Australian National Cervical Screening Program renewal: Attitudes and experiences of general practitioners, and obstetricians and gynaecologists

Practitioners support and intention to adopt universal access to self-collection in Australia's National Cervical Screening Program

OBJECTIVE

Primary care practitioners are crucial to engaging people in Australia's national cervical screening program. From July 2022, practitioners have been able to offer all screen-eligible people the choice to collect their own self-collected sample; an option introduced to increase equity. This study explored how practitioners are intending to incorporate universal access to self-collection into their clinical care.

METHODS

Semi-structed interviews with 27 general practitioners, nurses, and practice managers from 10 practices in Victoria, Australia conducted between May and August 2022. Interviews were deductively coded, informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. The Diffusion of Innovations theory was used to categorise intention to provide self-collection.

RESULTS

Participants were supportive of universal access to self-collection, citing benefits for screen-eligible people and that it overcame the limited adaptability of the previous policy. Most participants' practices (n = 7, 70%) had implemented or had plans to offer the option for self-collection to all. Participants deliberating whether to provide universal access to self-collection held concerns about the correct performance of the self-test and the perceived loss of opportunity to perform a pelvic examination. Limited time to change practice-level processes and competing demands within consultations were anticipated as implementation barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

The extent to which self-collection can promote equity within the program will be limited without wide-spread adoption by practitioners. Communication and education that addresses concerns of practitioners, along with targeted implementation support, will be critical to ensuring that self-collection can increase participation and Australia's progression towards elimination of cervical cancer.

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.

Perceptions and implications for cervical screening and self-collection: A qualitative exploration of never and under-screened Queensland women

BACKGROUND

Over 70% of cervical cancers are detected in women not currently screening. Queensland Health wanted to better understand the drivers of screening to inform our planning and capitalise on self-collection as an option to reach under-screened women. In 2020 Queensland Health commissioned qualitative research to explore barriers and enablers to cervical screening with never-screened and under-screened women in Queensland (with under-screeners defined as having last screened more than 4 years ago and being more than 2 years overdue). Additionally, the research explored the acceptability of self-collection amongst this cohort.

METHODS

A mixed methods qualitative approach of online focus groups and in-depth interviews was employed. Online focus groups were conducted with under-screeners. In-depth telephone interviews were conducted with never-screeners due to the anticipated personal nature of their reasons for not screening.

RESULTS

A total of 51 Queensland women aged 30 to 50 years participated in the research.

CONCLUSIONS

Queensland women cited several negative experiences and aspects of the current program, as well as barriers in their social and personal lives that limited screening intention and behaviour. Barriers and enablers to cervical screening identified in this research have been classified into four categories: structural, knowledge and attitudinal, social, and personal. The research identified more factors associated with nonparticipation than participation. However, the research did uncover a range of potential enablers to encourage screening, some of which related to the program design. SO WHAT?: The concept of self-collection was broadly well accepted by research participants, particularly by never-screeners. Recommendations resulting from this research include communications, systems, and eligibility changes, particularly regarding the availability and benefits of self-collection.

Implementation of Australia's primary human papillomavirus (HPV) cervical screening program: The STakeholders Opinions of Renewal Implementation and Experiences Study

In this study, we aimed to document stakeholders' experiences of implementing Australia's renewed National Cervical Screening Program. In December 2017, the program changed from 2nd yearly cytology for 20-69 year olds to 5 yearly human papillomavirus (HPV) screening for women 25-74 years. We undertook semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders including government, program administrators, register staff, clinicians and health care workers, non-government organisations, professional bodies, and pathology laboratories from across Australia between Nov 2018 - Aug 2019. Response rate to emailed invitations was 49/85 (58%). We used Proctor et al's (2011) implementation outcomes framework to guide our questions and thematic analysis. We found that stakeholders were evenly divided over whether implementation was successful. There was strong support for change, but concern over aspects of the implementation. There was some frustration related to the delayed start, timeliness of communication and education, shortcomings in change management, lack of inclusion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in planning and implementation, failure to make self-collection widely available, and delays in the National Cancer Screening Register. Barriers centred around a perceived failure to appreciate the enormity of the change and register build, and consequent failure to resource, project manage and communicate effectively. Facilitators included the good will and dedication of stakeholders, strong evidence base for change and the support of jurisdictions during the delay. We documented substantial implementation challenges, offering learnings for other countries transitioning to HPV screening. Sufficient planning, significant and transparent engagement and communication with stakeholders, and change management are critical.

'I'm a bit of a champion for it actually': qualitative insights into practitioner-supported self-collection cervical screening among early adopting Victorian practitioners in Australia

BACKGROUND

Self-collection for cervical screening has been available in the Australian National Cervical Screening Program since 2017 and is now available to all people as an option for cervical screening through a practitioner-supported model. Documenting early adopting practitioner experiences with self-collection as a mechanism to engage people in cervical screening is crucial to informing its continuing roll-out and implementation in other health systems.

AIM

This study aimed to describe the experiences of practitioners in Victoria, Australia, who used human papillomavirus (HPV)-based self-collection cervical screening during the first 17 months of its availability.

METHODS

Interviews (n = 18) with practitioners from Victoria, who offered self-collection to their patients between December 2017 and April 2019, analysed using template analysis.

FINDINGS

Practitioners were overwhelmingly supportive of self-collection cervical screening because it was acceptable to their patients and addressed patients' barriers to screening. Practitioners perceived that knowledge and awareness of self-collection were variable among the primary care workforce, with some viewing self-collection to be inferior to clinician-collected screening. Practitioners championed self-collection at an individual level, with the extent of practice-level implementation depending on resourcing. Concerns regarding supporting the follow-up of self-collected HPV positive patients were noted. Other practical barriers included gaining timely, accurate screening histories from the National Cancer Screening Register to assess eligibility. Practitioners' role surrounded facilitating the choice between screening tests through a patient-centred approach.

Human Papilloma Virus: An Unraveled Enigma of Universal Burden of Malignancies

HPV, or Human Papilloma Virus, has been the primary causative agent of genital warts and cervical cancer worldwide. It is a sexually transmitted infection mainly affecting women of reproductive age group, also infecting men and high-risk group individuals globally, resulting in high mortality. In recent years, HPV has also been found to be the major culprit behind anogenital cancers in both gender and oropharyngeal and colorectal cancers. Few studies have reported the incidence of HPV in breast cancers as well. For a few decades, the burden of HPV-associated malignancies has been increasing at an alarming rate due to a lack of adequate awareness, famine vaccine coverage and hesitancy. The effectiveness of currently available vaccines has been limited to prophylactic efficacy and does not prevent malignancies associated with post-exposure persistent infection. This review focuses on the current burden of HPV-associated malignancies, their causes and strategies to combat the growing prevalence of the cancers. With the advent of new technologies associated with treatment pertaining to therapeutic interventions and employing effective vaccine coverage, the burden of this disease may be reduced in the population.

Pre-Vaccination Human Papillomavirus Genotypes and HPV16 Variants among Women Aged 25 Years or Less with Cervical Cancer

Background: In 2007, Australia introduced a national human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination program. In 2017, the onset of cervical screening changed from 18 to 25 years of age, utilising human papillomavirus (HPV) nucleic acid testing. The objective of the study is to describe the HPV genotypes and HPV16 variants in biopsies from women ≤ 25 years of age with cervical carcinoma (CC) (cases), compared with those aged >25 years (controls), in a pre-vaccination cohort. Methods: HPV genotyping of archival paraffin blocks (n = 96) was performed using the INNO-LiPA HPV Genotyping assay. HPV16-positive samples were analysed for variants by type-specific PCR spanning L1, E2 and E6 regions. Results: HPV16 was the commonest genotype in cases (54.5%, 12/22) and controls (66.7%, 46/69) (p = 0.30), followed by HPV18 (36.3%, 8/22 vs. 17.3% 12/69, respectively) (p = 0.08). Furthermore, 90% (20/22) of cases and 84.1% (58/69) of controls were positive for HPV16 or 18 (p = 0.42); 100% (22/22) of cases and 95.7% (66/69) of controls had at least one genotype targeted by the nonavalent vaccine (p = 0.3). The majority of HPV16 variants (87.3%, 48/55) were of European lineage. The proportion of unique nucleotide substitutions was significantly higher in cases (83.3%, 10/12) compared with controls (34.1%, 15/44), (p < 0.003, χ2, OR 9.7, 95%CI 1.7–97.7). Conclusions: Virological factors may account for the differences in CCs observed in younger compared with older women. All CCs in young women in this study had preventable 9vHPV types, which is important messaging for health provider adherence to new cervical screening guidelines.

"So, if she wasn't aware of it, then how would everybody else out there be aware of it?"-Key Stakeholder Perspectives on the Initial Implementation of Self-Collection in Australia's Cervical Screening Program: A Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

In December 2017, the Australian National Cervical Screening Program transitioned from 2-yearly cytology-based to 5-yearly human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical screening, including a vaginal self-collection option. Until July 2022, this option was restricted to under- or never-screened people aged 30 years and older who refused a speculum exam. We investigated the perspectives and experiences of stakeholders involved in, or affected by, the initial implementation of the restricted self-collection pathway.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 49 stakeholders as part of the STakeholder Opinions of Renewal Implementation and Experiences Study. All interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Data were thematically analysed and coded to the Conceptual Framework for Implementation Outcomes.

RESULTS

Stakeholders viewed the introduction of self-collection as an exciting opportunity to provide under-screened people with an alternative to a speculum examination. Adoption in clinical practice, however, was impacted by a lack of clear communication and promotion to providers, and the limited number of laboratories accredited to process self-collected samples. Primary care providers tasked with communicating and offering self-collection described confusion about the availability, participant eligibility, pathology processes, and clinical management processes for self-collection. Regulatory delay in developing an agreed protocol to approve laboratory processing of self-collected swabs, and consequently initially having one laboratory nationally accredited to process samples, led to missed opportunities and misinformation regarding the pathway's availability.

CONCLUSIONS

Whilst the introduction of self-collection was welcomed, clear communication from Government regarding setbacks in implementation and how to overcome these in practice were needed. As Australia moves to a policy of providing everyone eligible for screening the choice of self-collection, wider promotion to providers and eligible people, clarity around pathology processes and the scaling up of test availability, as well as timely education and communication of clinical management practice guidelines, are needed to ensure smoother program delivery in the future. Other countries implementing self-collection policies can learn from the implementation challenges faced by Australia.

Association between Cervical Microbiota and HPV: Could This Be the Key to Complete Cervical Cancer Eradication?

Simple Summary

The microbiota can modulate immune responses and modify the physiology of the human organism, thereby increasing infective risks and a neoplastic predisposition. In this review, we focus on the composition of the cervical microbiota, to identify the risk of developing Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia and better understand the interaction between cervico-vaginal microbiota and human papillomavirus as a means of promoting the identification of new therapeutic strategies. In fact, no therapy for HPV is yet available. A better understanding of the cervical micro-environment could be a key element allowing complete viral clearance to be achieved in largely affected populations.

Abstract

The heterogeneity of the cervico-vaginal microbiota can be appreciated in various conditions, both pathological and non-pathological, and can vary according to biological and environmental factors. Attempts are still in course to define the interaction and role of the various factors that constitute this community of commensals in immune protection, inflammatory processes, and the onset of precancerous lesions of the cervical epithelium. Despite the many studies on the relationship between microbiota, immunity, and HPV-related cervical tumors, further aspects still need to be probed. In this review article, we will examine the principal characteristics of microorganisms commonly found in cervico-vaginal specimens (i) the factors that notoriously condition the diversity and composition of microbiota, (ii) the role that some families of organisms may play in the onset of HPV-dysplastic lesions and in neoplastic progression, and (iii) possible diagnostic-therapeutic approaches.

National experience in the first two years of primary human papillomavirus (HPV) cervical screening in an HPV vaccinated population in Australia: observational study

OBJECTIVE

To review the first two years of the primary human papillomavirus (HPV) cervical screening programme in an HPV vaccinated population.

DESIGN

Observational study.

SETTING

Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

3 745 318 women with a primary HPV test between 1 December 2017 and 31 December 2019; most women aged <40 years had previously been offered vaccination against HPV16 and HPV18.

INTERVENTIONS

Primary HPV screening with referral if HPV16 or HPV18 (HPV16/18) positive and triage with liquid based cytology testing (threshold atypical squamous cells-cannot exclude high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) for women who were positive for high risk HPV types other than 16/18. A 12 month follow-up HPV test was recommended in triaged women with a negative or low grade cytology result, with referral if they tested positive for any high risk HPV type at follow-up.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Proportion of women who had attended for their first HPV screening test, tested positive, and were referred for colposcopy; and short term risk of detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or worse, CIN grade 3 or worse, or cancer.

RESULTS

54.6% (n=3 507 281) of an estimated 6 428 677 eligible women aged 25-69 had undergone their first HPV test by the end of 2019. Among those attending for routine screening, positivity for HPV16/18 and for HPV types not 16/18 was, respectively, 2.0% and 6.6% in women aged 25-69 (n=3 045 844) and 2.2% and 13.3% in highly vaccinated cohorts of women aged 25-34 (n=768 362). Colposcopy referral (ages 25-69 years) was 3.5%, increasing to an estimated 6.2% after accounting for women who had not yet had a 12 month repeat test. Cervical cancer was detected in 0.98% (456/46 330) of women positive for HPV16/18 at baseline, including 0.32% (89/28 003) of women with HPV16/18 and negative cytology. Women with HPV types not 16/18 and negative or low grade cytology at both baseline and 12 months were at low risk of serious disease (3.4% CIN grade 3 or worse; 0.02% cancer; n=20 019) but estimated to account for 62.0% of referrals for this screening algorithm.

CONCLUSIONS

Colposcopy referral thresholds need to consider underlying cancer risk; on this basis, women with HPV16/18 in the first round of HPV screening were found to be at higher risk regardless of cytology result, even in a previously well screened population. Women with HPV types not 16/18 and negative or low grade cytology showed a low risk of serious abnormalities but constitute most referrals and could be managed safely with two rounds of repeat HPV testing rather than one. HPV16/18 driven referrals were low in HPV vaccinated cohorts.