Rural-urban differences in HPV testing for cervical cancer screening

Factors contributing to differences in cervical cancer screening in rural and urban community health centers

INTRODUCTION

Community health centers (CHCs) provide historically marginalized populations with primary care, including cancer screening. Previous studies have reported that women living in rural areas are less likely to be up to date with cervical cancer screening than women living in urban areas. However, little is known about rural-urban differences in cervical cancer screening in CHCs and the contributing factors, and whether such differences changed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Using 8-year pooled Uniform Data System (2014-2021) data and Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition, the extent to which CHC- and catchment area-level characteristics explained rural-urban differences in up-to-date cervical cancer screening was estimated.

RESULTS

Up-to-date cervical cancer screening was lower in rural CHCs than urban CHCs (38.2% vs 43.0% during 2014-2019), and this difference increased during the pandemic (43.5% vs 49.0%). The rural-urban difference in cervical cancer screening in 2014-2019 was mostly explained by differences in CHC-level proportions of patients with limited English proficiency (55.9%) or income below the poverty level (12.3%) and females aged 21 to 64 years (9.8%), and catchment area-level's unemployment (3.4%) and primary care physician density (3.2%). However, Medicaid (-48.5%) or no insurance (-19.6%) counterbalanced the differences between rural-urban CHCs. The contribution of these factors to rural-urban differences in cervical cancer screening generally increased in 2020-2021.

CONCLUSIONS

Rural-urban differences in cervical cancer screening were mostly explained by multiple CHC-level and catchment area-level characteristics. The findings call for tailored interventions, such as providing resources and language services, to improve cancer screening utilization among uninsured, Medicaid, and patients with limited English proficiency in rural CHCs.

Geographic variation of HPV-associated cancer incidence in Kentucky using spatial scan statistics

PURPOSE

Populations with high cancer risk that are targeted for screening, education, and vaccination have been shown to increase rates of screening, which ultimately may improve timing of diagnosis and overall outcome for certain cancers. Spatial scan analysis provides a visual representation of areas with higher rates of disease. Limited research has used this methodology to assess HPV-associated cancers. Using, spatial scan statistics, our goal was to identify regions within Kentucky having significantly higher rates of HPV-associated tumors. These regions can be targeted for public health efforts in the form of education, vaccination, screening, and physician recruitment.

METHODS

The Kentucky Cancer Registry data from 1995 to 2016 and spatial scan statistics were used to identify county-level clusters with high-incidence of HPV-associated cancers after adjustment for age and sex. Anatomic sites included in this analysis were oropharynx, cervix, anus, penis, and vulva.

RESULTS

There was one high-rate cluster of oropharyngeal cancer, which was observed in the Louisville metropolitan region (Relative Risk [RR] = 1.24, p < 0.001). One high-rate cluster of anal and penile cancer incidence in men was identified that partially overlapped with the oropharyngeal cluster. There were five clusters of higher cervical, vulvar, and anal cancer incidence in females, one of which overlapped with the oropharyngeal cluster.

CONCLUSION

Overlapping clusters of HPV-associated cancers were identified at the county-level and included both urban and rural counties of Kentucky. Findings can assist in the design of public health interventions to increase screenings, promote vaccination, and recruit physicians in these regions to improve prevention, diagnosis, and early treatment of HPV-associated cancers.

Rural/urban differences in rates and predictors of intimate partner violence and abuse screening among pregnant and postpartum United States residents

OBJECTIVE

To describe rates and predictors of perinatal intimate partner violence (IPV) and rates and predictors of not being screened for abuse among rural and urban IPV victims who gave birth.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING

This analysis utilized 2016-2020 Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) data from 45 states and three jurisdictions.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective, cross-sectional study using multistate survey data.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

This analysis included 201,413 survey respondents who gave birth in 2016-2020 (n = 42,193 rural and 159,220 urban respondents). We used survey-weighted multivariable logistic regression models, stratified by rural/urban residence, to estimate adjusted predicted probabilities and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for two outcomes: (1) self-reported experiences of IPV (physical violence by a current or former intimate partner) and (2) not receiving abuse screening at health care visits before, during, or after pregnancy.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Rural residents had a higher prevalence of perinatal IPV (4.6%) than urban residents (3.2%). Rural respondents who were Medicaid beneficiaries, 18-35 years old, non-Hispanic white, Hispanic (English-speaking), or American Indian/Alaska Native had significantly higher predicted probabilities of experiencing perinatal IPV compared with their urban counterparts. Among respondents who experienced perinatal IPV, predicted probabilities of not receiving abuse screening were 21.3% for rural and 16.5% for urban residents. Predicted probabilities of not being screened for abuse were elevated for rural IPV victims who were Medicaid beneficiaries, 18-24 years old, or unmarried, compared to urban IPV victims with those same characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

IPV is more common among rural birthing people, and rural IPV victims are at higher risk of not being screened for abuse compared with their urban peers. IPV prevention and support interventions are needed in rural communities and should focus on universal abuse screening during health care visits and targeted support for those at greatest risk of perinatal IPV.

Exploratory Analysis of Concordance Between Clinician-Collected and Self-Sampled Human Papillomavirus Tests in a Small Cohort of Average- and High-Risk Patients

Objectives

Cervical cancer screening rates have stagnated, but self-sampling modalities have the potential to increase uptake. This study compares the test characteristics of self-sampled high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) tests with clinician-collected hrHPV tests in average-risk (i.e., undergoing routine screening) and high-risk patients (i.e., receiving follow-up after abnormal screening results).

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, a relatively small cohort of average-risk (n = 35) and high-risk (n = 12) participants completed both clinician-collected and self-sampled hrHPV testing, along with a brief phone survey. We assessed hrHPV positivity, concordance, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), sensitivity, and specificity across both methods (for types 16, 18, or other hrHPV). We also explored the relationship between test concordance and sociodemographic/behavioral factors.

Results

Among average-risk participants, hrHPV positivity was 6% for both test methods (i.e., hrHPV-positive cases: n = 2), resulting in reported concordance, PPV, NPV, sensitivity, and specificity of 100%. Among high-risk participants, hrHPV positivity was 100% for clinician-collected tests but only 67% for self-sampled tests, showing varied concordance and sensitivity. Concordance was not associated with sociodemographic or behavioral factors.

Conclusions

Self-sampled hrHPV testing demonstrated high accuracy for average-risk patients in this exploratory study. However, its performance was less consistent in high-risk patients who had already received an abnormal screening result, which could be attributed to spontaneous viral clearance over time. The limited number of participants, particularly HPV-positive cases, suggests caution in interpreting these results. Further research with larger cohorts is necessary to validate these findings and to explore the integration of self-sampled hrHPV testing into routine clinical care, particularly for patients with a history of cervical abnormalities.

Clinical Trial Registration

NCT04591977, NCT04585243.

Health inequities in human papillomavirus prevention, diagnostics and clinical care in the USA: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Human papillomavirus (HPV) represents the most common STI in the USA. HPV inequities in prevention, diagnostics and clinical care persist. We define inequities as systematic, avoidable and unfair differences in health outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this scoping review are to chart existing data on HPV-related inequities, identify gaps in existing literature and guide future research to reduce these inequities.

METHODS

We completed a scoping review following guidelines from the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses scoping reviews extension. We performed a literature search on PubMed and Ovid Embase in July 2022 for articles pertaining to HPV and evaluating populations within the USA. We included English language publications from 2018 to 2022 evaluating at least one health inequity outlined by the National Institutes of Health. General publication characteristics and health inequity data were charted in a masked, duplicate fashion using a pilot-tested Google Form. We analysed frequencies of health inequities and summarised main findings from included studies.

RESULTS

Our final sample included 170 publications. The most common inequities examined were race/ethnicity (140 studies), sex or gender (97 studies), and income (69 studies). Many historically marginalised racial/ethnic groups had lower rates of HPV-related knowledge, vaccination and worse overall outcomes related to HPV. Compared with women, men had lower rates of HPV vaccination and provider recommendation, and higher rates of HPV-infection. Results regarding income were largely conflicting.

CONCLUSION

Findings from our review demonstrate clear gaps in HPV-related inequity research. Vaccine completion, provider recommendation and intersectionality should continue to be evaluated to implement targeted interventions.

Utility of Scoring System for Screening and Early Warning of Cervical Cancer Based on Big Data Analysis

Objective

To explore the utility of the scoring system for screening and early warning of cervical cancer based on big data analysis.

Methods

A total of 420 women undergoing physical examination in Shenyang from January 2021 to January 2022 were screened by convenient sampling as the study subjects. All females accepted the human papilloma virus (HPV) tests and thin-prep cytology test (TCT), a Rating Questionnaire for Screening and Early Warning of Cervical Cancer was developed, and a warning threshold was derived according to the scores of the questionnaire and the goodness of fit for the results of HPV+TCT tests. The patients were graded according to the threshold, and corresponding intervention strategies for patients of different grades were developed.

Results

Among the 420 people undergoing physical examination, 92 (21.90%) obtained scores ≥8 points, and 328 (78.10%) obtained scores < 8 points; in diagnosing cervical cancer, the Rating Questionnaire for Screening and Early Warning of Cervical Cancer had an AUC value of 0.848, specificity of 97.22%, and sensitivity of 86.46%; after scientific intervention, HPV test results showed a significant decrease in both high-risk positive cases and low-risk positive cases (p < 0.05), and TCT results showed that there was a significant difference in the number of patients with CIN I before and after intervention (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

The scoring system for screening and early warning of cervical cancer based on big data analysis presents certain clinical value in the clinical screening of cervical cancer, which can further improve the screening coverage, is of great significance for the diagnosis and treatment of disease, and helps physician implement hierarchical diagnosis and treatment quickly and precisely.

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.

Cancer Screening among Rural People Who Use Drugs: Colliding Risks and Barriers

Rural cancer disparities are associated with lesser healthcare access and screening adherence. The opioid epidemic may increase disparities as people who use drugs (PWUD) frequently experience healthcare-associated stigmatizing experiences which discourage seeking routine care. Rural PWUD were recruited to complete surveys and interviews exploring cancer (cervical, breast, colorectal, lung) risk, screening history, and healthcare experiences. From July 2020–July 2021 we collected 37 surveys and 8 interviews. Participants were 24.3% male, 86.5% White race, and had a mean age of 44.8 years. Females were less likely to report seeing a primary care provider on a regular basis, and more likely to report stigmatizing healthcare experiences. A majority of females reporting receiving recommendations and screens for cervical and breast cancer, but only a minority were adherent. Similarly, only a minority of males and females reported receiving screening tests for colorectal and lung cancer. Screening rates for all cancers were substantially below those for the US generally and rural areas specifically. Interviews confirmed stigmatizing healthcare experiences and suggested screening barriers and possible solutions. The opioid epidemic involves millions of individuals and is disproportionately experienced in rural communities. To avoid exacerbating existing rural cancer disparities, methods to engage PWUD in cancer screening need to be developed.