BACKGROUND: Little is known about the performance of physician-versus self-collected specimens for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) messenger RNA (mRNA) testing or risk factors for hrHPV mRNA positivity in physician- versus self-collected specimens. We compared the performance of hrHPV mRNA testing of physician- and self-collected specimens for detecting cytological high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or more severe (≥HSIL) and examined risk factors for hrHPV mRNA positivity in female sex workers in Nairobi. METHODS: From 2009 to 2011, 344 female sex workers participated in this cross-sectional study. Women self-collected a cervicovaginal specimen. A physician conducted a pelvic examination to obtain a cervical specimen. Physician- and self-collected specimens were tested for hrHPV mRNA and sexually transmitted infections using APTIMA nucleic acid amplification assays (Hologic/Gen-Probe Incorporated, San Diego, CA). Cervical cytology was conducted using physician-collected specimens and classified according to the Bethesda criteria. RESULTS: Overall hrHPV mRNA prevalence was similar in physician- and self-collected specimens (30% vs. 29%). Prevalence of ≥HSIL was 4% (n = 15). Overall sensitivity of hrHPV testing for detecting ≥HSIL was similar in physician-collected (86%; 95% CI, 62%-98%; 13 cases detected) and self-collected specimens (79%; 95% CI, 55%-95%; 12 cases detected). Overall specificity of hrHPV mRNA for ≥HSIL was similar in both physician-collected (73%; 95% CI, 68%-79%) and self-collected (75%; 95% CI, 70%-79%) specimens. High-risk HPV mRNA positivity in both physician- and self-collected specimens seemed higher in women who were younger (<30 years), had Trichomonas vaginalis or Mycoplasma genitalium infections, or had more than 8 years of educational attainment. CONCLUSIONS: Self-collected specimens for hrHPV mRNA testing seemed to have similar sensitivity and specificity as physician-collected specimens for the detection of ≥HSIL among high-risk women.
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the performance of physician-versus self-collected specimens for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) messenger RNA (mRNA) testing or risk factors for hrHPV mRNA positivity in physician- versus self-collected specimens. We compared the performance of hrHPV mRNA testing of physician- and self-collected specimens for detecting cytological high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or more severe (≥HSIL) and examined risk factors for hrHPV mRNA positivity in female sex workers in Nairobi. METHODS: From 2009 to 2011, 344 female sex workers participated in this cross-sectional study. Women self-collected a cervicovaginal specimen. A physician conducted a pelvic examination to obtain a cervical specimen. Physician- and self-collected specimens were tested for hrHPV mRNA and sexually transmitted infections using APTIMA nucleic acid amplification assays (Hologic/Gen-Probe Incorporated, San Diego, CA). Cervical cytology was conducted using physician-collected specimens and classified according to the Bethesda criteria. RESULTS: Overall hrHPV mRNA prevalence was similar in physician- and self-collected specimens (30% vs. 29%). Prevalence of ≥HSIL was 4% (n = 15). Overall sensitivity of hrHPV testing for detecting ≥HSIL was similar in physician-collected (86%; 95% CI, 62%-98%; 13 cases detected) and self-collected specimens (79%; 95% CI, 55%-95%; 12 cases detected). Overall specificity of hrHPV mRNA for ≥HSIL was similar in both physician-collected (73%; 95% CI, 68%-79%) and self-collected (75%; 95% CI, 70%-79%) specimens. High-risk HPV mRNA positivity in both physician- and self-collected specimens seemed higher in women who were younger (<30 years), had Trichomonas vaginalis or Mycoplasma genitalium infections, or had more than 8 years of educational attainment. CONCLUSIONS: Self-collected specimens for hrHPV mRNA testing seemed to have similar sensitivity and specificity as physician-collected specimens for the detection of ≥HSIL among high-risk women.
Authors: Nadja Vielot; Michael G Hudgens; Nelly Mugo; Michael Chitwa; Joshua Kimani; Jennifer Smith Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Jennifer E Cameron; Anne F Rositch; Nadja A Vielot; Nelly R Mugo; Jessie K L Kwatampora; Wairimu Waweru; Aubrey E Gilliland; Michael E Hagensee; Jennifer S Smith Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Brandon L Guthrie; Anne F Rositch; Joy Alison Cooper; Carey Farquhar; Rose Bosire; Robert Choi; James Kiarie; Jennifer S Smith Journal: Sex Transm Infect Date: 2020-01-09 Impact factor: 3.519
Authors: Jessica Yasmine Islam; Michael M Mutua; Emmanuel Kabare; Griffins Manguro; Michael G Hudgens; Charles Poole; Andrew F Olshan; Stephanie B Wheeler; R Scott McClelland; Jennifer S Smith Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2020-07 Impact factor: 3.868
Authors: Lauren G Johnson; Allison Armstrong; Caroline M Joyce; Anne M Teitelman; Alison M Buttenheim Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2018-02-09 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Derek C Johnson; Madhav P Bhatta; Jennifer S Smith; Mirjam-Colette Kempf; Thomas R Broker; Sten H Vermund; Eric Chamot; Shilu Aryal; Pema Lhaki; Sadeep Shrestha Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-06-30 Impact factor: 3.240