Department of Biostatistics, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California.
Unidad de Investigación Epidemiológica y en Servicios de Salud, Morelos, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Colonia Centro, Cuernavaca, México.
Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2023 Dec 1;16(12):681-687. doi: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-23-0134.
High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing is now the most recommended primary method for cervical cancer screening worldwide. Clinician-collected cervical sampling continues to be the main sampling method, but hrHPV vaginal self-sampling is an appealing alternative because of its greater acceptability and potentially higher cost-effectiveness. This study aimed to determine whether hrHPV vaginal self-sampling is comparable with clinician-collected cervical sampling for detecting histologically confirmed high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2/3) as part of a cervical cancer screening program in Mexico. We analyzed data from 5,856 women screened during a hrHPV-based screening study. Clinical performance and diagnostic efficiency metrics were estimated for the two sampling methods for the CIN3 and CIN2+ endpoints, using three triage strategies: HPV16/18 genotyping, HPV16/18/33/58 extended genotyping, and HPV16/18/31/33/58 extended genotyping. hrHPV-positivity was found in 801 (13.7%) cervical and 897 (15.3%) vaginal samples. All women with hrHPV-positive samples were referred to colposcopy, which detected 17 total CIN3 cases before considering retrospective triage strategies. Using the HPV16/18/31/33/58 extended genotyping strategy, 245 women had hrHPV-positive cervical samples and 269 had hrHPV-positive vaginal samples. Ten CIN3 cases were detected each among women with hrHPV-positive cervical samples and among those with hrHPV-positive vaginal samples when using this strategy, with no significant differences in sensitivity and specificity observed. We observe that self- and clinician-collected sampling methods are comparable for detecting CIN3 and CIN2+ regardless of the triage strategy used. These findings can help public health officials to develop more cost-effective cervical cancer screening programs that maximize participation.
We found that hrHPV vaginal self-sampling is comparable with hrHPV clinician cervical sampling when using any triage strategy to refer women to colposcopy, so self-sampling is a viable cervical screening method. Therefore, policymakers should consider incorporating self-sampling into cervical screening programs to increase screening coverage and reduce cervical cancer burden. See related Spotlight, p. 649.
高危型人乳头瘤病毒(hrHPV)检测目前是全球推荐用于宫颈癌筛查的最主要方法。临床医生采集的宫颈样本仍然是主要的采样方法,但 hrHPV 阴道自我采样因其更高的可接受性和潜在的更高成本效益而成为一种有吸引力的替代方法。本研究旨在确定在墨西哥的宫颈癌筛查项目中,hrHPV 阴道自我采样是否与临床医生采集的宫颈样本一样,可用于检测组织学证实的高级别宫颈上皮内瘤变(CIN2/3)。我们分析了在一项基于 hrHPV 的筛查研究中接受筛查的 5856 名女性的数据。使用三种分流策略(HPV16/18 基因分型、HPV16/18/33/58 扩展基因分型和 HPV16/18/31/33/58 扩展基因分型),针对 CIN3 和 CIN2+终点,估计了两种采样方法的临床性能和诊断效率指标。在考虑回顾性分流策略之前,在所有 hrHPV 阳性样本的女性中均转诊行阴道镜检查,共发现 17 例总 CIN3 病例。使用 HPV16/18/31/33/58 扩展基因分型策略,245 名女性的宫颈样本 hrHPV 阳性,269 名女性的阴道样本 hrHPV 阳性。在使用该策略时,在 hrHPV 阳性宫颈样本和 hrHPV 阳性阴道样本的女性中,各发现 10 例 CIN3 病例,敏感性和特异性无显著差异。我们观察到,无论使用哪种分流策略,自我和临床医生采集的采样方法在检测 CIN3 和 CIN2+方面都是可比的。这些发现可以帮助公共卫生官员制定更具成本效益的宫颈癌筛查计划,从而最大限度地提高参与度。
我们发现,使用任何分流策略将女性转诊行阴道镜检查时,hrHPV 阴道自我采样与 hrHPV 临床医生宫颈采样相当,因此自我采样是一种可行的宫颈癌筛查方法。因此,政策制定者应考虑将自我采样纳入宫颈癌筛查计划,以提高筛查覆盖率并降低宫颈癌负担。详见相关焦点文章,第 649 页。