Self-sampling and HPV testing or ordinary Pap-smear in women not regularly attending screening: a randomised study
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-...
Saved in:
Published in | British journal of cancer Vol. 105; no. 3; pp. 337 - 339 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
London
Nature Publishing Group UK
26.07.2011
Nature Publishing Group |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | 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. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-News-1 ObjectType-Feature-3 content type line 23 ObjectType-Feature-1 |
ISSN: | 0007-0920 1532-1827 1532-1827 |
DOI: | 10.1038/bjc.2011.236 |