Search

Objective To investigate the epidemiological characteristics of high-risk human papillomavirus(HR-HPV) infection based on vaginal self-collected samples. Study Design and Setting The pooled data of 3045 self-collected samples used for the analysis derived from four previous studies on cervical cancer screening(The Chinese Multi-Center Screening Trial, CHIMUST; The Shenzhen Cervical Cancer Screening Trial-2, SHENCCAST-2; The Chinese Cervical Cancer Prevention Study, CHIPCAPS; Pingshan trial, PINGSHAN)conducted across China by our team since 2011. These cases were evaluated for HR-HPV type prevalence relative to lesion grade and age. The occurrence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia(CIN) with specific HPV types and the influence of co-infection is explored. Results The top three most common genotypes among the HR-HPV positives were HPV-52(23.4%), HPV-16(18.0%), and HPV-58(15.50%). For women with CIN2+, the most frequent genotypes were HPV-16, 58, 52, and 18 in sequence. HPV-16 accounted for the majority of CIN2/CIN3/Ca with attribution rate of 23.86%, 44.78% and 50.00% respectively. HPV-58 accounted for 19.48%, 16.79% and 13.46% respectively. CIN2+ was found in the following types most frequently: HPV-16(31.23%), HPV-33(24.03%), HPV-58(18.41%), HPV-31(11.76%), HPV-18(7.75%), and HPV-52(7.30%). HPV-16 showed preference for co-infection with HPV-52 and HPV-58. Conclusion The prevalence of HR-HPV infection based on self-sampling among women in China exhibited some unique epidemiologic features.

Cervical cancer is preventable through gynecological screening. To promote participation among non-attending women, self-collected vaginal samples for detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (hr-HPV) is an option. The aims of this study were to investigate the response of self-collected vaginal samples for hr-HPV testing among long-term non-attendees, to explore the attendance at follow-up among HPV-positive women, and to analyze the prevalence of hr-HPV and severe cervical dysplasia or cancer among the responders. A vaginal self-sampling kit was sent to 19,766 women aged 30-70 years who had not provided a cervical screening sample for ≥ 7 years in Skåne, Sweden. The self-sample was analyzed by the Aptima HPV mRNA assay (Hologic). Women testing positive for HPV were invited for follow-up. The response was 18.5% (3,646/19,757). The prevalence of HPV mRNA was 11.3% (412/3,636). Among HPV-positive women, 85.7% (353/412) attended follow-up, and of these, 44.8% (158/353) had HPV in the cervical sample. The HPV mRNA test of self-samples showed a positive predictive value of 9.3% ([33/353], 95% CI = 6.5-12.9) for detection of cytologically severe dysplasia. Histologically severe dysplasia or cancer was detected in 0.88% ([32/3,636], 95% CI = 0.6-1.2) among responders, including two cervical- and one vaginal cancer. In conclusion, almost one fifth of the long-term non-attendees participated in self-collected vaginal hr-HPV sampling. The prevalence of histologically confirmed high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or cervical cancer was not increased significantly compared to regularly screened women in Sweden. The relatively high HPV prevalence among the self-samples indicates the importance of diagnostic follow-up with cervical HPV testing and reflex-cytology of HPV-positive cases.

Background Self-sampling with proper instruction in 35-37 weeks’ gestation is supplementary to clinician sampling to prevent early-onset invasive group B streptococcal disease of infants. Despite of the accuracy proved in previous studies, disputes were raised on pregnant women’s low preference and adherence to the method of swab collection. We aimed to assess the accuracy of self-sampling and influencing factors for preference on collection method in Chinese women. Methods We compared screening results of self-sampling with clinician collection in a sample of 522 women in late pregnancy. These participants needed to complete a questionnaire on their preference and demographics after self-sampling. A multi-nominal logistic regression model was then used to measure the association between the influencing factors and preference for collection method. Results A good agreement between the two collection methods was found with a Cohen’s Kappa coefficient 0.83 (95%CI 0.71-0.95). The prevalence of GBS infection in the two methods is statistically different. Four factors (maternal age, parity, education attainment and pain difference) were included in the final multi-nominal regression model while gestational age and vaginal suppository use were excluded. Non-elderly parturient women were 2.84 (95% CI 1.19-6.74) times more likely to prefer self-sampling compared to clinician sampling, adjusting for parity, education and pain difference. If these participants experienced more or equal pain during self-sampling compared to clinician collection, they were more likely to prefer clinician sampling controlling the other three factors’ effect. Conclusions Our study suggests high agreement between the two collection methods. Self-sampling presented a higher detection rate than physician-collected samples. Pregnant women are able to collect rectovaginal samples prior to their antenatal visit. Self-sampling is preferable by 1/5 of the participants and it could be an option for those younger than 35 years old, especially for those with low pain threshold.

Background: Human papillomavirus (HPV)-based screening is rapidly replacing cytology as the cervical screening modality of choice. In addition to being more sensitive than cytology, it can be done on self-collected vaginal or urine samples. This study will compare the high-risk HPV positivity rates and sensitivity of self-collected vaginal samples using four different collection devices and a urine sample. Methods: A total of 620 women referred for colposcopy were invited to provide an initial stream urine sample collected with the Colli-Pee device and take two vaginal self-samples, using either a dry flocked swab (DF) and a wet dacron swab (WD), or a HerSwab (HS) and Qvintip (QT) device. HPV testing was performed by the BD Onclarity HPV Assay. Results: A total of 600 vaginal sample pairs were suitable for analysis, and 505 were accompanied by a urine sample. Similar positivity rates and sensitivities for CIN2+ and CIN3+ were seen for DF, WD, and urine, but lower values were seen for QT and HS. No clear user preferences were seen between devices, but women found urine easiest to collect, and were more confident they had taken the sample correctly. The lowest confidence in collection was reported for HS. Conclusions: Urine, a DF swab, and WD swab all performed well and were well received by the women, whereas the Qvintip and HerSwab devices were less satisfactory. Impact: This is the first study to compare five self-sampling methods in the same women taken at the same time. It supports wider use of urine or vaginal self-sampling for cervical screening.

The article presents the advantages of screening cervical cancer based on the detection of oncogenic strains of human papillomavirus compare to traditional cytological screening using the PAP test. Self sampling using Aprovix's Qvintip tool (Sweden) allows to increase the percentage of women participating in national population screening programs, which will lead to an improvement in the incidence and mortality rates of the female population from cervical cancer.

Background: Human papillomavirus (HPV)-DNA testing combined with self-sampling could increase cervical cancer screening effectiveness, utilizing a sensitive screening modality and an easy sampling method with minimal pain or discomfort. Self-sampling acceptability, though, is pivotal. Materials and Methods: This study is a nested cross-sectional survey within GRECOSELF, a cross-sectional study on HPV-based screening with self-sampling, aiming at investigating self-sampling acceptability among Greek women residing in rural areas, and the factors affecting it. Women between 25 and 60 years old were recruited by midwives participating in a nationwide midwifery network. Participants, after self-sampling, filled out a questionnaire with three sections, one regarding demographic characteristics, a second with questions pertaining to the participants' cervical cancer screening history, and a third with questions regarding the self-sampling process per se. Results: The sample included 13,111 women. Most participants (67.9%), including those screened or not in the past, would prefer self-sampling if assured that the results are not inferior to standard testing. Discomfort or pain during self-sampling was absent or minimal in 97.1% and 96.5% of the cases, respectively, and 74.4% of the women felt adequately confident that they followed the instructions correctly. Women mostly preferred self-sampling at home compared with health care facilities. Pain and discomfort during the procedure, although rare, were significant factors against acceptance. Most of the women reporting a negative impression had a negative experience with conventional sampling in the past. Conclusion: Self-sampling is highly acceptable. Acceptance can be further improved with proper communication of the process and its noninferiority compared with conventional screening.

In France, cervical cancer screening based on cervical smear has a participation rate of around 60%. New screening strategies are encouraged to increase the participation of under-screened women, including vaginal self-sampling with high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing. This study was based on the distribution of an anonymous self-administered questionnaire to assess the acceptability of vaginal self-sampling with HR-HPV testing by women aged 25 to 65 years in two French Departments of the South of France, Aude, and Hérault, showing low participation in cervical cancer screening. Factors influencing this acceptability were also analyzed. From May to July 2017, 349 completed questionnaires were collected. Women declared high acceptability for vaginal self-sampling (81%) preferably at home (82.6%). Acceptability was statistically higher in the Department of Herault (

Background: Self sampled HPV testing is a cervical cancer screening method . However, cytology in self-sampled specimen cannot be used as a triage test. Therefore, other methods for triage should be considered. CyclinA1 (CCNA1) promoter methylation has strong association with cervical precancerous and cancerous lesion. The objective of this study was to compare the diagnostic value of CCNA1 and self-sampled specimen for detecting high-grade cervical intraepithelial lesions or worse (CIN2+). Materials and Methods: A cross sectional study was conducted. Women with abnormal cytology or positive for high risk HPV (hrHPV) indicated for colposcopic examination were enrolled. Self-collected sampling for hrHPV DNA (SS-HPV) and CCNA1 were performed. hrHPV DNA testing was done by Cobas 4800 method. CCNA1 promoter methylation was detected by CCNA1 duplex methylation specific PCR. Histopathologic result as CIN2+ obtaining from colposcopic directed biopsy or excisional procedure was considered as positive a gold standard. The results of hrHPV and CCNA1 were reported as positive or negative. Sensitivity specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of SS-HPV and CCNA1 were calculated by comparing the results with the gold standard. Results: Two hundreds and eighty women were recruited. High-grade cervical lesions and cervical cancer (CIN2+) were diagnosed in 21.8% (61 cases) of the patients. The most common type of hrHPV was non 16, 18 subtype, followed by HPV16 and 18. CCNA1 was positive in 13 patients out of whom, twelve were CIN2+. Sensitivity of CCNA1 was 19.7 % and its specificity and accuracy were 99.5% and 82.14%, respectively. The sensitivity of SS-HPV was 70.5%, and its specificity and accuracy were 39.2% and 43.3%, respectively. Conclusion: Due to high specificity and positive predictive value of CCNA1, it can be used as alarming sign of having high-grade cervical intraepithelial lesions, especially in patient who has positive hrHPV DNA test based on self-collected sampling.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic demonstrates the need for accurate and convenient approaches to diagnose and therapeutically monitor respiratory viral infections. We demonstrated that self-sampling with mid-nasal foam swabs is well-tolerated and provides quantitative viral output concordant with flocked swabs. Using longitudinal home-based self-sampling, we demonstrate that nasal cytokine levels correlate and cluster according to immune cell of origin. Periods of stable viral loads are followed by rapid elimination, which could be coupled with cytokine expansion and contraction. Nasal foam swab self-sampling at home provides a precise, mechanistic readout of respiratory virus shedding and local immune responses.

Objective Cervical cancer screening participation in China remains insufficient, possibly because of embarrassment or discomfort. We assessed knowledge of HPV and its link to cervical cancer, and whether HPV self-sampling might be an acceptable alternative to clinician-based screening, among Sichuan women. Methods A sample of healthy women undergoing routine physical examinations in 2017 at the West China Hospital, Sichuan University, completed a questionnaire. Results From 3000 questionnaires distributed, 1810 were completed and analyzed. Only 29.94% of respondents ( n = 542) had heard of HPV, among whom 65.75% knew that it caused cervical cancer. Among the 766 (42.32%) who considered that HPV self-sampling for cervical cancer screening was an acceptable option, over 90% thought it would be convenient, private, not embarrassing, and not painful. However, 1044 women (57.68%) did not consider self-sampling acceptable, mainly because the result might not be accurate (85.63%), specimens may have gone bad (83.05%), and they may not perform the test correctly (79.98%). Respondents who believed HPV self-sampling was acceptable were more likely than other respondents to be young, and to have completed at least secondary education. Of the 1810 respondents, 1312 (72.49%) reported that they would be willing to be vaccinated against HPV. Conclusion Most women in Chengdu lack basic knowledge about HPV. Over 40% of women believed HPV self-sampling for cervical cancer screening was an acceptable option. To increase screening coverage, public health efforts to educate the public about HPV and HPV self-sampling for cervical cancer screening should be strengthened and expanded.

Background: Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer in the world. A raised incidence and mortality parallel a low participation rate in screening, namely screening in poor countries and among specific populations of developed countries. Cervical or vaginal self-sampling may increase adherence to screening due to its low costs and elevated sensibility and specificity. Our main goal was to compare self-sampling with physician sampling and to evaluate the participation rate of women formerly non-adherent to cervical cancer screening. Study Design: We identified relevant studies from PubMed. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they fulfilled the following criteria: women aged between 16 and 80 years, poor and developed countries that use self-sampling, women with a low participation rate in screening and studies published since 2013. After fully reading the articles, data were extracted to an Excel sheet to ­display all relevant information in an organized manner. ­Results: We identified 18 studies, which altogether enrolled 22,118 women. Self-sampling and physician sampling are quite similar regarding the HPV detection rate. Women have a low participation rate mainly because of limited access to health services, religious and culture beliefs, and lack of time due to several demanding tasks in daily life. Self-sampling shows a significant increase in acceptability and preference compared to physician sampling. Conclusion: Self-sampling is a reliable method to involve women in opportunistic or organized screening programs for cervical cancer prevention.

Molecular diagnosis on nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) is the current standard for COVID-19 diagnosis, but saliva may be an alternative specimen to facilitate access to diagnosis. We compared analytic performances, feasibility and acceptability of NPS, saliva, and oral-self sampling swab for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). A prospective, multicenter study was conducted in military hospitals in France among adult outpatients attending COVID-19 diagnosis centers or hospitalized patients. For each patient, all samples were obtained and analyzed simultaneously with RT-PCR or transcription-mediated amplification method. Clinical signs, feasibility, and acceptability for each type of sample were collected. A total of 1220 patients were included, corresponding to 1205 NPS and saliva and 771 OS. Compared to NPS, the sensitivity, specificity, and kappa coefficient for tests performed on saliva were 87.8% (95% CI 83.3-92.3), 97.1% (95% CI 96.1-98.1), and 0.84 (95% CI 0.80-0.88). Analytical performances were better in symptomatic patients. Ct values were significantly lower in NPS than saliva. For OS, sensitivity was estimated to be 61.1% (95% CI 52.7-69.4) and Kappa coefficient to be 0.69 (95% CI 0.62-0.76). OS was the technique preferred by the patients (44.3%) before saliva (42.4%) and NPS (13.4%). Instructions were perceived as simple by patients (> 90%) for saliva and OS. Finally, the painful nature was estimated to be 0.9 for OS, on a scale from 0 to 10, and to be 5.3 for NPS. Performances of OS are not sufficient. Saliva is an acceptable alternative to NPS for symptomatic patient but the process required additional steps to fluidize the sample.

BACKGROUND: Human Papilloma Virus (HPV), the causative agent for cervical cancer, can be tested for using self-collected vaginal samples. Self-collection is promising for HPV screening in hard-to-reach populations. To assess the relationship between willingness to self-collect and subsequent uptake of self-collection, we conducted a longitudinal study of reproductive-age women in rural Malawi. METHODS: At baseline, we asked women if they would be willing to self-collect a vaginal sample for HPV testing. At follow-up (12–18 months later), we offered the same women the opportunity to self-collect a sample for HPV testing. We examined unadjusted and adjusted associations between baseline willingness to self-collect a sample for HPV testing and uptake of self-collection at follow-up using log-binomial models. RESULTS: Among 122 women who, at baseline, indicated willingness to self-collect, n=65 (53%) agreed to self-collect a sample at follow-up. Of 64 women who stated unwillingness at baseline to self-collect, n=30 (47%) self-collected a sample for testing at follow-up. We observed no association between women’s willingness at baseline and their observed self-collection decision at follow-up (unadjusted prevalence ratio: 1.14, 95% confidence interval: 0.83–1.55). The association remained non-significant after adjustment for age, awareness of cervical cancer, and perceived behavioral control. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that evaluation of acceptability of self-collection should go beyond simply asking women if they would be willing to self-collect a vaginal sample. Given that half of this study’s participants agreed to self-collect a sample when the opportunity was offered, regardless of their previously stated preferences, self-collection should be offered to everyone.

Objectives To evaluate experiences and reactions after receiving a mailed, unsolicited human papillomavirus self-sampling kit and identify psychosocial correlates of using kits. Methods Survey participants were underscreened women aged 30–64 who were mailed human papillomavirus kits as part of a pragmatic trial at Kaiser Permanente Washington, a United States integrated health care system. Six months after the mailing, we invited kit returners and non-returners to complete a web survey that measured psychosocial factors (e.g. cervical cancer/human papillomavirus knowledge, attitudes toward screening), experiences, and reactions to kits. We compared responses between kit returners and non-returners. Results Comparing 116 kit returners (272 invited) and 119 non-returners (1083 invited), we found no clinically significant differences in psychosocial factors. Overall, survey respondents showed knowledge gaps in human papillomavirus natural history (82% did not know human papillomavirus infection can clear on its own) and interpreting human papillomavirus test results (37% did not know a human papillomavirus-negative result indicates low cancer risk). Kit returners found kits convenient and easy to use (>90%). The most common reason for non-return was low confidence in ability to correctly use a kit, although many non-returners (49%) indicated that they would consider future use. Women reported low trust in human papillomavirus testing to identify women at high risk for cervical cancer (52% in returners, 42% in non-returners). Conclusions Screening programs could improve uptake and acceptability of human papillomavirus self-sampling through outreach materials that emphasize the high efficacy of human papillomavirus testing for cervical cancer screening and educate patients about how to interpret results.

Background Rates of sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening are suboptimal among college women. Self-sampling methods (SSMs) may improve STI screening rates, but critical gaps remain regarding the influential characteristics of SSM to prioritize in intervention development. The purpose of this study was to explore intervention characteristics influencing the decision to adopt SSM among college women. Methods In-depth interviews (n = 24) were conducted with sexually active college women aged 18-24 years to explore preferred intervention characteristics of SSM. Interviews were stratified by screening status (screened or not screened). The instrument was guided by constructs from the Diffusion of Innovation theory and included characteristics of SSM, such as relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, adaptability, and risk and uncertainty. Results Overall, women felt that the SSM was not complex and that the instructions were straightforward. Participants discussed their strong preference for receiving their results via text or e-mail rather than via telephone. In addition, women described their concerns about mailing their sample and described their concern about potential contamination and tampering. The most salient advantage to use of SSM was avoiding an interaction with a health care provider. Conclusions This study contributes to an understanding of the salient intervention characteristics influencing the use of SSM for STI screening, which can be leveraged to improve the health of students and improve rates of screening. Findings can be used to inform the development of a future innovative, theory-based intervention that promotes the use of SSM to improve STI screening rates, and ultimately decrease the burden of STI-related disease.

In Botswana, where human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevalence remains high, cervical cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths in women. Multiple organizations recommend high-risk human papillomavirus (hr-HPV) testing as a screening tool; however, high coverage may not be feasible with provider-collected samples. We conducted the first assessment of self- versus provider-collected samples for hr-HPV testing in HIV-positive women in Botswana and report prevalence of hr-HPV and histological outcomes. We recruited HIV-positive women ≥25 years attending an HIV clinic in Gaborone. Self- and provider-collected samples from participants were tested for hr-HPV using Cepheid GeneXpert. Women testing positive for any hr-HPV returned for colposcopy. We used unweighted κ statistics to determine hr-HPV agreement. We report that 31 (30%) of 103 women tested positive for any hr-HPV. The most common genotypes were HPV 31/33/35/52/58. Overall agreement between self- and provider-collected samples for any hr-HPV was 92% with a κ of 0.80. Ten of the 30 hr-HPV-positive women attending colposcopy had CIN2+ (33%). In conclusion, in this HIV-positive population, there was excellent agreement between self and provider samples, and self-sampling may play an important role in screening programs in high HIV burden settings with limited resources like Botswana.

This study aims to investigate acceptance of vaginal self-sampling for high-risk human papilloma virus (HPV) among long-term screening non-attenders at increased cervical cancer risk and to identify leverage points to promote screening adherence among these women. Forty-three long-term screening non-attenders performed home vaginal self-sampling for HPV, had positive HPV results, and subsequently attended gynecologic examination. Sixteen (37.2%) had high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2 or 3), and two had invasive cervical cancer. Forty-one of these women completed a questionnaire concerning Specific Knowledge about HPV, CIN, and cervical cancer, potential barriers to screening and views about self-sampling. Results were compared with 479 women treated for CIN2+ who attended gynecologic follow-up and also performed self-sampling. Significant multivariate predictors of long-term non-attender status compared with referents were low Specific Knowledge, high confidence in self-sampling, and potential barriers—refraining from activity to attend gynecologic examination, needing another's help to attend, and long travel time. Non-attenders citing fear/refraining from gynecologic examination as why they preferred self-sampling significantly more often had lowest Specific Knowledge compared with other non-attenders. All non-attenders could envision themselves doing self-sampling again while only 74% of referents endorsed this statement (p = 0.0003). We conclude that HPV self-sampling is an acceptable option for women at increased cervical cancer risk who have been long-term screening non-attenders. Educational outreach to enhance Specific Knowledge about HPV, CIN and cervical cancer is critical. Those non-attenders who explicitly avoid gynecologic examinations need special attention. Trial Registry: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02750124

International audience; Vaginal self-sampling and human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing can be useful tools for women with limited access to health care living in sub-Saharan Africa. To assess the feasibility and acceptability of vaginal self-sampling and high-risk HPV prevalence in two villages of central Senegal, women were asked to self-sample vaginal swabs for HPV detection in May, 2016. Vaginal swabs were collected from 133 women and were tested for HPV genotyping. The acceptability rate of vaginal self-sampling was 98.5%, and 99.2% of the women (133/134) used the device correctly. The quality of self-sampling was satisfactory in 100% of the samples; 10.5% of the samples were positive for HPV, including 6% with high-risk HPV types and 4% with low-risk HPV types. This preliminary study indicates that vaginal self-sampling is a valuable strategy for high-risk HPV detection and cervical cancer screening in a population of women not attending gynecologic screening in rural areas of Senegal.

PURPOSE To obtain insight into the feasibility of, and the patients' perspective on, dried blood spot (DBS) self-sampling by patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) using nilotinib. METHODS Sixty-eight patients with CML using nilotinib participated in this multicenter observational study. Patients were asked to perform blood sampling by means of the DBS method at home just before drug intake (trough level) and to complete a questionnaire including demographics and five questions on their experience with DBS self-sampling. RESULTS Sixty-one patients (57.5 ± 15.0 years, 49% female) provided 178 DBS samples of which 137 (77%) proved useful in clinical practice. Twenty percent of the samples were rejected because the spot size was too small for analysis. A further 3% were taken at the wrong time. Unsuitable DBS samples were provided by 23 patients. Their educational level was significantly lower than that of patients whose samples were all suitable (p = 0.041). Patients considered DBS self-sampling easy and not painful, and three quarters of the patients performed DBS sampling without additional assistance. Patients' belief in the reliability of DBS self-sampling was moderate to high. It was preferred over venous sampling by 37% of the patients, whereas 39% had no preference. CONCLUSION DBS self-sampling by CML patients is feasible in clinical practice provided that patients, particularly those with a lower educational level, are adequately instructed about sample collection with emphasis on timing and volume of sample collection.

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

BackgroundThe 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).MethodsInterventional 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.Results383 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 p = 0.18).ConclusionProviding 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.

(1) Background: Earwax might provide the long-term concentration of substances that are altered in chronic diseases. Standardised earwax extraction has to be exclusively performed by clinicians. We investigated the safety, reliability, and tolerance of a novel self-sampling earwax device in comparison with a clinical method, (2) Methods: We compared the reliability between both methods in a longitudinal study. We first cleaned both ears at baseline in 37 controls. Secondly, we obtained a sample a month after by extracting earwax from the right ear with a novel self-sampling device, and from the left ear by using the clinical method. Reliability of both methods was measured by coefficients of variation, (3) Results: The weight of the baseline samples was not significantly different between ear sides. The reliability of the two methods was not significantly different. The self-extraction method removed eight times more earwax than the clinical method. The new method proved to be well tolerated, (4) Conclusions: The novel device was as reliable as the clinical method in sampling earwax. In view of its practicality, safety, tolerability and efficiency, the new method may have clinical applications at a reduced cost.

Serological testing is emerging as a powerful tool to progress our understanding of COVID-19 exposure, transmission and immune response. Large-scale testing is limited by the need for in-person blood collection by staff trained in venepuncture, and the limited sensitivity of lateral flow tests. Capillary blood self-sampling and postage to laboratories for analysis could provide a reliable alternative. Two-hundred and nine matched venous and capillary blood samples were obtained from thirty nine participants and analysed using a COVID-19 IgG ELISA to detect antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Thirty eight out of thirty nine participants were able to self-collect an adequate sample of capillary blood (≥ 50 µl). Using plasma from venous blood collected in lithium heparin as the reference standard, matched capillary blood samples, collected in lithium heparin-treated tubes and on filter paper as dried blood spots, achieved a Cohen’s kappa coefficient of > 0.88 (near-perfect agreement, 95% CI 0.738–1.000). Storage of capillary blood at room temperature for up to 7 days post sampling did not affect concordance. Our results indicate that capillary blood self-sampling is a reliable and feasible alternative to venepuncture for serological assessment in COVID-19.

Introduction Urine self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening is a non-invasive method that offers several logistical advantages and high acceptability, reducing barriers related to low screening coverage. This study developed and evaluated the performance of a low-cost urine self-sampling method for HPV-testing and explored the acceptability and feasibility of potential implementation of this alternative in routine screening. Methods A series of sequential laboratory assays examined the impact of several pre-analytical conditions for obtaining DNA from urine and subsequent HPV detection. Initially, we assessed the effect of ethylaminediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) as a DNA preservative examining several variables including EDTA concentration, specimen storage temperature, time between urine collection and DNA extraction, and first-morning micturition versus convenience sample collection. We further evaluated the agreement of HPV-testing between urine and clinician-collected cervical samples among 95 women. Finally, we explored the costs of self-sampling supplies as well as the acceptability and feasibility of urine self-sampling among women and healthcare workers. Results Our results revealed higher DNA concentrations were obtained when using a 40mM EDTA solution, storing specimens at 25°C and extracting DNA within 72 hrs. of urine collection, regardless of using first-morning micturition or a convenience sampling. We observed good agreement (Kappa = 0.72) between urine and clinician-collected cervical samples for HPV detection. Furthermore, urine self-sampling was an affordable method (USD 1.10), well accepted among cervical cancer screening users, healthcare workers, and decision-makers. Conclusion These results suggest urine self-sampling is feasible and appropriate alternative for HPV-testing in HPV-based screening programs in lower-resource contexts.

Primary screening with human papillomavirus (HPV) test is more effective in reducing cervical cancer incidence than cytology and it also offers the opportunity to self-sample. We conducted a randomized study to compare vaginal self-sampling with cervical sampling by medical professionals for HPV testing concerning prevalence of HPV and detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) or grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) in primary screening. In total, 11 951 women aged 30-60 years were randomized into two groups, 5961 for self-sampling (SS arm) and 5990 for sampling by medical professionals (SMP arm). Sampling was performed with a RoversViba-brush in the SS arm and a cytobrush in the SMP arm. All samples were applied to an indicating FTA elute card and analyzed for HPV using a clinically validated real-time PCR test (hpVIR). All HPV-positive women performed repeated sampling about 6 months later using the same procedure as used initially. All HPV-positive women in the second sampling were referred to colposcopy. The prevalence of HPV in the first test did not differ between the SS arm (6.8%, 167/2466) and the SMP arm (7.8%, 118/1519) (P = .255). The prevalence of CIN2+ per 1000 screened women was 17 (43/2466 × 1000) (95%CI 13-24) in the SS arm and 21 (32/1519 × 1000) (95%CI 15-30) in the SMP arm. For CIN3+, the prevalence per 1000 screened women was 14 (35/2466 × 1000) (95%CI 10-20) in the SS arm and 15 (23/1519 × 1000) (95%CI 10-23) in the SMP arm. In conclusion, self-sampling and sampling by medical professionals showed the same prevalence of HPV and detection rate of CIN2+ and CIN3+ in histology.

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.

This study aimed at assessing the validity of self-collected (self-sampled) oropharyngeal (OP) swabs among healthcare workers compared to those collected by trained sentinel general practitioners (GP-sampled) from individuals with influenza-like illness (ILI), to be implemented in epidemiological studies and/or surveillance programs of viral pathogens involved in community respiratory infections. In our study, OP swabs were collected from adults (>18 years) with ILI during the 2018–2019 influenza season. Two groups of samples were considered: group 1−131 self-sampled OP swabs collected by healthcare workers after being trained on the sampling procedure; group 2−131 GP-sampled OP swabs collected from outpatients by sentinel GPs operating within the Italian Influenza Surveillance Network. To assess swabbing quality, following RNA extraction, each sample was tested for the presence of the human ribonuclease P gene (RNP) by in-house real-time reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Samples with a cycle threshold (Ct) p = 0.10). IVs, RSV, and RV positivity rates were 26.7 vs. 52.7% (p < 0.01), 7.6 vs. 9.9% (p = 0.52), and 21.4 vs. 19.9% (p = 0.76), respectively. Self-sampled OP swabs resulted as valid as GP-sampled OP swabs for molecular detection of respiratory viruses. Self-swabbing can thus be a worthwhile strategy for sample collection to implement molecular surveillance of respiratory pathogens and carry out epidemiological studies, easily reaching a larger population size.

Internet-based testing for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae is a public health service in Sweden. However, knowledge about users of the service is limited. This study examined experiences of using the C. trachomatis/N. gonorrhoeae self-sampling service. Individuals ordering a free-of-charge C. trachomatis/N. gonorrhoeae self-sampling test from an eHealth website in 2018/2019 were invited to complete a questionnaire. Of the 1,785 participants 69.4% were women. The majority of participants (77.1%) were single and heterosexual (88.2%) and 5.3% of samples tested positive. The self-sampling service was appreciated, with > 90% considering it good/very good. The main reason subjects gave for testing was to check their health after unprotected sex (72.9%). Almost half (44.7%) had regretted having sex after alcohol intake. Differences in attitudes were seen between categories: born vs not born in Sweden, employed vs student, single vs married/having a partner. Participants were happy with the self-sampling test service, and sexual risk behaviours motivated use of the test.

ObjectivesTo establish temporal links between vaginal microbiota (VMB) data and incident clinical events, frequent longitudinal vaginal sampling is required. Self-collection of swabs at the participant’s home may be useful to avoid overburdening research clinics and participants. One-off vaginal self-sampling for STI or cervical cancer screening programmes has been shown to be feasible and acceptable to women in multiple studies, including in sub-Saharan Africa, but the feasibility and acceptability of frequent longitudinal vaginal sampling in the context of VMB sequencing studies is unknown.MethodsTwelve participants of a randomised clinical trial in Kigali, Rwanda, self-collected vaginal swabs three times a week for a month. We studied feasibility by comparing DNA concentrations, proportions of samples with >1000 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing reads and VMB composition outcomes of self-collected swabs with clinician-collected swabs. We evaluated the acceptability of self-collection using structured face-to-face interviews and a focus group discussion.ResultsThe participants collected vaginal swabs at 131 different time points. One woman stopped self-sampling after one try due to a social harm. All self-sampled swabs generated >1000 rRNA amplicon sequencing reads, and the DNA concentration of self-sampled swabs and clinician-sampled swabs did not differ significantly (Kruskal-Wallis p=0.484). Self-sampled and clinician-sampled swabs generated similar VMB composition data. Participants reported feeling very comfortable during self-sampling (11/12; 91.7%) and that self-sampling had become easier over time (12/12; 100%). They mentioned reduced travel time and travel costs as advantages of self-sampling at home.ConclusionsFrequent longitudinal vaginal sampling at home is feasible and acceptable to participants, even in the context of a low-resource setting, as long as adequate counselling is provided.Trial registration numberNCT02459665.

ObjectivesIn 2017, to reduce the proportion of men who have sex with men (MSM) in the undiagnosed HIV population in France (38%), HIV screening is advised each 3 months and STI screening is advised each year in multipartner MSM. Despite the range of testing solutions, over 40% of MSM were not tested for HIV and over 50% for STIs in the past year. Based on international experiments that offer screening solutions via online advertising, the French National Health Agency launched a programme (MemoDepistages) to provide a free self-sampling kit (SSK) for HIV and STIs. This article analyses the sociodemographic and behavioural characteristics of MSM in terms of kit acceptance and sample return.MethodsParticipants were registered for the programme online after ordering an SSK. The study included men aged over 18 years, living in one of the four selected French regions, and willing to disclose their postal and email address; they had health insurance, acknowledged more than one male partner in the past year, indicated a seronegative or unknown HIV status and were not taking medically prescribed pre-exposure prophylaxis drugs. Samples were collected by users and posted directly to the laboratory. Characteristics associated with kit acceptance and sample return were analysed using logistic regression.ResultsOverall, 7158 eligible MSM were offered to participate in the programme, with 3428 ordering the kit (47.9%) and 1948 returning their sample, leading to a return rate of 56.8% and an overall participation rate of 27.2%. Acceptance and return rates were strongly associated with sociodemographic characteristics, mainly education level but not with behavioural characteristics. Non-college graduates had lower acceptance (44.2%) and return rates (47.7%).ConclusionThe programme rapidly recruited a large number of MSM. It removed geographical inequalities related to screening access.

Background: Cervical cancer is one of the most common cancers in women and about 90% of cervical cancer can be reduced by regular screening. The Pap smear has been well in place as a primary cervical screening method since 1950s, however, coverage is still not optimal. This study explored the feasibility of HPV self-sampling in two under-screened population groups in Hong Kong (HK): never screened and not regularly screened females, to estimate the uptake rate and preference rate in the future. Materials and Methods: This was a cross-sectional study to explore the acceptability and feasibility of HPV self-sampling in two age groups: aged 25&ndash, 35 and aged &ge, 45, which were reported as the highest proportion of the under-screened population in HK between 2017 and 2018. The study invited eligible women from an HPV study cohort to perform HPV self-sampling at home by themselves. The number of specimens returned from participants was recorded and used to determine the feasibility of HPV self-sampling in the community. The participants were asked to fill in the questionnaires before and after HPV self-sampling to indicate their attitudes, acceptability, and future preference for HPV self-sampling as an acceptable alternative primary cervical cancer screening method. Results: A total of 177 subjects participated in the present study and have achieved a good overall uptake rate of 73% (129/177) who returned the self-collected cervicovaginal sample for HPV testing. Among the under-screened population, there was a higher response rate in aged &ge, 45 than those aged 25&ndash, 35. The findings also revealed that women who were under-screened, including those who have never been screened, were more likely to prefer HPV self-sampling than those who had regular screening. This study found that the acceptability of HPV self-sampling was fairly positive among the respondents. The findings also indicated that HPV self-sampling was not only beneficial to enhance their health awareness but also to promote the cervical cancer screening uptake rate, especially among the under-screened or never screened populations. Conclusions: HPV self-sampling would be a solution to overcome the perceived barriers in clinician-based screening. The findings also indicated that it could be feasible to use as an alternative primary cervical cancer screening.

Background Cervical cancer is preventable by early detection and treatment of pre-cancerous lesions. The current screening policy in Belgium (3-yearly cytology on Pap smears) covers 60% of the target population. Offering self-samples by GPs can overcome barriers for women who are currently not screened. Methods Women aged 25-64 who did not have a Pap smear since three years and consulted a GP practice in a Flemish municipality between November, 2014 and April, 2015 were allocated in a 1:1 ratio to either the intervention arm where women were given a vaginal self-sampling kit or control arm where women were encouraged to make an appointment for having a Pap smear taken by a clinician. Results Eighty-eight consenting women were randomised. 35 (78%) out of 45 women in the self-sampling arm participated in screening compared to 22 (51%) out of 43 women in the control arm (p=0.009). This difference remained significant after adjusting for covariates (age category, education level, time interval since last Pap smear, past Pap smear-taker). Conclusion GPs offering self-sampling kits resulted in a high participation. Larger trials should confirm this effect and evaluate feasibility of this approach.

To facilitate HCV diagnosis, we developed an HCV-RNA testing service, which involved home-sampled dried blood spots (DBS). The main objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of self-sampling at home. Furthermore, to optimise the processing of DBS samples for RNA detection, we evaluated two elution buffers: phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) and L6-buffer. 27 HCV-RNA and 12 HIV-1 RNA positive patients were included. Laboratory spotted DBS (LabDBS) were made by a technician from blood samples drawn at inclusion. Patients received a DBS home-sampling kit and were requested to return their self-sampled DBS (ssDBS) by mail. We compared the RNA load of PBS and L6-eluted labDBS, and of L6-eluted ssDBS, L6-eluted labDBS and plasma. LabDBS load measurements were repeated after 7-13 and 14-21 days to evaluate RNA stability. All 39 plasma samples provided quantifiable RNA loads. In 1/39 labDBS sample, RNA could not be detected (plasma HCV load: 2.98 log10 IU/ml). L6-eluted samples gave a 0.7 log10 and 0.6 log10 higher viral load for HCV and HIV-1 respectively, compared to PBS-eluted samples. Strong correlations were found between labDBS and ssDBS HCV RNA (r = 0.833; mean difference 0.3 log10 IU/mL) and HIV-1 RNA results (r = 0.857; mean difference 0.1 log10 copies/mL). Correlations between labDBS and plasma values were high for HCV (r = 0.958) and HIV-1 (r = 0.844). RNA loads in DBS remained stable over 21 days. Our study demonstrates that self-sampling dried blood spots at home is a feasible strategy for the detection of HCV and HIV-1 RNA. This could facilitate one-step diagnostics and treatment monitoring in communities with high HCV prevalence.

ObjectiveInternet-based testing for Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) with self-sampling at home has gradually been implemented in Sweden since 2006 as a free-of-charge service within the public healthcare system. This study evaluated the national diagnostic outcome of this service.MethodsRequests for data on both self-sampling at home and clinic-based sampling for CT testing were sent to the laboratories in 18 of 21 counties. Four laboratories were also asked to provide data on testing patterns at the individual level for the years 2013–2017.ResultsThe proportion of self-sampling increased gradually from 2013, comprising 22.0% of all CT tests in Sweden in 2017. In an analysis of 14 counties (representing 83% of the population), self-sampling increased by 115% between 2013 and 2017 for women, compared with 71% for men, while test volumes for clinic-based sampling were fairly constant for both sexes (1.8% increase for women, 15% increase for men). In 2017 self-sampling accounted for 20.3% of all detected CT cases, and the detection rate was higher than, but similar to, clinic-based testing (5.5% vs 5.1%). The proportion of self-sampling men was also higher, but similar (33.7% vs 30.8%). Analysis of individual testing patterns in four counties over 5 years showed a higher proportion of men using self-sampling only (67%, n=10 533) compared with women (40%, n=8885).ConclusionsSelf-sampling has increased substantially in recent years, especially among women. This service is at least as beneficial as clinic-based screening for detection of CT, and self-sampling reaches men more than clinic-based testing.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Cervical cancer is associated with poorer diagnosis among the elderly and pap-smear screening has a lower sensitivity. Self-sampling for detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (hr-HPV) may be an alternative screening method. The aim of this study was to analyze the response rate to vaginal HPV self-sampling and the HPV mRNA prevalence among women 69-70 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An HPV self-sampling kit was sent to 1,000 women 69-70 years whom had not taken a cervical smear in ≥5 years. The samples were analyzed by the Aptima HPV mRNA assay. HPV-positive women were recalled for a follow-up examination. RESULTS: The self-sample response rate was 43.3%. The HPV mRNA prevalence was 6.2%. All HPV-positive women attended follow-up. CONCLUSION: HPV self-sampling was accepted among older women. Although the HPV mRNA prevalence was 6.2%, no high-grade cytological abnormalities were found. Larger studies are needed to elucidate hr-HPV self-sampling as a tool to identify older women at risk of cervical cancer. (Less)

We conducted a randomised study to compare vaginal self-sampling with assisted sampling by medical personnel on the cervix for HPV testing in primary screening. The first aim was to determine if th ...

Background To overcome obstacles within the Slovenian organised cervical cancer screening programme, a randomised pilot study of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling among non-attenders was performed, aiming to assess three different screening approaches. Participants and methods Non-attenders aged 30–64 years from two Slovenian regions were randomised to two HPV self-sampling groups–the opt-in (I1, n = 14.400) and the opt-out (I2, n = 9.556), with a control group (P, n = 2.600). Self-collected samples were analysed using the Hybrid Capture 2 assay. HPV-positive women were invited to a colposcopy. The overall and type-specific intention-to-screen response rates and histological outcomes with a positive predictive value (PPV) according to the women’s age, the screening approach, the level of protection resulting from previous screening history, and the region of residence were assessed. Results Of the 26.556 women enrolled, 8.972 (33.8%) responded with self-sample for HPV testing and/or traditional cytology within one year of enrolment. Response rates were 37.7%, 34.0% and 18.4% (p < 0.050) for opt-out, opt-in and control groups. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)2+ was diagnosed in 3.9/1.000, 3.4/1.000, and 3.1/1.000 women (p > 0.050), respectively. PPV of the HPV self-sampling was 12.0% and 9.6% for CIN2+ and CIN3+. The highest PPV was obtained in non-attenders in screening programme for more than 10-years and concordant results of HPV testing with 40.8% for CIN2+ and 38.8% for CIN3+. Conclusions The results of our study show that a high response to HPV self-sampling can be achieved also in an opt-in approach, if women are encouraged to choose between self-sampling at home and screening with gynaecologist. In addition, clinically important risk difference for a high-grade cervical lesion exists in the case of a positive result of HPV testing on self-collected samples, depending on the length of the interval since last screening. Stratified management of these women should be strongly considered. Women who were not screened with cytology for at least 10 years should be referred to immediate colposcopy for histology verification instead to delayed re-testing.

In a cross-sectional study carried out in El Salvador between February 2016 and July 2017, self-sampling and human papillomavirus (HPV) testing was found to be highly acceptable among 2019 women who had not attended a cervical cancer screening in at least 3 years. Within this population, HPV positivity rates differed according to age, marital status, number of children, and lifetime sexual partners. The proportion of women who tested HPV positive or who were diagnosed with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) or more severe diagnoses (CIN2+) was similar to the general population of the area. Among the reasons for failing to participate in previous screening programs, non-attending women described logistic concerns, but also erroneous beliefs regarding HPV and cervical cancer, misconceptions regarding the screening procedure, discomfort with male providers, and confidentiality fears. The aim of this study was to identify opportunities and challenges that emerged from the use of self-sampling and HPV testing as part of a public cervical cancer control effort in a low-resource setting.

Objective To investigate whether self-sampling is as reliable as professional sampling for HPV testing and genotype detection among postmenopausal women. Methods In the present prospective cross-sectional study, women in Orebro County, Sweden, who had high-risk HPV (hrHPV) and normal cytology results in exit screening tests conducted in between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2014, were invited to follow-up screenings between February 24, 2015 and May 15, 2015, that included professional sampling and self-sampling. HPV genotypes were identified by a DNA-based assay that could detect 35 HPV genotypes. Findings between the different sampling methods were compared. Results Of 143 women who participated, 119 returned a self-sample. Completely concordant results were observed in 67 of these samples when both hrHPV and low-risk HPV genotypes were analyzed. Overall, 99 (83.2%) women had the same clinically relevant finding from both sampling methods. Twenty women had discordant hrHPV results (hrHPV detected in 10 self-samples vs 10 professionally collected samples; Cohen κ 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.53-0.80). There was no significant difference between the two sampling methods for clinically significant infections (P>0.99) or extended genotyping (P=0.827). Conclusion Postmenopausal women could be offered self-sampling devices to increase screening-program coverage while maintaining test quality.

Fur Personen, denen Anonymitat wichtig ist, stehen voraussichtlich noch im Lauf des Jahres 2018 HIV-Selbsttests zur Verfugung. Auserdem werden Einsendetests auf HIV und andere sexuell ubertragbare Erkrankungen erprobt.

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

As a new initiative, HPV self-sampling to non-attenders using the dry Evalyn self-sampling brush is offered in the Capital Region of Denmark. The use of a dry brush is largely uncharted territory in terms of analytical stability. In this study we aim to provide evidence on the analytical quality of dry HPV self-sampling brushes as a function of time and temperature. We assessed the analytical stability of dry stored Evalyn brushes at three different temperatures, (4 °C, room temperature, 30 °C) and five different storage time points; T = 0 (baseline), 2, 4, 8, 16, and 32 weeks prior to HPV analysis using the BD Onclarity HPV assay. Mean Ct value of the Onclarity internal control was used as comparator of cellularity across time and temperatures, with no or only borderline statistical differences observed. HPV detection was stable throughout the five time points. In addition, analytically amplifiable DNA copy numbers and DNA fragmentation was assessed using the Agena iPLEX Exome QC assay, with no or only borderline statistical differences observed. In conclusion, the Evalyn brush is analytically stable with respect to human genomic material and HPV detection for up to 32 weeks at temperatures ranging from 4 °C to 30 °C., Highlights • The Capital Region of Denmark is implementing HPV self-sampling using a dry brush. • But how analytically stable is a dry collected self-sampling device? • Stability was established for both human DNA (all, N = 637) and HPV (positives, N = 41). • We found the Evalyn Self-sampling brush stable up to 6 month. • Neither 4 °C nor 30 °C changed the analytical stability of the dry brush.

Cervical cancer rates are disproportionately high among women living with the human immunodeficiency virus (wlhiv). Cervical cancer is preventable through hpv screening, regular Pap tests, and early cancer detection. Evidence indicates that hpv and cervical cancer screening are suboptimal among wlhiv, who face a myriad of access barriers. Considering that screening is an effective first-line defense to cervical cancer, we conducted a scoping review with the aim of gaining a better understanding about: (1) the knowledge and perceptions of hpv and cervical cancer screening among wlhiv, and (2) the acceptability of self-sampling for hpv among wlhiv. We searched five electronic databases for peer-reviewed articles that were published in English within the last ten years, reported on studies with hiv-positive women who were aged 16 or older, and satisfied the topics of the review. A total of 621 articles were found. After accounting for duplicates and unmet criteria, 17 articles and 1 abstract, reporting on studies in the United States and Africa, were included in this review. The review highlighted that most wlhiv had inadequate knowledge of hpv transmission and cervical cancer prevention, which influenced their perceptions of risk and susceptibility. Screening barriers included misconceptions about Pap tests, fear of diagnosis of serious illness, perceived pain, embarrassment, bodily modesty, and limited access to female health care providers. This review also affirms that self-sampling is an acceptable and promising screening option for wlhiv. Implications for policy, research, and practice are discussed.

Screening for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) outside of traditional health-care facilities is limited by the privacy needed for sample collection. We explored the acceptability of privacy shelters for the self-collection of genital swabs and tested the use of privacy shelters during mobile STI screening. Attendees ≥14 years old at two outdoor community events completed a questionnaire that assessed participant characteristics, health-care access, and rating of acceptability of self-collecting penile or vaginal swabs in a privacy shelter and four other private spaces: portable restroom, health van, home, and doctor’s office. A privacy shelter was used during mobile STI screening. The majority (65%) of the 95 participants reported that using a privacy shelter was somewhat or very acceptable. No participant characteristics or health-care access factors were associated with the acceptability of privacy shelters. Women rated a privacy shelter more acceptable than a portable restroom or health van. Men rated a privacy shelter more acceptable than a portable restroom. During mobile STI screening, all 13 men and women who requested STI testing used the privacy shelter for self-sampling. Rating of acceptability before and after privacy shelter use was the same. Privacy shelters may enable STI screening without using a building or vehicle for sample collection.

Contains fulltext : 177357.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) In 2017 the cervical cancer screening program in The Netherlands will be revised. Cervical smears will primarily be tested for the presence of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) instead of cytology, and vaginal self-sampling will be offered to non-responders. This includes a potential risk that part of the women who would otherwise opt for a cervical smear will wait for self-sampling. However, self-sampling for hrHPV in a responder population has never been studied yet. The aim of this study was to investigate the applicability and accuracy of self-sampling in detecting hrHPV in a screening responder population. A total of 2049 women, aged 30-60years, participating in the screening program in The Netherlands were included from April 2013 to May 2015. After they had their cervical smear taken, women self-collected a cervicovaginal sample with a brush-based device, the Evalyn Brush. Both the cervical smear and self-sample specimen were tested with the COBAS 4800 HPV platform. The hrHPV prevalence was 8.0% (95% CI 6.9-9.2) among the physician-taken samples, and 10.0% (95% CI 8.7-11.3) among the self-samples. There was 96.8% (95% CI 96.0-97.5) concordance of hrHPV prevalence between self-samples and physician-taken samples. Women in our study evaluated self-sampling as convenient (97.1%), user-friendly (98.5%), and 62.8% preferred self-sampling over a physician-taken sampling for the next screening round. In conclusion, self-sampling showed high concordance with physician-taken sampling for hrHPV detection in a responder screening population and highly acceptable to women. Implementation of HPV-self-sampling for the responder population as a primary screening tool may be considered.

Background: The aim of this study is to evaluate whether self-sampling can increase screening attendance of women who do not attend regular screening in Switzerland. Methods: Participants were proactively recruited in Geneva between September 2011 and November 2015. Women (25–69 years) who had not undergone CC screening in the last 3 years were considered eligible. Through a 1 : 1 ratio randomisation, enrolled participants were invited to either undergo liquid-based cytology, which was performed by a health-care provider (control group, CG) or to take a self-sample for HPV-testing, which was mailed to their home (intervention group, IG). Results: A total of 331 and 336 women were randomised in the CG and in the IG, respectively. Overall, 7.3% (95% CI: 4.9–10.6) women in the CG and 5.7% (95% CI: 3.6–8.7) women in the IG did not undergo the initial screening (P=0.400). There were 1.95% (95% CI: 0.8–4.3) women in the CG and 5.05% (95% CI: 3.1–8.1) women in the IG with a positive screen who did not attend triage and colposcopy (P=0.036). Conclusions: The participation in CC screening in women offered self-sampling was not higher than among those offered specimen collection by a clinician. Compliance with further follow-up for women with a positive HPV test on the self-sample requires further attention.

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

We conducted an online survey to examine the preferences for receiving a text message with results of a test for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) as part of online self-sampling service at Solent NHS Trust. Findings showed that if all tests were negative, participants would prefer to receive one text message. However, in the event of a positive result, a large majority (86%) would prefer to receive a separate text with the name of the STI for which the test was positive. Similarly, three-quarters (74%) of participants would prefer to receive multiple texts indicating which test was inconclusive and required an additional sample. The results of this survey support a change of practice to sending multiple text messages with the results of online self-sampling that include the names of STIs.

Indigenous women have higher rates of cervical cancer and cervical cancer mortality compared to non-Indigenous women, as well as unique challenges to accessing screening services. Human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling has been demonstrated as an effective measure to reach under-screened women. A scoping review identified 19 sources matching selection criteria through a systematic search of PubMed and Scopus completed in May 2018. Analysis revealed that this is a limited field of research; albeit one that has undergone growth in the last 7 years. HPV self-sampling is identified as easy, convenient, comfortable and private and is often preferred over Papanicolaou (Pap) testing. Despite largely positive experiences, several studies indicated that some women lacked confidence in their ability to adequately self-sample. HPV self-sampling may be an effective intervention where Pap testing adherence is low but should include supporting resources and community input so as to best tailor implementations to each community.

The objective of this study was to evaluate a service improvement project offering HIV testing through either self-testing or self-sampling in an online sexual health service by measuring type of test chosen and the reason for this choice. We created a web-page offering choice of online self-sampling or self-testing with information on the advantages and disadvantages of both methods. Anyone aged over 18 years resident in England, Scotland or Wales could order either type of test. We describe the characteristics of users, the tests chosen and the reasons for the choice. A total of 1502 HIV testing orders were placed and 1466 (97.6%) testing kits were dispatched after exclusion of multiple orders by the same user. Sixty-seven per cent of users chose self-testing (n = 984) and the rest chose self-sampling (n = 482, 32.9%). The most frequent reasons for choosing self-testing were: immediate results (n = 264, 46.9%), ability to complete the test themselves (n = 168, 29.8%), less blood required (n = 67, 11.9%) and the privacy of testing at home (n = 55, 9.8%). Public sector provision of self-testing as an adjunct to clinic-based HIV testing services is likely to be highly acceptable to UK populations. However, a proportion will prefer self-sampling, and maintaining choice of testing modality is important.