Literature DB >> 27434147

Direct comparison of two vaginal self-sampling devices for the detection of human papillomavirus infections.

M Jentschke1, K Chen2, M Arbyn3, B Hertel4, M Noskowicz4, P Soergel4, P Hillemanns4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Two devices for vaginal self-sampling of dry cell material (Evalyn Brush, Rovers Medical Devices; Qvintip, Aprovix) were compared using the Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV test. STUDY
DESIGN: Both self-sampling devices (change of order with every patient) including instructions for use and a questionnaire were handed to 146 patients in a colposcopy clinic prior to scheduled colposcopies with collection of cervical reference specimens by gynaecologists using a broom-like device. Matched self-collected and physician collected specimens were transferred to ThinPrep medium and tested for the presence of hr-HPV. Biopsies were taken if indicated by colposcopy.
RESULTS: Evaluation of 136 patients with complete data (136/146; 93.2%) showed high agreement of overall hr-HPV detection rates between self-collected and clinician-collected specimens (Evalyn: 91.2% [kappa 0.822]; Qvintip: 89.0% [kappa 0.779]). Colposcopy and histological evaluation revealed 55 women without cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), 32 CIN1, 34 CIN2, 14 CIN3 and one adenocarcinoma in situ. Hr-HPV testing detected all CIN3+ cases on the clinician-taken or Evalyn self-samples (14/14) and 93% of them on the Qvintip samples (13/14). There was no significant difference regarding the sensitivity for CIN2+ or CIN3+ and specificity of hr-HPV testing on self- vs. clinician samples and on Evalyn vs. Qvintip. Based on signal intensities of β-globin, the observed DNA concentration with Evalyn samples (mean CN: 22.0; 95%-CI: 21.5-22.6) was found to be significantly higher compared to that of Qvintip samples (mean CN: 23.8; 95%-CI 23.2-24.4), regardless of the order of self-sampling (p<0.0001). Most women considered self-sampling easy and comfortable. Qvintip was considered easier than the Evalyn Brush to understand (p<0.001) and to use (p=0.002). DISCUSSION: This study confirms that hr-HPV testing with a clinically validated PCR-based HPV assay is as accurate on self-samples as on clinician-samples without significant difference between both self-sampling devices.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cervical cancer screening; Human papillomavirus; Self-sampling

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27434147     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcv.2016.06.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Virol        ISSN: 1386-6532            Impact factor:   3.168


  13 in total

1.  Cervico-vaginal self-collection in HIV-infected and uninfected women from Tapajós region, Amazon, Brazil: High acceptability, hrHPV diversity and risk factors.

Authors:  Luana L S Rodrigues; Mariza G Morgado; Vikrant V Sahasrabuddhe; Vanessa S De Paula; Nathália S Oliveira; Elena Chavez-Juan; Diane M Da Silva; W Martin Kast; Alcina F Nicol; José H Pilotto
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2018-08-04       Impact factor: 5.482

2.  High-risk Human Papillomavirus Messenger RNA Testing in Wet and Dry Self-collected Specimens for High-grade Cervical Lesion Detection in Mombasa, Kenya.

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

3.  Randomised study shows that repeated self-sampling and HPV test has more than two-fold higher detection rate of women with CIN2+ histology than Pap smear cytology.

Authors:  Inger Gustavsson; Riina Aarnio; Malin Berggrund; Julia Hedlund-Lindberg; Ann-Sofi Strand; Karin Sanner; Ingrid Wikström; Stefan Enroth; Matts Olovsson; Ulf Gyllensten
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2018-02-13       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 4.  Self-Sampling for Human Papillomavirus Testing: Increased Cervical Cancer Screening Participation and Incorporation in International Screening Programs.

Authors:  Sarah Gupta; Christina Palmer; Elisabeth M Bik; Juan P Cardenas; Harold Nuñez; Laurens Kraal; Sara W Bird; Jennie Bowers; Alison Smith; Nathaniel A Walton; Audrey D Goddard; Daniel E Almonacid; Susan Zneimer; Jessica Richman; Zachary S Apte
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2018-04-09

5.  Time and temperature dependent analytical stability of dry-collected Evalyn HPV self-sampling brush for cervical cancer screening.

Authors:  Ditte Møller Ejegod; Helle Pedersen; Garazi Peña Alzua; Camilla Pedersen; Jesper Bonde
Journal:  Papillomavirus Res       Date:  2018-04-22

6.  Detecting cervical precancer and reaching underscreened women by using HPV testing on self samples: updated meta-analyses.

Authors:  Marc Arbyn; Sara B Smith; Sarah Temin; Farhana Sultana; Philip Castle
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2018-12-05

7.  Is self-sampling to test for high-risk papillomavirus an acceptable option among women who have been treated for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia?

Authors:  Sonia Andersson; Karen Belkić; Miriam Mints; Ellinor Östensson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-06-18       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  An observational study comparing HPV prevalence and type distribution between HPV-vaccinated and -unvaccinated girls after introduction of school-based HPV vaccination in Norway.

Authors:  Espen Enerly; Ragnhild Flingtorp; Irene Kraus Christiansen; Suzanne Campbell; Mona Hansen; Tor Åge Myklebust; Elisabete Weiderpass; Mari Nygård
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-10-10       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Elderly women's experiences of self-sampling for HPV testing.

Authors:  Ruth S Hermansson; Matts Olovsson; Catharina Gustavsson; Annika Kristina Lindström
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2020-05-26       Impact factor: 4.430

10.  Acceptance of Self-Sampling Among Long-Term Cervical Screening Non-Attenders with HPV-Positive Results: Promising Opportunity for Specific Cancer Education.

Authors:  Sonia Andersson; Karen Belkić; Miriam Mints; Ellinor Östensson
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 2.037

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.