4.7 Article

Self-sampling and HPV testing or ordinary Pap-smear in women not regularly attending screening: a randomised study

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 105, Issue 3, Pages 337-339

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2011.236

Keywords

cervix; human papilloma virus; self-sampling; cytological screening

Categories

Funding

  1. County Council of Uppsala
  2. Medical Faculty of Uppsala University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: Most women with cervical cancer have not participated in Pap-smear screening. Self-sampling of vaginal fluid in combination with high-risk HPV testing may be a method to increase the attendance rate. METHODS: A total of 4060 women, 39-60 years old, who had not attended the organised Pap-smear screening for 6 years or more were randomised into two equal groups. A study group was offered to self-sample vaginal fluid (Qvintip) at home and/or recommended to attend the Pap-smear screening. The collected fluid after self-sampling was examined for the presence of high-risk HPV (Hybrid Capture 2 method). Controls were only recommended to attend the Pap-smear screening. The end point was a histological identification of CIN2-3. RESULTS: The participation rate was 39% (771 out of 2000) in the self-sampling group and 9% (188 out of 2060) in the conventional cytology (P < 0.001). The number of histological CIN2-3 alterations detected was 0.4% (8 out of 2000) among women offered self-sampling of vaginal fluid and 0.07% (3 out of 4060) in women offered Pap-smears. The odds ratio (OR) for offering self-sampling and HPV testing instead of Pap-smear screening for detection of CIN2-3 was OR 5.42 (95% CI: 1.30-31.8). CONCLUSION: Offering self-sampling of vaginal fluid followed by a high-risk HPV test was considerably more effective for detection of histological CIN2-3 lesions in comparison with offering Pap-test in a midwife reception in women not regularly attending organised screening. British Journal of Cancer (2011) 105, 337-339. doi:10.1038/bjc.2011.236 www.bjcancer.com Published online 5 July 2011 (C) 2011 Cancer Research UK

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available