TY - JOUR
T1 - Equal prevalence of severe cervical dysplasia by HPV self-sampling and by midwife-collected samples for primary HPV screening
T2 - A randomised controlled trial
AU - Hellsten, Caroline
AU - Ernstson, Avalon
AU - Bodelsson, Gunilla
AU - Forslund, Ola
AU - Borgfeldt, Christer
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - Objectives HPV self-sampling is an option for cervical screening. The aim of this randomised study was to investigate the compliance, prevalence of HPV, and prevalence of severe dysplasia in a vaginal self-sampling group in comparison to cervical samples collected by midwives (control arm). The hypothesis was that there would be no difference between vaginal self-sampling and cervical sampling to find high-grade cervical dysplasia or cancer. Methods Vaginal HPV self-sampling kits were sent by regular mail to 14 765 randomly selected women aged 30-64 years old in the screening programme. HPV-positive women were invited for a follow-up examination by their midwife in which they provided a cervical sample for cytological and HPV co-testing. The control arm consisted of 14 839 women who met the same inclusion criteria and were invited to have cervical sampling by midwives for primary HPV screening. All HPV samples were analysed by the Aptima HPV assay (Hologic Inc.). Main results The participation rate was 33.5% in the self-sampling arm and 47.5% in the cervical sampling arm, (P < 0.0001). HPV was detected in 17.1% (95% confidence interval (CI), 16.1-18.23%) in the self-sampling arm and 4.5% (95% CI, 4.0-5.0%) in the cervical sampling arm. Histological, severe dysplasia was observed among 0.48% (95% CI, 0.3-0.72%) and 0.47% (95% CI, 0.3-0.66%) of the self-sampling and the cervical sampling groups, respectively. Conclusion The self-sampling approach detects a similar proportion of severe dysplasia as regular screening. Thus, our study indicates that self-sampling could replace primary HPV screening of cervical samples.
AB - Objectives HPV self-sampling is an option for cervical screening. The aim of this randomised study was to investigate the compliance, prevalence of HPV, and prevalence of severe dysplasia in a vaginal self-sampling group in comparison to cervical samples collected by midwives (control arm). The hypothesis was that there would be no difference between vaginal self-sampling and cervical sampling to find high-grade cervical dysplasia or cancer. Methods Vaginal HPV self-sampling kits were sent by regular mail to 14 765 randomly selected women aged 30-64 years old in the screening programme. HPV-positive women were invited for a follow-up examination by their midwife in which they provided a cervical sample for cytological and HPV co-testing. The control arm consisted of 14 839 women who met the same inclusion criteria and were invited to have cervical sampling by midwives for primary HPV screening. All HPV samples were analysed by the Aptima HPV assay (Hologic Inc.). Main results The participation rate was 33.5% in the self-sampling arm and 47.5% in the cervical sampling arm, (P < 0.0001). HPV was detected in 17.1% (95% confidence interval (CI), 16.1-18.23%) in the self-sampling arm and 4.5% (95% CI, 4.0-5.0%) in the cervical sampling arm. Histological, severe dysplasia was observed among 0.48% (95% CI, 0.3-0.72%) and 0.47% (95% CI, 0.3-0.66%) of the self-sampling and the cervical sampling groups, respectively. Conclusion The self-sampling approach detects a similar proportion of severe dysplasia as regular screening. Thus, our study indicates that self-sampling could replace primary HPV screening of cervical samples.
KW - cervical cancer
KW - HPV
KW - human papillomavirus
KW - self-sampling
KW - vaginal human papillomavirus
U2 - 10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000693
DO - 10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000693
M3 - Article
C2 - 34010238
AN - SCOPUS:85108021370
SN - 0959-8278
VL - 30
SP - 334
EP - 340
JO - European Journal of Cancer Prevention
JF - European Journal of Cancer Prevention
IS - 4
ER -