Search

This article examines human papillomavirus (HPV) self‐sampling as an approach to cervical cancer prevention and the ways self‐sampling kits are promoted directly to consumers in the United States. Public health, biomedicine and health tech have increasingly imagined self‐sampling, which allows individuals to collect their own vaginal specimen, mail to a laboratory for testing and receive delivered results, as a component of cervical cancer prevention and sexual health promotion. This article examines the scientific and biomedical claims used to configure the problem in need of this solution and the ways persons, publics and markets are established. We analyse scientific literature, interviews with clinicians and other key actors, and websites of directly to consumers (DTC) companies. HPV self‐sampling is constructed as both a solution to inequities and gaps in cervical cancer screening and a solution to the wants and needs of those already engaged in self‐projects of body monitoring and risk reduction. These multidirectional biomedical tendencies also reveal how sexuality and sexual health and cervical cancer prevention and sexual health promotion are entangled objects. While we do not want to undermine the potential of HPV self‐sampling, we encourage a focus on equity and care and not commodified markets that reinforce notions of 'good' patients monitoring their health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the feasibility and acceptability of HPV self‐sampling in Arusha region, northern Tanzania, because the ability for women to self‐collect HPV samples can help reduce the number of health facility visits and improve cervical cancer screening coverage rates. Methods: We conducted a facility‐ and community‐based cross‐sectional study among 350 women aged 25–55 years in Arumeru district, Arusha region, northern Tanzania. Women were trained to self‐collect an HPV sample, and follow‐up visits were used to provide results after laboratory testing. Data were analyzed using Stata version 15.1 and summarized using mean and standard deviation for numeric variables and frequencies and percentages for categorical variables. Results: Among 350 women, 65 (18.6%) ever screened for cervical cancer, all provided self‐collected samples, and 349 (99.4%) would advise their female friends to undergo the same procedure. The prevalence of positive HPV results was 31 (8.9%), of which 26 (83.9%) were further examined. Two women found with lesions were treated following the national guidelines. Conclusion: This study has demonstrated that the HPV self‐sampling intervention for cervical cancer screening is a feasible and acceptable intervention, especially in resource‐limited countries like Tanzania. Scaling‐up policies should consider addressing the potential barriers to the uptake of this intervention. Synopsis: This study has demonstrated that the HPV self‐sampling intervention for cervical cancer screening is a feasible and acceptable intervention, especially in resource‐limited countries like Tanzania. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Today in France, low attendance to cervical screening by Papanicolaou cytology (Pap-smear) is a major contributor to the 3,000 new cervical cancer cases and 1,000 deaths that occur from this disease every year. Nonattenders are mostly from lower socioeconomic groups and testing of self-obtained samples for high-risk Human Papilloma virus (HPV) types has been proposed as a method to increase screening participation in these groups. In 2011, we conducted a randomized study of women aged 35-69 from very low-income populations around Marseille who had not responded to an initial invitation for a free Pap-smear. After randomization, one group received a second invitation for a free Pap-smear and the other group was offered a free self-sampling kit for HPV testing. Participation rates were significantly different between the two groups with only 2.0% of women attending for a Pap-smear while 18.3% of women returned a self-sample for HPV testing ( p ≤ 0.001). The detection rate of high-grade lesions (≥CIN2) was 0.2‰ in the Pap-smear group and 1.25‰ in the self-sampling group ( p = 0.01). Offering self-sampling increased participation rates while the use of HPV testing increased the detection of cervical lesions (≥CIN2) in comparison to the group of women receiving a second invitation for a Pap-smear. However, low compliance to follow-up in the self-sampling group reduces the effectiveness of this screening approach in nonattenders women and must be carefully managed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]