AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of self-collected vaginal samples compared with physician-collected cervical samples for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in Japanese women with abnormal cervical cytology. We also assessed the acceptability of self-collected HPV (sHPV) testing using a questionnaire. METHODS: Women aged 20-69 years (n = 136) attending Yokohama City University Hospital because of abnormal cervical cytology between April 2014 and January 2015 were enrolled in this study. Cervical samples for conventional cytology and physician-collected HPV (pHPV) testing were obtained before colposcopic examination. After this examination, patients were asked to provide a self-sampled vaginal specimen (sHPV) at home, some time between the following day and the next week and to complete a self-sampling acceptability questionnaire. RESULTS: The overall positive rates of HPV detection with pHPV and sHPV testing were 61.0% (83/136) and 40.4% (55/136), respectively (P < 0.001). sHPV testing had a lower sensitivity compared to pHPV for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)2 or worse (CIN2+: 59.4% vs 100%, P < 0.001; CIN3: 66.7% vs 100%, P = 0.248). There were no statistically significant differences in the sensitivity to detect CIN3 among pHPV testing, sHPV testing, and cytology. The self-collecting device had good acceptability. CONCLUSION: sHPV testing is a possible technique with which to improve poor cervical cancer screening uptake rates in Japan; however, the sensitivity to detect CIN2+ lesions must improve before it can be a substitute for conventional cytology or pHPV testing. Further large-scale acceptability studies involving non-responders are also needed before practical application.
AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of self-collected vaginal samples compared with physician-collected cervical samples for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in Japanese women with abnormal cervical cytology. We also assessed the acceptability of self-collected HPV (sHPV) testing using a questionnaire. METHODS:Women aged 20-69 years (n = 136) attending Yokohama City University Hospital because of abnormal cervical cytology between April 2014 and January 2015 were enrolled in this study. Cervical samples for conventional cytology and physician-collected HPV (pHPV) testing were obtained before colposcopic examination. After this examination, patients were asked to provide a self-sampled vaginal specimen (sHPV) at home, some time between the following day and the next week and to complete a self-sampling acceptability questionnaire. RESULTS: The overall positive rates of HPV detection with pHPV and sHPV testing were 61.0% (83/136) and 40.4% (55/136), respectively (P < 0.001). sHPV testing had a lower sensitivity compared to pHPV for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)2 or worse (CIN2+: 59.4% vs 100%, P < 0.001; CIN3: 66.7% vs 100%, P = 0.248). There were no statistically significant differences in the sensitivity to detect CIN3 among pHPV testing, sHPV testing, and cytology. The self-collecting device had good acceptability. CONCLUSION: sHPV testing is a possible technique with which to improve poor cervical cancer screening uptake rates in Japan; however, the sensitivity to detect CIN2+ lesions must improve before it can be a substitute for conventional cytology or pHPV testing. Further large-scale acceptability studies involving non-responders are also needed before practical application.
Authors: Adolf K Awua; Edwin K Wiredu; Edwin A Afari; Ahmad S Tijani; Gabriel Djanmah; Richard M K Adanu Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 3.295