Exploratory Analysis of Concordance Between Clinician-Collected and Self-Sampled Human Papillomavirus Tests in a Small Cohort of Average- and High-Risk Patients.

Objectives: Cervical cancer screening rates have stagnated, but self-sampling modalities have the potential to increase uptake. This study compares the test characteristics of self-sampled high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) tests with clinician-collected hrHPV tests in average-risk (i.e., undergoing routine screening) and high-risk patients (i.e., receiving follow-up after abnormal screening results). Methods: In this cross-sectional study, a relatively small cohort of average-risk (n = 35) and high-risk (n = 12) participants completed both clinician-collected and self-sampled hrHPV testing, along with a brief phone survey. We assessed hrHPV positivity, concordance, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), sensitivity, and specificity across both methods (for types 16, 18, or other hrHPV). We also explored the relationship between test concordance and sociodemographic/behavioral factors. Results: Among average-risk participants, hrHPV positivity was 6% for both test methods (i.e., hrHPV-positive cases: n = 2), resulting in reported concordance, PPV, NPV, sensitivity, and specificity of 100%. Among high-risk participants, hrHPV positivity was 100% for clinician-collected tests but only 67% for self-sampled tests, showing varied concordance and sensitivity. Concordance was not associated with sociodemographic or behavioral factors. Conclusions: Self-sampled hrHPV testing demonstrated high accuracy for average-risk patients in this exploratory study. However, its performance was less consistent in high-risk patients who had already received an abnormal screening result, which could be attributed to spontaneous viral clearance over time. The limited number of participants, particularly HPV-positive cases, suggests caution in interpreting these results. Further research with larger cohorts is necessary to validate these findings and to explore the integration of self-sampled hrHPV testing into routine clinical care, particularly for patients with a history of cervical abnormalities. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04591977, NCT04585243.

Self-sampling tools to increase cancer screening among underserved patients: a pilot randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Screening can reduce cancer mortality, but uptake is suboptimal and characterized by disparities. Home-based self-sampling can facilitate screening for colorectal cancer (with stool tests, eg, fecal immunochemical tests) and for cervical cancer (with self-collected human papillomavirus tests), especially among patients who face barriers to accessing health care. Additional data are needed on feasibility and potential effects of self-sampling tools for cancer screening among underserved patients. METHODS: We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial with patients (female, ages 50-65 years, out of date with colorectal and cervical cancer screening) recruited from federally qualified health centers in rural and racially segregated counties in Pennsylvania. Participants in the standard-of-care arm (n = 24) received screening reminder letters. Participants in the self-sampling arm (n = 24) received self-sampling tools for fecal immunochemical tests and human papillomavirus testing. We assessed uptake of screening (10-week follow-up), self-sampling screening outcomes, and psychosocial variables. Analyses used Fisher exact tests to assess the effect of study arm on outcomes. RESULTS: Cancer screening was higher in the self-sampling arm than the standard-of-care arm (colorectal: 75% vs 13%, respectively, odds ratio = 31.32, 95% confidence interval = 5.20 to 289.33; cervical: 79% vs 8%, odds ratio = 72.03, 95% confidence interval = 9.15 to 1141.41). Among participants who returned the self-sampling tools, the prevalence of abnormal findings was 24% for colorectal and 18% for cervical cancer screening. Cancer screening knowledge was positively associated with uptake (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Self-sampling tools can increase colorectal and cervical cancer screening among unscreened, underserved patients. Increasing the use of self-sampling tools can improve primary care and cancer detection among underserved patients. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: STUDY00015480.

We are all in this together: Rurality, Social cohesion, and COVID-19 prevention behaviors.

BACKGROUND: Social cohesion refers to an individual's sense of belonging to their community and correlates with health outcomes. Rural communities tend to have higher social cohesion than urban communities. Social cohesion is relatively understudied as a factor impacting COVID-19 prevention behaviors. This study explores the associations between social cohesion, rurality, and COVID-19 prevention behaviors. METHODS: Participants completed a questionnaire assessing rurality; social cohesion (subscales of (1) attraction to neighborhood, (2) acts of neighboring, and (3) sense of community); COVID-19 behaviors; and demographics. Chi-square tests were used to characterize participant demographics and COVID-19 behaviors. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used to analyze the relationship between COVID-19 outcomes and rurality, social cohesion, and demographics. RESULTS: Most participants (n = 2,926) were non-Hispanic White (78.2%) and married (60.4%); 36.9% were rural. Rural participants were less likely than urban participants to practice social distancing (78.7% vs 90.6%, P<.001) or stay home when sick (87.7% vs 93.5%, P<.001). Social distancing was more common among participants with higher "attraction to neighborhood" scores (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.26-3.47) but was less common among participants with higher "acts of neighboring" scores (aOR = 0.59; 95% CI = 0.40-0.88). Staying home when sick was also more common among participants with higher scores on "attraction to neighborhood" (aOR = 2.12; 95% CI = 1.15-3.91), and less common among participants with higher scores on "acts of neighboring" (aOR = 0.53; 95% CI = 0.33-0.86). CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to maximize COVID-19 behavioral prevention, particularly among rural communities, should emphasize the importance of protecting the health of one's neighbors and how to support one's neighbors without face-to-face interactions.