, and it is also the cancer disease that most women die from. The high mortality rate is partly due to low attendance rates to screening services and low sensitivity of visual inspection with acetic acid, which is the standard screening method used in screening programs in sub-Saharan Africa. In order to overcome of the burden of disease new screening strategies and methods are warranted. This study aims to explore the acceptability and feasibility of HPV self-sampling compared to provider-based sampling among cervical cancer screening clients living in Dar es Salaam.

Methods

Women attending cervical cancer screening at Ocean Road Cancer Institute in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania between February – April 2017 were invited into the study. The participants had (1) a provider-collected sample, and (2) a self-sample for HPV on top of the regular cervical cancer screening. 50% of the participants conducted the self-sample after receiving a written instruction guide of how to collect the sample (written). The other 50% received both the written and an oral introduction to self-sampling (written+). All participants could ask for nurse assistance during self-sample collection if needed. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with the participants post sample collection. Data collection stopped when saturation was reached. Data were analysed using a thematic content analysis.

Results

Twenty-one women participated in the study. Regardless of how women were introduced to the self-sample (written or written+), there was a high demand for nurse presence as they felt uncertain of their personal capabilities to collect the self-sample correctly. However, as long as nurse assistance was an option most women perceived self-sampling as easy and comfortable though few experienced bleeding and pain. The majority of women preferred self-sampling over provider-sampling primarily due to the method being more private than the provider-sampling.

Conclusions

HPV self-sampling was well-perceived and accepted, however, for the method to be feasible a nurse needed to be present. HPV Self-sampling may be an alternative method to increase uptake of cervical cancer screening. Larger quantitative studies are recommended to support the study findings.

Combining copy number, methylation markers, and mutations as a panel for endometrial cancer detection via intravaginal tampon collection

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess whether endometrial cancer (EC) can be detected in shed DNA collected with vaginal tampon by analyzing copy number, methylation markers, and mutations.

METHODS

Tampons were collected prior to hysterectomy from 38 EC patients and 28 women with benign indications. Extracted tampon DNA underwent the following: 1) low-coverage whole genome sequencing (LC-WGS) to assess copy number, 2) pyrosequencing to measure percent promotor methylation of HOXA9, RASSF1, and CDH13 and 3) next generation sequencing (NGS) to identify mutations in 19 genes associated with EC identified through The Cancer Genome Atlas. Sensitivity and specificity for each test and test combinations were calculated.

RESULTS

Methylation analysis yielded the highest specificities but lowest sensitivities (37-40% sensitivity; 100% specificity for HOXA9, RASSF1 and HTR1B) while mutation analysis had improved sensitivity (50% sensitivity; 83% specificity). Only one "false positive" result for copy number variants was identified among women with benign surgical indications, which was based on detection of copy number changes, and associated with a leiomyosarcoma that was only recognized at hysterectomy. Considering any of the 3 biomarker classes as a positive, resulted in a sensitivity of 92% and specificity of 86%. Mutation analysis did not add sensitivity to the combination of analysis of copy number and methylation.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates a proof-of-principle for non-invasive yet precise detection of endometrial cancer. We propose that with improved biomarker testing, it may be possible to develop a clinically useful test for detecting EC.

HPV testing on vaginal/cervical nurse-assisted self-samples versus clinician-taken specimens and the HPV prevalence, in Adama Town, Ethiopia

This study aimed to determine the feasibility of vaginal/cervical nurse-assisted self-sampling (NASS) and the agreement between human papilloma virus (HPV) tests on self-samples versus clinician-taken (CT) specimens.Women participated voluntarily for cervical cancer screening at St. Aklesia Memorial Hospital. Eighty-three women provided a total of 166 coupled self-taken and CT specimens collected. Specimens were stored at room temperature for a maximum of 10 months and analyzed using validated the RIATOL qPCR HPV genotyping test, a quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) high-throughput HPV E6, E7 assay. The average age of the participating women was 32 years. Seventy-three women (87.9%) felt that NASS was easy to use. An overall HPV, high-risk (HR) HPV, and low-risk HPV prevalence was 22.7% (15/66), 18.2% (12/66), and 6.1% (4/66), respectively. The overall HR HPV prevalence was 17.2% (NASS) and 15.5% (CT). The most prevalent HPV type was HPV51; HPV 16 was only detected in 1 woman (CT+NASS) and HPV18 only in 1 woman (CT). The overall measurement agreement between self-taken and CT samples was moderate with a kappa value of 0.576 (P < .001). Lifetime partnered with >2 men were associated with HR HPV positivity (P < .001). There was a strong statistical association between HR HPV positivity and visual inspection with acetic acid- positive (P < .001). The NASS for HPV testing could be seen as an alternative option and might be acceptable to Ethiopian women. The overall HR HPV prevalence was comparable with Sub-Saharan countries in the general population.

New Methodologies for Global Health Research: Improving the Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice Survey Model Through Participatory Research in Haiti

Knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) survey models are a common tool used by researchers and global health practitioners to reveal insights necessary for health program design and implementation. We explore how an interdisciplinary team of medical practitioners, researchers, designers, and community members improved the KAP survey tool in Haiti by drawing on participatory research methods. The overall objective of the project was to build a new approach to investigating and meeting community health needs and specifically the challenges faced by women with breast and cervical cancer in Haiti. The research findings were used to design an education tool kit for health care providers as well as create a community-based engagement strategy to better connect people to cancer screening and treatment facilities. By infusing the KAP survey model with participatory approaches to knowledge production, the advisory board designed a survey tool that generated more relevant and in-depth knowledge with the community while maintaining the study's simplicity and complying with a time-limited budget.

Acceptability of self-taken vaginal HPV sample for cervical screening among an under-screened Indigenous population

BACKGROUND

Human papillomavirus (HPV), the causative agent of cervical cancer, can be screened for using self-collected vaginal samples (self-testing). This may overcome barriers to screening for Māori women who suffer a greater burden of cervical disease than New Zealand European women.

AIMS

This study aimed to explore the potential acceptability of HPV self-testing for never/under-screened (self-reported no cervical screen in 4+ years, aged 25+) Māori women by Kaupapa Māori (by, with and for Māori) mixed methods, involving hui (focus groups/interviews) and survey.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Community-based researchers ran hui with women in four regions (N = 106) and supported hui participants to collect survey data (N = 397). Healthcare providers (HCPs) were also interviewed (N = 17). Hui data were thematically analysed. Survey data were analysed by age group, rural/urban, primary health organisation (PHO) enrolment, and time since last cervical screen.

RESULTS

Most survey participants were PHO-enrolled (87.15%) and attended regularly (71.79%), but did not attend regular cervical screening. A desire for bodily autonomy, including whakamā (embarrassment/shyness/reticence), was the most frequently cited barrier. Three in four women reported being likely/very likely to do an HPV self-test. Nine in ten women reported being likely/very likely to attend follow up if they receive a positive HPV test result. Women and HCPs in the hui emphasised the importance of health literacy, cultural competence and empathetic support.

CONCLUSION

The findings indicate that with a culturally competent introduction of HPV self-testing, many currently never/under-screened Māori women would be willing to be screened and followed up if necessary. HPV self-testing has the potential to save lives.

[MDM and proportionate universalism applied to cervical cancer prevention]

For over 30 years, Médecins du Monde (MDM) has been working with people living in vulnerable conditions in order to promote and facilitate their access to fundamental human rights and healthcare. Women encountered within MDM programs have many risk factors for developing precancerous and cancerous lesions of the cervix. They may not seek or have little access to health services and preventive health measures.These findings prompted MDM to adopt a 'proportionate universalism' approach in order to improve access to prevention for people living in vulnerable conditions, by reaching out to the population and offering preventative health consultations. In order to address health inequalities, this approach combines health mediation, use of visuals (binder, patient leaflet), professional interpretation services, as well as preventative health consultations run by a team aware of counselling approaches and techniques. MDM diversifies screening options by inviting women to perform a self-collected vaginal swab for high risk HPV testing.This multi-level intervention aims to create favorable conditions for public participation and empowerment by promoting specifically tailored tools and a "proportionate universalism" approach.

Home Self-Collection by Mail to Test for Human Papillomavirus and Sexually Transmitted Infections

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the validity and acceptability of at-home self-collection to test for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) and sexually transmitted infections among women overdue for cervical cancer screening by national guidelines.

METHODS

Low-income, infrequently screened women were recruited from the general population in North Carolina to participate in an observational study. Participants provided two self-collected cervicovaginal samples (one at home and one in the clinic) and a clinician-collected cervical sample. Samples were tested for high-risk HPV, Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Trichomonas vaginalis, and Mycoplasma genitalium. Cervical samples were also tested by liquid-based cytology.

RESULTS

Overall, 193 women had conclusive high-risk HPV results for all three samples and cytology results. Prevalence of high-risk HPV within self-home samples (12.4%) was not different from that within clinician samples (11.4%; P=.79) and from that within self clinic samples (15.5%; P=.21). Positivity for high-risk HPV in all sample types increased with increasing grades of cervical abnormality (P<.001). Self-home samples detected high-risk HPV in all identified cases of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse. Detection was comparable across sample types for T vaginalis (range 10.2-10.8%), M genitalium (3.3-5.5%), C trachomatis (1.1-2.1%), and N gonorrhoeae (0-0.5%). Kappa values between sample types ranged from 0.56 to 0.66 for high-risk HPV, 0.86-0.91 for T vaginalis, and 0.65-0.83 for M genitalium. Most participants reported no difficulty understanding self-collection instructions (93.6%) and were willing to use self-collection in the future (96.3%).

CONCLUSION

Mail-based, at-home self-collection for high-risk HPV and sexually transmitted infection detection was valid and well accepted among infrequently screened women in our study. These findings support the future use of high-risk HPV self-collection to increase cervical cancer screening rates among higher risk women in the United States.

HPV Self-Sampling for Cervical Cancer Screening Among Ethnic Minority Women in South Florida: a Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Ethnic minority women are at increased risk of cervical cancer. Self-sampling for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) is a promising approach to increase cervical screening among hard-to-reach populations.

OBJECTIVE

To compare a community health worker (CHW)-led HPV self-sampling intervention with standard cervical cancer screening approaches.

DESIGN

A 26-week single-blind randomized pragmatic clinical trial.

PARTICIPANTS

From October 6, 2011 to July 7, 2014, a total of 601 Black, Haitian, and Hispanic women aged 30-65 years in need of cervical cancer screening were recruited, 479 of whom completed study follow-up.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomized into three groups: (1) outreach by CHWs and provision of culturally tailored cervical cancer screening information (outreach), (2) individualized CHW-led education and navigation to local health care facilities for Pap smear (navigation), or (3) individualized CHW-led education with a choice of HPV self-sampling or CHW-facilitated navigation to Pap smear (self-swab option).

MAIN MEASURES

The proportion of women in each group whom self-reported completion of cervical cancer screening. Women lost to follow-up were considered as not having been screened.

KEY RESULTS

Of the 601 women enrolled, 355 (59%) were Hispanic, 210 (35%) were Haitian, and 36 (6%) were non-Haitian Black. In intent-to-treat analyses, 160 of 207 (77%) of women in the self-swab option group completed cervical cancer screening versus 57 of 182 (31%) in the outreach group (aOR 95% CI, p < 0.01) and 90 of 212 (43%) in the navigation group (aOR CI, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

As compared to more traditional approaches, CHW-facilitated HPV self-sampling led to increased cervical cancer screening among ethnic minority women in South Florida.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT02121548.

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.

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.