Noriko Terada1, Motoki Matsuura2, Shoko Kurokawa2, Yoko Nishimura2, Masato Tamate2, Kyoko Isoyama2, Satoko Yamazaki3, Hiroshi Shimada4, Masahiro Suzuki5, Yuta Tabuchi6, Mizue Teramoto7, Tsuyoshi Saito2. 1. Department of Gynecology, Sapporo Medical University, 291, West 16, South 1, Chuo-Ku, Sapporo, Hokkaido, 060-8543, Japan. 0407noriko@gmail.com. 2. Department of Gynecology, Sapporo Medical University, 291, West 16, South 1, Chuo-Ku, Sapporo, Hokkaido, 060-8543, Japan. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Steel Memorial Muroran Hospital, Hokkaido, 050-0076, Japan. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nikko Memorial Hospital, Hokkaido, 051-0005, Japan. 5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Obihiro Kyokai Hospital, Hokkaido, 085-0805, Japan. 6. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kushiro City General Hospital, Hokkaido, 085-0822, Japan. 7. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, NTT East Sapporo Hospital, Hokkaido, 060-0061, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing using self-collected vaginal samples and urine samples is convenient and effective for improving the screening rate. But, to serve as an alternative cervical cancer screening technique, such tests must offer sensitivity equivalent to the HPV testing of physician-collected cervical samples. To examine the effectiveness of HPV testing using self-collected samples and urine samples, we compared the results of HPV testing using these samples with those of HPV testing using physician-collected samples and cytological examinations. METHODS: The study population included 300 women (age: 20-50 years) with abnormal cervical cytology. The results of HPV testing using self-collected samples and urine samples and physician-collected samples and cervical cytology were compared. RESULTS: For all HPV types, the κ-value was 0.773 for physician- and self-collected samples and 0.575 for physician-collected and urine samples. The κ-value for HPV type 16-positive samples was 0.988 for physician- and self-collected samples and 0.896 for physician-collected and urine samples. The κ-value for HPV type 18-positive samples was 0.856 for physician- and self-collected samples and 0.831 for physician-collected and urine samples. For other HPV types, the value was 0.809 for physician- and self-collected samples and 0.617 for physician-collected and urine samples. CONCLUSIONS: The obtained results were consistent between physician- and self-collected samples as well as between physician-collected and urine samples. Considering that the agreement rate was particularly high for the high-risk HPV types 16 and 18, HPV testing using physician-collected samples, self-collected samples, and urine samples was equally effective for the types with high carcinogenicity.
BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing using self-collected vaginal samples and urine samples is convenient and effective for improving the screening rate. But, to serve as an alternative cervical cancer screening technique, such tests must offer sensitivity equivalent to the HPV testing of physician-collected cervical samples. To examine the effectiveness of HPV testing using self-collected samples and urine samples, we compared the results of HPV testing using these samples with those of HPV testing using physician-collected samples and cytological examinations. METHODS: The study population included 300 women (age: 20-50 years) with abnormal cervical cytology. The results of HPV testing using self-collected samples and urine samples and physician-collected samples and cervical cytology were compared. RESULTS: For all HPV types, the κ-value was 0.773 for physician- and self-collected samples and 0.575 for physician-collected and urine samples. The κ-value for HPV type 16-positive samples was 0.988 for physician- and self-collected samples and 0.896 for physician-collected and urine samples. The κ-value for HPV type 18-positive samples was 0.856 for physician- and self-collected samples and 0.831 for physician-collected and urine samples. For other HPV types, the value was 0.809 for physician- and self-collected samples and 0.617 for physician-collected and urine samples. CONCLUSIONS: The obtained results were consistent between physician- and self-collected samples as well as between physician-collected and urine samples. Considering that the agreement rate was particularly high for the high-risk HPV types 16 and 18, HPV testing using physician-collected samples, self-collected samples, and urine samples was equally effective for the types with high carcinogenicity.
Authors: J M Walboomers; M V Jacobs; M M Manos; F X Bosch; J A Kummer; K V Shah; P J Snijders; J Peto; C J Meijer; N Muñoz Journal: J Pathol Date: 1999-09 Impact factor: 7.996
Authors: Jie-Bin Lew; Kate T Simms; Megan A Smith; Michaela Hall; Yoon-Jung Kang; Xiang Ming Xu; Michael Caruana; Louiza Sofia Velentzis; Tracey Bessell; Marion Saville; Ian Hammond; Karen Canfell Journal: Lancet Public Health Date: 2017-02-07
Authors: J W Sellors; A T Lorincz; J B Mahony; I Mielzynska; A Lytwyn; P Roth; M Howard; S Chong; D Daya; W Chapman; M Chernesky Journal: CMAJ Date: 2000-09-05 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Philip E Castle; Julia C Gage; Edward E Partridge; Alfio Rausa; Patti E Gravitt; Isabel C Scarinci Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2013-01-07 Impact factor: 3.090
Authors: Manuela Viviano; Phuong Lien Tran; Bruno Kenfack; Rosa Catarino; Mohamed Akaaboune; Liliane Temogne; Eveline Tincho Foguem; Pierre Vassilakos; Patrick Petignat Journal: Int J Womens Health Date: 2018-04-11