On the path toward cervical cancer elimination in Canada: a national survey of factors influencing women's intentions to participate in human papillomavirus test-based primary cervical screening.

Background: HPV test-based primary cervical screening is replacing cytology in Canada. In other countries, women's unpreparedness and concerns hindered the transition and post-implementation screening uptake. We investigated psychosocial correlates of intentions of screening in eligible individuals to participate in HPV-based primary cervical screening. Methods: We conducted a nationwide web-based survey of individuals aged 21-70 years in 2022 and oversampled under-screened individuals. We used five Canadian-validated scales to measure HPV test-based screening knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs. Using the multistage Precaution Adoption Process Model, we assessed women's stage of intentions to participate in HPV testing and self-sampling. We estimated associations of psychosocial factors with intentions' stage using multinomial logistic regression. Findings: In both groups (adequately screened n = 1778; under-screened n = 1570), higher HPV knowledge was associated with intention for HPV testing and more personal barriers to the HPV test were associated with lower intentions to participate in HPV testing or use of self-sampling. In both groups, higher self-sampling concerns were associated with lower intentions for self-sampling and higher women's need for autonomy was associated with increased intentions for self-sampling. In the under-screened group, increased age was associated with lower intentions for HPV testing and self-sampling, while living in Canada for <10 years was associated with higher intentions. Interpretation: Our results could be used by policymakers and healthcare professionals to design communication strategies and ensure a smooth transition to HPV-based primary cervical screening, especially for under-screened individuals. Funding: Canadian Institutes of Health Research project grant 165905.

Alternatives to surveillance for persistent human papillomavirus after a positive cervical screen: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: In 2021, the World Health Organisation (WHO) updated its guidelines for cervical screening from cytology testing to primary high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing. This change in testing has effectively led to a 'new disease' as women are now aware of having a virus that induces changes that can cause cancer, which they would have been unaware of previously. While current management involves a 'watch and wait' approach and no active treatment, the anxiety associated with having HR-HPV may prompt some women to seek 'treatments' outside the screening programme. ● to identify potential treatment options available for women with persistent HR-HPV and/or low-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), i.e. ≤CIN 1. ● to determine the clinical effectiveness of these treatments, namely by: ◦ HR-HPV clearance rate, and/or: ◦ CIN regression. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. We included cohort studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) only. Records (n = 2135) were screened in Rayyan by two independent reviewers. Quality assessment was conducted using the ROBINS-I tool and the ROB-2 tool. RESULTS: 12 studies (four cohort studies and eight RCTs) were included: six oral medications, two topical medications, one vaccination, and three non-surgical device treatments. Meta-analysis revealed that some therapeutic interventions, including vaginal gels, photodynamic therapy, and some oral medications, may lead to earlier resolution of persistent HR-HPV and regression of low-grade CIN when compared with natural clearance. CONCLUSION: This review can better inform discussions with HR-HPV+ women and answer their questions about alternatives to surveillance.

High-risk HPV mRNA testing on self-samples offered to those who do not attend for organised cervical screening - real world data from the Dumfries and Galloway region in Scotland.

BACKGROUND: HPV self sampling can act as a tool to engage women in cervical screening and population based studies can inform optimal implementation of this approach. METHODS: Self sampling kits were mailed to women who had defaulted from routine screening resident in an entire territorial health board in Scotland. Kit return rates and compliance to colposcopy follow up in those who were HPV mRNA positive were assessed. Concordance of the self-sample with samples taken later at colposcopy was measured alongside PPV of an mRNA positive result for CIN2+. RESULTS: Of 4173 women invited to participate, 20.5 %, returned their kit and a greater return rate with increasing age was observed. HPV mRNA positivity was 12.0 %, and invalidity rate was approximately 3 %. Compliance to colposcopy follow up was 88.3 % and the PPV for an mRNA test for CIN2+ on a self sample was 25.6 %. hr-HPV concordance on the initial swab and the follow up swab and liquid based cytology (LBC) sample taken at colposcopy was 67.1 % and 30 % respectively. CONCLUSIONS: HPV self sampling using a "mail to all" approach is feasible in Scotland although only 1 in 5 actively responded to the offer. Future work to monitor screening behaviours in those who were invited but did not engage initially will help quantify any additional benefit(s) incurred.

Progress and Challenges in Canada's Path Toward the Elimination of Cervical Cancer.

Cervical cancer is almost entirely preventable and treatable when detected early, making its elimination within reach for Canada and the world. However, cervical cancer is now the fastest-increasing cancer (+3.7% per year since 2015) in Canada as of 2023, marking the first significant increase in cervical cancer incidence since 1984. The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine and cervical screening are key preventive measures, with targets set by the WHO and the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer (CPAC) to eliminate cervical cancer in Canada by 2030 and 2040, respectively. These targets include increasing HPV vaccination rates, implementing primary HPV screening, and improving follow-up for abnormal HPV+ results. However, Canada's progress has been impeded by significant challenges. As of the most recent data, HPV vaccine coverage rates in Canada range from 47% to 81%, with an estimated national HPV vaccination completion rate of 64% in Canada, far below the target of 90% by 2025 set by the CPAC. With the exception of British Columbia and Prince Edward Island, the adoption of HPV DNA testing as the primary screening method has been slow across the Canadian provinces and territories despite its superior sensitivity compared with traditional cytology. This article reviews the current state of HPV vaccination and screening in Canada, emphasizing the need for coordinated efforts, transparency, and resource sharing to overcome barriers. Key recommendations include the dissemination of accessible educational materials, partnerships, and collaboration, including nationwide task forces and roundtables, and the implementation of standardized guidelines for HPV screening. Achieving cervical cancer elimination requires a united approach involving federal, provincial, and territorial health authorities, researchers, clinicians, NGOs, community groups, and patients' voices working together to ensure consistent, effective, timely, and meaningful cervical cancer prevention strategies are used across the country.

Clinically validated HPV assays offer comparable long-term safety in primary cervical cancer screening: A 9-year follow-up of a population-based screening cohort.

Molecular testing for human papillomaviruses (HPV) is gradually replacing cytology in cervical cancer screening. In this longitudinal population-based cohort study, 4140 women 20 to 64 years old attending organized screening were tested at baseline by five different screening methods and followed for 9 years. To assess long-term safety, the cumulative risks of CIN2+/CIN3+ were estimated after a negative baseline result obtained by conventional cytology and four clinically validated HPV assays: Hybrid Capture 2 (hc2), RealTime High Risk HPV assay (RealTime), cobas 4800 HPV Test (cobas_4800), and Alinity m HR HPV (Alinity). HPV-negative women at baseline had a substantially lower risk for CIN2+ compared to those with normal baseline cytology: 0.84% (95% CI, 0.46-1.22), 0.90% (95% CI, 0.51-1.29), 0.78% (95% CI, 0.42-1.15), and 0.75% (95% CI, 0.39-1.11) for hc2, RealTime, cobas_4800, and Alinity, respectively, compared to 2.46% (95% CI, 1.88-3.03) for cytology. No differences were observed between HPV assays in longitudinal sensitivity (range: 86.21%-90.36%) and negative predictive values (range: 99.54%-99.70%) for CIN2+ in women ≥30 years, but were significantly different from cytology (p < .05). The 9-year cumulative risk of CIN2+ differed significantly between HPV genotypes, reaching 32.1% (95% CI, 14.5-46.1) for HPV16, 24.9% (95% CI, 4.7-40.8) for HPV18/45, 27.2% (95% CI, 14.6-37.8) for HPV31/33/35/52/58, and 8.1% (95% CI, 0.0-16.7) for HPV39/51/56/59. Four clinically validated HPV assays showed comparable safety and better assurance against precancerous lesions than cytology, but some important differences were identified in the performance characteristics of HPV assays impacting the referral rate. Information about the HPV genotype is valuable for guiding further clinical action in HPV-based screening programs.

PAX1/SOX1 DNA Methylation Versus Cytology and HPV16/18 Genotyping for the Triage of High-Risk HPV-Positive Women in Cervical Cancer Screening: Retrospective Analysis of Archival Samples.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of cytology, HPV16/18 genotyping and PAX1/SOX1 methylation for the triage of high-risk HPV-positive cervical samples. DESIGN: Retrospective analyses of archival samples collected from a large-scale prospective randomised controlled trial. SETTING/SAMPLE: HPV-positive women recruited from the general cervical screening population. METHODS: 403 HPV-positive samples including 113 normal, 173 low-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (LG-CIN), 114 HG-CIN and three cervical cancers. All samples were assessed by liquid-based cytology, HPV genotyping and PAX1/SOX1 methylation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: AUC (area under the curve), sensitivity and specificity for cytology, HPV16/18 genotyping and PAX1/SOX1 methylation for high-grade (HG) premalignant cervical lesions. RESULTS: PAX1 was more sensitive than cytology and HPV16/18 genotyping in detecting a HG lesion (CIN2+). The sensitivity for PAX1, SOX1, cytology and HPV16/18 were 73.5% (95% CI: 65.5-81.5), 41.9% (95% CI: 32.9-50.8), 48.7% (95% CI: 39.7-57.8) and 36.8% (95% CI: 28.0-45.5), respectively, and their respective specificities were 70.3% (95% CI: 65.0-75.6), 83.6% (95% CI: 79.3-87.9), 77.6% (95% CI: 72.8-82.5) and 67.1% (95% CI: 61.7-72.6), respectively. Overall, PAX1 gave the best AUC at 0.72. Adding SOX1 to PAX1 did not improve the AUC (0.68). Three hundred and twenty-two women who did not have a HG lesion at baseline were followed up for two rounds of screening. Fewer women developed a HG lesion with a normal baseline PAX1 compared to women with a normal baseline cytology or negative HPV16/18 (8.4% vs. 14.5% and 17.5%, respectively). CONCLUSION: PAX1 triage for referral to colposcopy in HPV-positive women may be superior to cytology and HPV16/18 genotyping.

[High-grade lesions probability in ASCUS HPV positive patient according to HPV type]. / Probabilité diagnostique d'une lésion de haut grade chez les patientes ASCUS HPV positif en fonction du typage HPV.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study was to assess the proportion of high-grade histological lesions, according to HPV type, in patients referred for colposcopy involving a positive HPV-HR test and ASC-US cytology. METHODS: This is a retrospective descriptive study of asymptomatic patients aged 25 to 65 with a positive HPV-HR test and ASC-US cytology. Data were collected at the Nord Franche-Comté Hospital from September 2019 to February 2022. The primary outcome was the proportion of high-grade histological lesions in patients with ASC-US cytology combined to HPV 16 or 18 (associated or not with other HPV type), compared with HPV no 16 no 18. RESULTS: Among the 298 patients included, 67% were HPV no 16 no 18, 22% HPV 16 associated or not with others and 11% HPV 18 associated or not with others. We found significantly fewer high-grade lesions in patients with ASC-US cytology and HPV no 16 no 18 than in patients with HPV 16 or 18 (8.5% versus 22.7%, P<0.01). In patients presenting an ASC-US cytology with HPV no 16, no 18: 53% of the biopsies found no histological lesion compared with 30% for the other HPVs (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: We have highlighted the reality of colposcopists: a high ratio of normal coloscopy associated with normal or low-grade biopsies, in patients with a positive HPV-HR test no 16, no 18 and ASC-US cytology.

Review of triage strategies for atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance among young women.

In the present study we reviewed the existing literature regarding management approaches for ASC-US and highlight their pros and cons. The ASC-US entity emerged from Bethesda classification 2001. We conducted this review using search words ASC-US triage, ASC-US management in young women, triage tests for ASC-US, and ASC-US outcome from the English literature. We included different cervical cancer policies (American, European and for WHO) and research articles published on ASC-US in young women from the year 2001. We searched in Google Scholar, PubMed, MEDLINE (NCBI) library, Embase (Elsevier), Wiley online library as well as Cochrane library. We defined young women as aged 30 years and below. We identified 52 articles which focused on management approaches of ASC-US, seven articles focused on young women aged <30 years. Five of these articles combined ASC-US with low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (ASC-US/LSIL) while only two addressed ASC-US as a standalone entity. The limited number of articles restricts the evidence base supporting the adoption of triage strategies. There is yet, no consensus in the literature regarding the management of ASC-US, more so in young women below the age of 30 years. Researchers, however, agree on a few aspects, which include the necessity for applying a conservative strategy for managing ASC-US in young women, avoiding direct referral for colposcopy at the initial detection of ASC-US, and avoiding the use of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing on young women (unless living with HIV). Newer techniques such as HPV E6/E7 messenger RNA (mRNA), and dual staining p16/ki-67, may serve as better triage to identify cases of HPV persistence and integration which may subsequently lead to preinvasive or invasive lesions.

Clinical validation of the Roche cobas HPV test on the Roche cobas 5800 system for the purpose of cervical screening.

This study assessed the relative clinical sensitivity and specificity, as well as reproducibility, for high-risk HPV types of the Roche cobas HPV test when processed using the Roche cobas 5800 system. The results from this study demonstrate that the cobas HPV test using the cobas 5800 system fulfils the Meijer criteria for use in population-based cervical screening. This clinical validation study also examines the clinical sensitivity and specificity based on partial genotyping, with separate detection of HPV16 and HPV18, compared with the Roche cobas 4800 HPV test, a second-generation standard comparator assay. The cobas HPV test has a relative clinical sensitivity of 1.000, when compared with the cobas 4800 HPV test to detect histologically confirmed CIN2+ lesions in woman aged 30 years or older, with a relative clinical specificity of 0.995. The general intra- and inter-laboratory agreement for the cobas HPV test on the cobas 5800 system for finding a HPV positive result were 99.1% and 99.6%, respectively.IMPORTANCEThis study demonstrates, for the first time, the clinical performance of the Roche cobas HPV test when processed using the new cobas 5800 system [cobas (5800)]. This study shows that the cobas (5800) demonstrates relative clinical sensitivity and specificity, when compared with a standard comparator HPV test, which meets the international HPV test validation requirements. Intra- and inter-laboratory reproducibility also fulfills these criteria. The current study demonstrates that the cobas (5800) can be used for primary HPV-based cervical screening on cervical specimens.

Age-specific performance of human papillomavirus E6/E7 mRNA assay versus cytology for primary cervical cancer screening and triage: community-based screening in China.

Background: In the general population, primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is advocated for cervical cancer (CC) screening. HPV E6/E7 mRNA (Aptima HPV, AHPV) assays have garnered considerable traction due to their higher specificity when compared with HPV DNA assays. Here, we investigated age-specific primary AHPV screening assays and different triage strategies versus cytology to identify the best approach. Methods: Between April 2018 and December 2021, we recruited female participants from 34 communities across Liaoning province and Qingdao City, China. Primary cervical screening protocols included liquid-based cytology (LBC) and AHPV assays, with females positive for any assays undergoing colposcopy. Genotyping (AHPV-GT) was conducted on all HPV-positive samples. Our primary outcomes were the identification of age-specific detection rates, colposcopy referral rates, and sensitivity and specificity values for high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or worse (HSIL+). AHPV and different triage strategy performances were also examined across different age cohorts. Results: Our investigation included 9911 eligible females. Age-specific abnormal cytology rates were in the 6.1%-8.0% range, and were highest in 45-54-year olds. When compared with 35-44-or 45-54-year olds, HPV prevalence was highest in 55-64-year olds (12.2% or 11.6% vs.14.1%, P = 0.048 and P = 0.002, respectively). In 35-44-year olds, AHPV sensitivity for detecting HSIL+ was 96.6 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 89.7-100) - significantly higher than LBC sensitivity (65.5 [95% CI: 48.3-82.8], P < 0.001). When compared with LBC, HSIL+ detection rates by AHPV-GT using reflex LBC triage increased by 31.5% (9.6‰ vs. 7.3‰), and colposcopy referral rates decreased by 16.4% (5.1% vs. 6.1%). In 45-54-year olds, HSIL+ detection rates for AHPV-GT using reflex LBC triage were lower than LBC rates (6.2‰ vs. 6.6‰). In 55-64-year olds, AHPV sensitivity (97.2 [95% CI: 91.7-100.0]) was higher than LBC sensitivity (66.7 [95% CI: 50.0-80.6], P = 0.003). The area under the curve (AUC) value was not significantly different between AHPV-GT with reflex LBC triage and LBC (0.845 [95% CI: 0.771-0.920] vs. 0.812 [95% CI: 0.734-0.891], P = 0.236). Conclusions: Primary AHPV screening using different triage strategies were different across different age cohorts. Thus, AHPV may be an appropriate primary screening method for 35-44 and 55-64 year old females, while AHPV-GT with reflex LBC triage may be more apt for 35-44 year old females.

Utilising the COM-B model to interpret barriers and facilitators to cervical cancer screening in young women.

As most women now reaching the age for cervical cancer screening (24.5 years old) in the UK will be HPV vaccinated, their current perspectives on screening can inform effective interventions to increase screening uptake (and thus, early detection). Twenty-four interviews were conducted with women aged 24-30 years old to explore their views on cervical cancer screening (n = 12 attendees and n = 12 non-attendees). Reflexive thematic analysis generated six themes that were then mapped onto the COM-B model. Reflective motivations (e.g. reassurance) were key facilitators to screening attendance for both groups. Social opportunities (e.g. open communication) contrasted between the groups, with attendees more likely to have discussed screening with friends. Automatic motivations (e.g. embarrassment) were key barriers to attending screening in both groups. Notably, HPV vaccination did not factor into the decision to attend screening. Interventions to increase screening uptake may target motivational and social factors.

The acceptability of, and informational needs related to, self-collection cervical screening among women of Indian descent living in Victoria, Australia: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: In July 2022, self-collection became universally available as part of Australia's National Cervical Screening Program. This change aims to address screening inequities experienced among underscreened populations, including women of Indian descent. This study explored experiences of cervical screening, alongside the acceptability of self-collection, among women of Indian descent living in Victoria, Australia. We also aimed to articulate the informational needs to promote self-collection among this population. METHODS: Five focus group discussions with 39 women living in Victoria were conducted in English (n = 3) and Punjabi (n = 2). Transcripts were thematically analysed, as informed by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. RESULTS: Women were motivated by the choice to self-collect, perceiving the ability to maintain modesty and greater autonomy as key enablers. Healthcare practitioners were seen as central in supporting patient-centred models of care. Perceived barriers to self-collection included concerns around its accuracy and women's confidence in collecting their own sample. Widespread dissemination of culturally tailored promotion strategies communicating concepts such as 'privacy' and 'accuracy' were suggested by women to promote self-collection. CONCLUSION: Self-collection was highly acceptable among women of Indian descent, particularly when assured of its accuracy, and sociocultural norms and previous screening experiences are considered. This study highlights the huge potential that self-collection can play in increasing equity in Australia's cervical screening programme. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Members of the public were involved in focus group discussions. Findings were summarised and disseminated via a poster. A bicultural worker was involved in all stages of the research.

Cervical screening participation and access facilitators and barriers for people with intellectual disability: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: The World Health Organisation's vision of eliminating cervical cancer as a public health problem is achievable, but elimination must be achieved equitably, including for people with intellectual disability. A better understanding of cervical screening within the context of the lives of people with intellectual disability is needed. This study systematically reviewed research on the rates of cervical screening participation among people with intellectual disability, and facilitators and barriers that affect participation. Method: Six electronic databases were systematically searched: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, PsycINFO, Embase and Pro-Quest Central Social Sciences Collection. Empirical studies published between 1986 and 2023, in English language peer-reviewed journals were eligible for inclusion. Further articles were identified through forward and backward citation tracking, and hand-searching the index lists of two key journals. Two authors screened the studies, extracted the data and collated study outcomes using a standardised software program. A meta-analysis was performed using the DerSimonian and Laird method to estimate pooled effect sizes in prevalence rates and odds ratios (ORs). The socio-ecological model (SEM) was used as a framework to thematically analyse facilitators and barriers impacting participation in cervical screening. Results: Sixty-three articles met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 42 reported on rates of cervical screening participation and 24 reported on facilitators or barriers to cervical screening for people with intellectual disability. Overall, the studies reported a screening prevalence of 35% (95% CI: 26% to 45%), indicating that just over a third of people with intellectual disability have had cervical screening. The pooled odds ratio of 0.30 (95% CI: 0.23 to 0.41) indicated that people with intellectual disability are significantly less likely to have a cervical screening test compared with people without intellectual disability. Most studies examined individual and interpersonal factors impacting cervical screening. These included: (i) fear and anxiety among people with intellectual disability, (ii) misassumptions preventing screening participation, (iii) the role of support people, (iv) the need for education, (v) accessible information, and time to prepare for screening, (vi) patient-provider communication including challenges obtaining informed consent, and (vii) healthcare provider lack of confidence. Conclusion: Future research, policy and practice efforts must address barriers to cervical screening participation among people with intellectual disability and ensure these efforts are co-produced and community-led. This is critical to ensuring equity in global and local efforts to eliminate cervical cancer.

AICyte-alone capabilities as an independent screener for triaging cervical cytology using a 50% negative cutoff value.

BACKGROUND: AICyte has previously demonstrated a potential role in cervical cytology screening for reducing the workload by using a 50% negative cutoff value. The aim of the current study is to evaluate this hypothesis. METHODS: The authors used the Ruiqian WSI-2400 (with the registered trademark AICyte) to evaluate a collection of 163,848 original cervical cytology cases from 2018 to 2023 that were collected from four different hospital systems in China. A breakdown of cases included 46,060 from Shenzhen, 67,472 from Zhengzhou, 25,667 from Shijiazhuang, and 24,649 from Jinan. These collected cases were evaluated using the AICyte system, and the data collected were statistically compared with the original interpretative results. RESULTS: In 98.80% of all artificial intelligence cases that were designated as not needing further review, the corresponding original diagnosis was also determined to be negative. For any cases that were designated atypical squamous cells, cannot exclude high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or higher, the sensitivity and negative predictive value were 90.77% and 98.80%, respectively. The sensitivity and negative predictive value were greater in cases designated as low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or higher at 98.92% and 99.94%, respectively. Of the 49 low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or higher that were designed by AICyte as not needing further review, the cytohistologic correlation revealed eight cases of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 1 and 18 negative cases; and the remaining cases were without histologic follow-up. In practice, AICyte used at a 50% negative cutoff value could reduce the anticipated workload if a protocol were implemented to label cases that qualified within the negative cutoff value as not needing further review, thereby finalizing the case as negative for intraepithelial lesions and malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: For pathologic practices that do not have cytotechnologists or in which the workflow is sought to be optimized, the artificial intelligence system AICyte alone to be an independent screening tool by using a 50% negative cutoff value, which is a potential assistive method for cervical cancer screening.

Corrigendum: Actions speak louder than words; pediatricians, gynecologists, nurses, and other mothers' perspectives on the human papillomavirus vaccine: an Istanbul multicenter study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1361509.].

Nationwide registry-based trial of risk-stratified cervical screening.

In well-screened populations, most cervical cancers arise from small groups of women with inadequate screening. The present study aims to assess whether registry-based cancer risk assessment could be used to increase screening intensity among high-risk women. The National Cervical Screening Registry identified the 28,689 women residents in Sweden who had either no previous cervical screening or a screening history indicating high risk. We invited these women by SMS and/or physical letter to order a free human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling kit. The Swedish national HPV reference laboratory performed extended HPV genotyping and referred high-risk HPV-positive women to their regional gynecologist. A total of 3691/28,689 (12.9%) women ordered a self-sampling kit and 10.0% (2853/28,689) returned a sample for testing. Participation among women who had never attended screening was low, albeit improved. Up to 22.5% of women in other high-risk groups attended. High-risk HPV types were detected in 8.3% of samples. High-risk HPV-positive women (238/2853) were referred without further triaging and severe cervical precancer or cancer (HSIL+) in histopathology were detected in 36/158 (23%) of biopsied women. Repeat invitations gave modest additional participation. Nationwide contacting of women with high risk for cervical cancer with personal invitations to order HPV self-sampling kits resulted in high yield of detected CIN2+. Further efforts to improve risk-stratified screening strategies should be directed to improving (i) the precision of the risk-stratification algorithm, (ii) the convenience for the women to participate and, (iii) ensuring that screen-positive women are followed-up.

Identifying optimum implementation for human papillomavirus self-sampling in underserved communities: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To review the existing evidence to identify the optimum methods for implementing human papillomavirus self-sampling to increase screening uptake for underserved groups. SETTING: Specific groups are less likely to participate in cervical screening. These include individuals from low socioeconomic status groups, ethnic minority groups, younger age groups (25-29), older age groups (≥50), with a physical disability, with a learning disability and with an LGBTQ+ identity. The advent of human papillomavirus self-sampling for cervical screening presents an opportunity to promote equitable access to screening. Implementation for human papillomavirus self-sampling can vary, for example, opt-out or opt-in approaches. However, it is unclear which of these is the best method of offering human papillomavirus self-sampling to underserved groups. METHODS: Six databases were searched through May 2023. Studies comparing cervico-vaginal human papillomavirus self-sampling provision using different implementation strategies with the standard screening pathway in underserved groups were identified. A narrative synthesis was conducted. RESULTS: In total, 4574 studies were identified; 25 studies were included, of which 22 were from high-income countries. Greater uptake was found for offering human papillomavirus self-sampling compared to standard clinician-based sampling. Directly mailing human papillomavirus self-sampling kits to participants resulted in higher uptake of screening than using an 'opt-in' approach or standard recall in low socioeconomic status and ethnic minority groups, and older women. Strategies that used community health workers or educational materials increased uptake in ethnic minority and low socioeconomic status groups. CONCLUSIONS: Directly mailing human papillomavirus self-sampling kits to low socioeconomic status groups, ethnic minority groups and older women has the potential to increase uptake of human papillomavirus self-sampling. Using community health workers to offer human papillomavirus self-sampling should be considered for ethnic minority and low socioeconomic status groups. Further research exploring the preferences of younger women is needed.

Experiences of Self-Sampling and Future Screening Preferences in Non-Attenders Who Returned an HPV Vaginal Self-Sample in the YouScreen Study: Findings From a Cross-Sectional Questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: We assessed experiences of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaginal self-sampling and future screening preferences in an ethnically and socio-economically diverse group of women overdue for cervical screening. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A postal questionnaire was embedded in the YouScreen self-sampling trial in England: 32.5% (2712/8338) of kit completers returned the survey. Kit non-completers were encouraged to return a questionnaire, but no responses were received. Participants were ethnically diverse (40.3% came from ethnic minority backgrounds), and 59.1% came from the two most deprived quintiles. Differences in confidence in kit completion, trust in the test results and intention to attend a follow-up test if HPV-positive were evaluated using Pearson's χ2 analyses. Binary logistic regression models explored predictors of a future screening choice and preferences for urine versus vaginal self-sampling. RESULTS: Most kit-completers reported high confidence in self-sampling (82.6%) and high trust in the results (79.9%), but experiences varied by ethnicity and screening status. Most free-text comments were positive but some reported difficulties using the device, pain or discomfort. Most women would opt for self-sampling in the future (71.3% vs. 10.4% for a clinician-taken test) and it was more often preferred by ethnic minority groups, overdue screeners and never attenders. Urine self-tests were preferred to vaginal tests (41.9% vs. 15.4%), especially among women from Asian, Black or Other Ethnic backgrounds. CONCLUSIONS: Kit-completers were confident, found the test easy to complete, and trusted the self-sample results. However, experiences varied by ethnic group and some women highlighted difficulties with the kit. Most women would prefer self-sampling in the future, but it was not a universal preference, so offering a choice will be important. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: We did not have direct patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in the questionnaire design. However, patients and public representatives did input into the design of the YouScreen trial and reviewed the wider study materials (e.g. participant information sheet). TRIAL REGISTRATION: This questionnaire study was embedded in the YouScreen trial. The protocol for the YouScreen trial is available at https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12759467. The National Institute for Health Research 43 Clinical Research Network (NIHR CRN) Central Portfolio Management System (CPMS) ID is 4441934.

Is there a need for screening of cervical HPV infections and carcinoma?

Antenatal cervical screening aims to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasms as precancerous lesions and invasive cervical cancer. Whether this screening is performed routinely during pregnancy varies depending on each country's screening participation rates, guidelines, and the risks to the pregnant woman. In some countries with the high rate of routinely implemented cervical screening among the target women, women are recommended to defer cervical screening intentionally to post-delivery, though having screening in consultation with physicians may be possible if routine screening overlaps. However, when cervical screening rate in fertile women is low and the incidence of cervical cancer is high, cervical screening during pregnancy may play an important role in the early detection of cervical cancer. Cervical screening using high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is accepted worldwide as a highly sensitive and objective test method, and it should replace traditional primary cervical cytology in the future. However, the benefits and disadvantages of using HPV testing in pregnant women is unclear because a false positive rate may be increased due to pregnant women being generally under an immunosuppressed condition.