The effect of video information on anxiety levels in women attending colposcopy: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to investigate whether additional information, in video form, reduces anxiety, depression and pain levels in women referred for colposcopy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between September 2012 and March 2015, 136 patients referred for colposcopy were randomized into two study arms. Group A received video information in addition to the regular information leaflet, and group B (control group) received only the regular information leaflet. The patients were requested to complete standardized online questionnaires. The first online questionnaire (T1) was pre-randomization, and was completed at home, 5 days prior to the appointment. The second online questionnaire (T2) was completed directly before the colposcopy appointment, and the last online questionnaire (T3) was completed directly following colposcopy at the out-patient clinic. The questionnaires included the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) to assess pain. RESULTS: The STAI state anxiety score was high (44.6), but there was no significant difference in STAI, HADS and NRS between the two groups at the three measuring points. A post hoc analysis showed that women with a generally higher baseline anxiety trait had significantly lower HADS anxiety levels following video information. CONCLUSIONS: Additional information (video) before colposcopy did not significantly reduce anxiety, depression, and expected or experienced pain, as measured by the STAI, HADS and NRS in patients attending their first colposcopy appointment. However, most patients positively appreciated the video information, which may reduce the anxiety of extremely anxious patients.

High-risk human papillomavirus detection in self-sampling compared to physician-taken smear in a responder population of the Dutch cervical screening: Results of the VERA study.

In 2017 the cervical cancer screening program in The Netherlands will be revised. Cervical smears will primarily be tested for the presence of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) instead of cytology, and vaginal self-sampling will be offered to non-responders. This includes a potential risk that part of the women who would otherwise opt for a cervical smear will wait for self-sampling. However, self-sampling for hrHPV in a responder population has never been studied yet. The aim of this study was to investigate the applicability and accuracy of self-sampling in detecting hrHPV in a screening responder population. A total of 2049 women, aged 30-60years, participating in the screening program in The Netherlands were included from April 2013 to May 2015. After they had their cervical smear taken, women self-collected a cervicovaginal sample with a brush-based device, the Evalyn Brush. Both the cervical smear and self-sample specimen were tested with the COBAS 4800 HPV platform. The hrHPV prevalence was 8.0% (95% CI 6.9-9.2) among the physician-taken samples, and 10.0% (95% CI 8.7-11.3) among the self-samples. There was 96.8% (95% CI 96.0-97.5) concordance of hrHPV prevalence between self-samples and physician-taken samples. Women in our study evaluated self-sampling as convenient (97.1%), user-friendly (98.5%), and 62.8% preferred self-sampling over a physician-taken sampling for the next screening round. In conclusion, self-sampling showed high concordance with physician-taken sampling for hrHPV detection in a responder screening population and highly acceptable to women. Implementation of HPV-self-sampling for the responder population as a primary screening tool may be considered.

Evidence supporting see-and-treat management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Studies of see-and-treat management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) vary in their inclusion criteria, resulting in a broad range of overtreatment rates. OBJECTIVES: To determine overtreatment rates in see-and-treat management of women referred for colposcopy because of suspected CIN, in order to define circumstances supporting see-and-treat management. SEARCH STRATEGY: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception up to 12 May 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies of see-and-treat management in women with a reported cervical smear result, colposcopic impression, and histology result were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Methodological quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. We used the inverse variance method for pooling incidences, and a random-effects model was used to account for heterogeneity between studies. Overtreatment was defined as treatment in patients with no CIN or CIN1. MAIN RESULTS: Thirteen studies (n = 4611) were included. The overall overtreatment rate in women with a high-grade cervical smear and a high-grade colposcopic impression was 11.6% (95% CI 7.8-15.3%). The overtreatment rate in women with a high-grade cervical smear and low-grade colposcopic impression was 29.3% (95% CI 16.7-41.9%), and in the case of a low-grade smear and high-grade colposcopic impression it was 46.4% (95% CI 15.7-77.1%). In women with a low-grade smear and low-grade colposcopic impression, the overtreatment rate was 72.9% (95% CI 68.1-77.7%). AUTHOR'S CONCLUSIONS: The pooled overtreatment rate in women with a high-grade smear and high-grade colposcopic impression is at least comparable with the two-step procedure, which supports the use of see-and-treat management in this subgroup of women. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: See-and-treat management is justified in the case of a high-grade smear and a high-grade colposcopic impression.

DNA methylation analysis in self-sampled brush material as a triage test in hrHPV-positive women.

BACKGROUND: Primary high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing in cervical cancer screening shows relatively low specificity, which makes triage testing necessary. In this study, DNA methylation analysis was compared with cytology for triage testing in hrHPV-positive women. Moreover, feasibility of DNA methylation analysis directly on brush-based self-sampled specimens was assessed. METHODS: Non-responding women from population-based screening were invited to self-collect a cervico-vaginal specimen for hrHPV testing; hrHPV-positive women were referred to a physician for triage liquid-based cytology. DNA methylation analysis was performed on 128 hrHPV-positive physician-collected triage samples and 50 matched brush self-samples with QMSP for C13ORF18, EPB41L3, JAM3 and TERT. RESULTS: In physician-taken triage material, DNA methylation analysis of JAM3 showed the highest combined specificity (88%) and sensitivity (82%) for detection of CIN3+, whereas cytology showed a specificity of 48% and a sensitivity of 91%. Out of 39 women with abnormal cytology and normal histology (false-positive by cytology), 87% were negative for JAM3 and 90% for C13ORF18 methylation. Agreement between DNA methylation analysis performed directly on the matched self-sampled material and physician-taken samples was 88% for JAM3 (κ=0.75, P<0.001) and 90% for C13ORF18 (κ=0.77; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: DNA methylation analysis as a triage test in hrHPV-positive women is an attractive alternative to cytology. Furthermore, DNA methylation is feasible directly on brush-based self-samplers and showed good correlation with matched physician-taken samples. Direct molecular triage on self-collected specimens could optimise the screening program, especially for non-responders, as this would eliminate the need for an additional physician-taken scraping for triage testing.