Comparison between professional sampling and self‐sampling for HPV‐based cervical cancer screening among postmenopausal women

Objective To investigate whether self‐sampling is as reliable as professional sampling for HPV testing and genotype detection among postmenopausal women. Methods In the present prospective cross‐sectional study, women in Örebro County, Sweden, who had high‐risk HPV (hrHPV) and normal cytology result...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of gynecology and obstetrics Jg. 142; H. 3; S. 359 - 364
Hauptverfasser: Bergengren, Lovisa, Kaliff, Malin, Larsson, Gabriella L., Karlsson, Mats G., Helenius, Gisela
Format: Journal Article
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: United States 01.09.2018
Schlagworte:
Cervical cancer
Cross-Sectional Studies
Early Detection of Cancer - methods
Female
Genotype
HPV
Humans
Middle Aged
Papillomaviridae - genetics
Papillomavirus Infections - diagnosis
Papillomavirus Infections - virology
Postmenopausal women
Postmenopause
Professional sampling
Prospective Studies
Screening
Self-sample
Specimen Handling - methods
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - diagnosis
Vaginal Smears - methods
Screening
Professional sampling
Postmenopausal women
Self-sample
Cervical cancer
HPV
ISSN:0020-7292, 1879-3479, 1879-3479
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objective To investigate whether self‐sampling is as reliable as professional sampling for HPV testing and genotype detection among postmenopausal women. Methods In the present prospective cross‐sectional study, women in Örebro County, Sweden, who had high‐risk HPV (hrHPV) and normal cytology results in exit screening tests conducted in between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2014, were invited to follow‐up screenings between February 24, 2015 and May 15, 2015, that included professional sampling and self‐sampling. HPV genotypes were identified by a DNA‐based assay that could detect 35 HPV genotypes. Findings between the different sampling methods were compared. Results Of 143 women who participated, 119 returned a self‐sample. Completely concordant results were observed in 67 of these samples when both hrHPV and low‐risk HPV genotypes were analyzed. Overall, 99 (83.2%) women had the same clinically relevant finding from both sampling methods. Twenty women had discordant hrHPV results (hrHPV detected in 10 self‐samples vs 10 professionally collected samples; Cohen κ 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.53–0.80). There was no significant difference between the two sampling methods for clinically significant infections (P>0.99) or extended genotyping (P=0.827). Conclusion Postmenopausal women could be offered self‐sampling devices to increase screening‐program coverage while maintaining test quality. The concordance between professionally and self‐collected HPV‐testing samples was 83%. Postmenopausal women could be offered self‐sampling without loss of test quality.
Bibliographie:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:0020-7292
1879-3479
1879-3479
DOI:10.1002/ijgo.12538