Strategies to accelerate the elimination of cervical cancer in British Columbia, Canada: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: To eliminate cervical cancer in Canada by 2040, defined as an annual age-standardized incidence rate (ASIR) lower than 4.0 per 100 000 women, the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer (CPAC) identified 3 priorities for action: increasing human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine coverage, implementing HPV-based screening and increasing screening participation, and improving follow-up after abnormal screen results. Our objective was to explore the impact of these priorities on the projected time to elimination of cervical cancer in British Columbia. METHODS: We used OncoSim-Cervical, a microsimulation model led and supported by CPAC and developed by Statistics Canada that simulates HPV transmission and the natural history of cervical cancer for the Canadian population. We updated model parameters to reflect BC's historical participation rates and program design. We simulated the transition to HPV-based screening and developed scenarios to explore the additional impact of achieving 90% vaccination coverage, 95% screening recruitment, 90% ontime screening, and 95% follow-up compliance. We projected cervical cancer incidence, ASIR, and year of elimination for the population of BC for 2023-2050. RESULTS: HPV-based screening at current vaccination, participation, and follow-up rates can eliminate cervical cancer by 2034. Increasing on-time screening and follow-up compliance could achieve this target by 2031. Increasing vaccination coverage has a small impact over this time horizon. INTERPRETATION: With the implementation of HPV-based screening, cervical cancer can be eliminated in BC before 2040. Efforts to increase screening participation and follow-up through this transition could potentially accelerate this timeline, but the transition from cytology- to HPV-based screening is fundamental to achieving this goal.

Evidence of decreased long-term risk of cervical pre-cancer after negative primary HPV screens compared to negative cytology screens in a longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Growing use of primary HPV cervical cancer screening requires determining appropriate screening intervals to avoid overtreatment of transient disease. This study examined the long-term risk of cervical precancer after HPV screening to inform screening interval recommendations. METHODS: This longitudinal cohort study (British Columbia, Canada, 2008-2022) recruited women and individuals with a cervix (WIC) who received 1-2 negative HPV screen(s) (HPV1 cohort, N = 5,546, HPV2 cohort, N = 6,624) during a randomized trial and WIC with 1-2 normal cytology result(s) (BCS1 cohort, N = 782,297, BCS2 cohort, N = 673,778) extracted from the provincial screening registry. All participants were followed through the registry for 14 years. Long-term risk of cervical precancer or worse (CIN2+) was compared between HPV and cytology cohorts. RESULTS: Cumulative risks of CIN2+ were 3.2/1000 (95% CI: 1.6 to 4.7) in HPV1 and 2.7/1000 (CI: 1.2 to 4.2) in HPV2 after eight years. This was comparable to the risk in the cytology cohorts after 3 years (BCS1: 3.3/1000, [CI: 3.1 to 3.4]; BCS2: 2.5, [CI: 2.4 to 2.6]). The cumulative risk of CIN2+ after 10 years was low in HPV cohorts (HPV1: 4.7/1000, [CI: 2.6 to 6.7]; HPV2: 3.9, [CI: 1.1 to 6.6]). CONCLUSIONS: Risk of CIN2+ eight years after negative screen in HPV cohorts was comparable to risk after 3 years in cytology cohorts (the benchmark for acceptable risk). IMPACT: These findings suggest that primary HPV screening intervals could be extended beyond the current five-year recommendation potentially reducing barriers to screening.

Colposcopy referral rates post-introduction of primary screening with human papillomavirus testing: evidence from a large British Columbia cohort study.

Background: Shifting from cytology to human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening will initially increase colposcopy referrals. The anticipated impact on health systems has been raised as a concern for implementation. It is unclear if the higher rate of colposcopy referrals is sustained after initial HPV-based screens or reverts to new lower baselines due to earlier detection and treatment of precancer. This study aimed to investigate long-term rates of colposcopy referrals after participation in HPV-based screening. Methods: Participants of HPV for Cervical Cancer Screening trial (HPV FOCAL) received one (HPV1, N = 6204) or two (HPV2, N = 9540) HPV-based screens. After exit, they returned to British Columbia's (BC) cytology screening program. A comparison cohort from the BC screening population (BCS, N = 1,140,745) was identified, mirroring trial inclusion criteria. All participants were followed for 10-14 years through the provincial screening registry. Colposcopy referral rates per 1000 screens were calculated for each group. Trial colposcopy referrals for HPV1 and HPV2 were calculated under two referral scenarios: (1) all HPV positive referred to colposcopy; (2) cytology triage with ASCUS or greater referred to colposcopy. Colposcopy referrals from post-trial screens in HPV1 an HPV2 and all screens in BCS were based on actual recommendations from the screening program. A multivariable flexible survival regression model compared hazard ratios (HR) throughout follow-up. Findings: Scenario 2 referral rates were higher during initial HPV screen(s) vs cytology screen (HPV1: 28 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 24, 33), HPV2: 32 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 29, 36), BCS: 8 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 8.9)). However, post-trial rates in HPV1 and HPV2 were significantly lower than in BCS. Cumulative rates in HPV1 and HPV2 approached the cumulative rate in BCS 11-12 years after HPV-based screening (HPV1: 11 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 10, 12), HPV2: 16 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 15-17), BCS: 11 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 10, 11)). Adjusted models demonstrated reductions in referral rates in HPV1 (HR = 0.6, 95% CI: 0.5, 0.7) and HPV2 (HR = 0.7, 95% CI: 0.6, 0.8) relative to BCS by 54 and 72 months post-final HPV screen respectively. Interpretation: Reduced colposcopy referral rates were observed after initial rounds of HPV-based screening. After initial HPV screening, referral rates to colposcopy after cytology triage were below the current rates seen in a centralized cytology program after approximately four years. Any expected increase in referrals at initiation of HPV-based screening could be countered by staged program implementation. Funding: This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (R01 CA221918), Michael Smith Health Research BC (RT-2021-1595), and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MCT82072).

Community-integrated self-collected HPV-based cervix screening in a low-resource rural setting: a pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial.

Effective approaches to improve coverage of self-collected human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervix screening (SCS) as well as attendance at treatment for HPV-positive participants are needed to inform policy on optimal integration of cervical cancer screening programs within existing infrastructure in low-resource settings. ASPIRE Mayuge was a pragmatic cluster-randomized trial in rural Mayuge district, Uganda, comparing the superiority of two recruitment implementation strategies for SCS: Door-to-Door versus Community Health Day. Villages were randomized (unblinded) to a strategy, and participants aged 25-49 years with no previous history of hysterectomy or treatment for cervical cancer or pre-cancer were eligible. Participants completed a survey and participated in SCS. The primary outcome was rate of attendance at treatment after a positive SCS. The trial randomized 31 villages and 2,019 participants included in these analyses (Door-to-Door: 16 clusters, 1,055 participants; Community Health Day: 15 clusters, 964 participants). Among HPV-positive participants, attendance at treatment rates were 75% (Door-to-Door) and 67% (Community Health Day) (P = 0.049). Participants in the Community Health Day intervention were less likely to attend treatment compared to Door-to-Door (risk ratio = 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.64-0.96). No adverse events were reported. Policymakers in low-resource settings can use these results to guide implementation of SCS programs. ISRCTN registration: 12767014 . ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT04000503 .

The role of daughters in relation to their mother's cervical cancer diagnosis and treatment in Guatemala: a descriptive study.

PURPOSE: There is currently no information on how caregivers for women diagnosed with cervical cancer in Guatemala, particularly daughters, are affected by their supportive role. This study's objective was to describe the support role of caregivers in the country, with a focus on daughters with a mother diagnosed with cervical cancer. METHODS: This analysis utilizes data from a cross-sectional study which aimed to understand pathways to cervical cancer care. Women seeking cervical cancer treatment at the Instituto de Cancerologia (INCAN) in Guatemala City, Guatemala and their companions were surveyed. Descriptive statistics were calculated. RESULTS: One hundred forty-five women seeking treatment and 71 companions participated in the study. Patient's daughters were most frequently reported as the person who provided the most support (51%) and as the most reported to have encouraged the patient to seek care. Furthermore, daughters were noted as the person most reported to fulfill the major household and livelihood roles of the patient while they were seeking or receiving treatment (38.0%). Most daughters reported that they were missing housework (77%), childcare (63%), and income-earning activities (60%) to attend the appointment with their mothers. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that in Guatemala cervical cancer patient's daughters have a significant support role in their mother's cancer diagnosis. Furthermore, we found that while caring for their mothers, daughters in Guatemala are often unable to participate in their primary labor activities. This highlights the additional burden that cervical cancer has on women in Latin America.

Experiences with thermal ablation for cervical precancer treatment after self-collection HPV-based screening in the ASPIRE Mayuge randomized trial.

Cervical cancer remains a significant public health burden in low-resourced countries. Thus, the WHO prioritized cervix screening, and recently recommended thermal ablation treatment for cervical precancer. However, there is limited information on side effects during treatment and recovery, and acceptability among those treated. The ASPIRE Mayuge trial recruited women to participate in self-collection cervix screening between 2019 and 2020 (N = 2019). Screen-positive women (N = 531, 26.3%) were referred for visual inspection with acetic acid and thermal ablation treatment, per Uganda Ministry of Health recommendations; 71.2% of those referred attended follow-up. Six months post-screening, a subset of trial participants were recontacted. Those who received thermal ablation completed a survey assessing side effects during and after the procedure, and willingness to recommend the treatment to others. We summarized the results to describe the side effects and acceptability of thermal ablation treatment. Of 2019 participants, 349 (17%) received thermal ablation. A subset of 135 completed the follow-up survey, where 90% reported pain during treatment; however, intensity and duration were low. Over a third of women reported problems with recovery for reasons including pain, discharge and bleeding. Regardless, 98% reported they would recommend the treatment to others. The use of thermal ablation to treat cervical precancer appears to be highly acceptable in this population. While many women reported side effects during the procedure and recovery, the majority said they would recommend the treatment to others. However, given the substantial proportion who reported problems with recovery, efforts should be made to provide additional resources to women after receiving thermal ablation treatment for cervical precancer.

Cervical cancer knowledge and barriers and facilitators to screening among women in two rural communities in Guatemala: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 80% of deaths due to cervical cancer occur in low- and middle-income countries. In Guatemala, limited access to effective screening and treatment has resulted in alarmingly high cervical cancer incidence and mortality rates. Despite access to free-of-cost screening, women continue to face significant barriers in obtaining screening for cervical cancer. METHODS: In-depth interviews (N = 21) were conducted among women in two rural communities in Guatemala. Interviews followed a semi-structured guide to explore knowledge related to cervical cancer and barriers and facilitators to cervical cancer screening. RESULTS: Cervical cancer knowledge was variable across sites and across women. Women reported barriers to screening including ancillary costs, control by male partners, poor provider communication and systems-level resource constraints. Facilitators to screening included a desire to know one's own health status, conversations with other women, including community health workers, and extra-governmental health campaigns. CONCLUSIONS: Findings speak to the many challenges women face in obtaining screening for cervical cancer in their communities as well as existing facilitators. Future interventions must focus on improving cervical cancer-related knowledge as well as mitigating barriers and leveraging facilitators to promote screening.

Barriers To Accessing Contraception and Cervical and Breast Cancer Screening During COVID-19: A Prospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to examine how access to contraception and cervical and breast cancer screening in British Columbia, Canada, has been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: From August 2020 to March 2021, 3691 female residents of British Columbia (age 25-69 y) participated in this study. We used generalized estimating equations to analyze the proportion of females accessing contraception and the proportion having difficulty accessing contraception across the different phases of pandemic control measures, and logistic regression to analyze attendance at cervical and breast cancer screening. We added sociodemographic and biological variables individually into the models. Self-reported barriers to accessing contraception and attending screening were summarized. RESULTS: During phases with the highest pandemic controls, self-reported access to contraception was lower (OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.90-0.98; P = 0.005) and difficulty with access was higher (OR 2.74; 95% CI 1.54-4.88; P = 0.001). A higher proportion of adults aged 25-34 years reported difficulty accessing contraception than those aged 35-39 years (P < 0.0001), and participants identifying as Indigenous had higher odds of access difficulties (OR 5.56; 95% CI 2.44-12.50; P < 0.001). Of those who required screening during the COVID-19 pandemic, 62% and 54.5% did not attend at least one of their cervical or breast screening appointments, respectively. Those with a history of breast cancer had significantly higher odds of self-reporting having attended their mammogram appointment compared with those without a history of breast cancer (OR 5.62; 95% CI 2.69-13.72; P < 0.001). The most common barriers to screening were difficulty getting an appointment and appointments being considered non-urgent. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has uniquely affected access to contraception and cancer screening participation for various subgroups. Self-reported data present potential avenues for mitigating barriers.

Human papillomavirus-based screening at extended intervals missed fewer cervical precancers than cytology in the HPV For Cervical Cancer (HPV FOCAL) trial.

While cervix screening using cytology is recommended at 2- to 3-year intervals, given the increased sensitivity of human papillomavirus (HPV)-based screening to detect precancer, HPV-based screening is recommended every 4- to 5-years. As organized cervix screening programs transition from cytology to HPV-based screening with extended intervals, there is some concern that cancers will be missed between screens. Participants in HPV FOr CervicAL Cancer (HPV FOCAL) trial received cytology (Cytology Arm) at 24-month intervals or HPV-based screening (HPV Arm) at 48-month intervals; both arms received co-testing (cytology and HPV testing) at exit. We investigated the results of the co-test to identify participants with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+) who would not have had their precancer detected if they had only their arm's respective primary screen. In the Cytology Arm, 25/62 (40.3%) identified CIN2+s were missed by primary screen (ie, normal cytology/positive HPV test) and all 25 had normal cytology at the prior 24-month screen. In the HPV arm, three CIN2+s (3/49, 6.1%) were missed by primary screen (ie, negative HPV test/abnormal cytology). One of these three misses had low-grade cytology findings and would also not have been referred to colposcopy outside of the trial. Multiple rounds of cytology did not detect some precancerous lesions detected with one round of HPV-based screening. In our population, cytology missed more CIN2+, even at shorter screening intervals, than HPV-based screening. This assuages concerns about missed detection postimplementation of an extended interval HPV-based screening program. We recommend that policymakers consider a shift from cytology to HPV-based cervix screening.

Long-term cervical precancer outcomes after a negative DNA- or RNA-based human papillomavirus test result.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer, a preventable disease associated with the human papillomavirus, is responsible for significant morbidity and mortality globally. Primary human papillomavirus testing is more sensitive in detecting precancerous cervical lesions than cytologic screening and can be conducted using either DNA- or RNA-based assays. Screening programs must select the most appropriate assay from several available assays for their population. It is not yet known whether these assays perform equivalently in the long term, particularly among women with a negative human papillomavirus test result. This study aims to compare long-term safety after a negative human papillomavirus test result across both DNA- and RNA-based testing assays. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare long-term high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher) outcomes of 2 DNA-based assays (Digene Hybrid Capture 2 High-Risk HPV DNA Test and cobas 4800 HPV Test) and 1 messenger RNA-based assay (Aptima HPV Assay) using data from the Human Papillomavirus For Cervical Cancer Trial-DECADEl (FOCAL-DECADE) cohort, by first comparing the positive and negative rates between the assays and then investigating the cumulative incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 and higher and grade 3 or higher detection among participants in the FOCAL DECADE cohort over follow-up according to human papillomavirus testing assays. STUDY DESIGN: The FOCAL Trial was a randomized controlled trial that evaluated human papillomavirus testing for primary cervical cancer screening. The FOCAL-DECADE cohort subsequently followed FOCAL Trial participants passively through the British Columbia Cervix Screening Program Database for approximately 10 years after the FOCAL Trial study exit to examine the rates of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher. For this study, eligible participants had baseline human papillomavirus-negative results from at least 1 assay and had 1 or more cytologic screens after baseline (9509 participants for DNA-based and 3473 participants for DNA- vs RNA-based assay comparisons). We constructed cumulative incidence curves and compared the hazard ratios for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher detection according to the assays. RESULTS: Over 10 years of follow-up, the cumulative incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher did not significantly differ between the DNA-based assays (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.06; P=.35 and hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-1.01; P=.06 for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or higher, respectively) or between the DNA- and RNA-based assays (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.87-1.06; P=.48 and hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-1.13; P=.52 for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or higher, respectively). CONCLUSION: Among participants who tested negative for human papillomavirus at baseline, the long-term risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher did not significantly differ regardless of whether DNA- or RNA-based human papillomavirus testing assays were used. Screening program decision makers can be confident that for women who test negative for human papillomavirus, DNA- and RNA-based assays exhibit similar cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher outcomes over several years.

Assessing 10-Year Safety of a Single Negative HPV Test for Cervical Cancer Screening: Evidence from FOCAL-DECADE Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Long-term safety of a single negative human papillomavirus (HPV) test for cervical cancer screening is unclear. The HPV FOr cerviCAL Cancer Trial (FOCAL) was a randomized trial comparing HPV testing with cytology. The FOCAL-DECADE cohort tracked women who received one HPV test during FOCAL, and were HPV negative, for up to 10 years to identify cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) detected through a provincial screening program. METHODS: FOCAL participants who received one HPV test, were negative, and had at least one post-FOCAL cervix screen were included (N = 5,537). We constructed cumulative incidence curves of CIN2+/CIN3+ detection, analyzed cumulative risk of detection at intervals post-HPV test, calculated average incidence rates for detection, and compared hazard across ages. RESULTS: Ten years after one negative HPV test, the probability of CIN2+ detection was lower than 1%, with most lesions detected 7 years or later. Average incidence rates of CIN2+/CIN3+ lesions over follow-up were 0.50 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.31-0.78] and 0.18 (95% CI, 0.07-0.36) per 1,000 person-years, respectively. Hazards were higher for younger ages (nonsignificant trend). CONCLUSIONS: Among women with a single negative HPV test, long-term risk of CIN2+ detection was low, particularly through 7 years of follow-up; thus, one negative HPV test appears to confer long-term protection from precancerous lesions. Even 10-year risk is sufficiently low to support extended testing intervals in average-risk populations. IMPACT: Our findings support the safety of screening policies using HPV testing alone at 5-year or longer intervals.

Cross-sectional study on the awareness, susceptibility and use of heated tobacco products among adolescents in Guatemala City, Guatemala.

OBJECTIVES: Heated tobacco products (HTPs) are increasingly marketed worldwide, yet limited research on HTPs has been conducted in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) or among adolescents. Guatemala is one of the few LMICs where HTPs are available. This study examined prevalence and correlates of HTP awareness, susceptibility and use among adolescents in Guatemala. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A cross-sectional survey on HTP awareness, susceptibility and use was conducted among 2870 students between the ages of 13 and 17 in private schools in Guatemala City, Guatemala. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was susceptibility to future use of HTP among school-aged current and never smokers in Guatemala. We also explored awareness and use of HTPs. Multivariate binomial regression models were used to explore associations between these outcomes and both sociodemographic factors and established smoking correlates. RESULTS: Of all students (n=2870), about half were aware of HTPs (52.4%) and susceptible to future or continued use (52.4%). Whereas 8.4% of students had tried HTPs in the lifetime (but not in the last month), only 2.9% used HTPs in the past month. Independent correlates of HTP susceptibility and ever-use included: use of other tobacco products (current smoking: adjusted OR (AOR)=10.53 and 6.63, respectively; current e-cigarette use: AOR=21.87 and 10.40, respectively), moderate alcohol consumption (AOR=1.49 and 1.19, respectively), marijuana use in the past 30 days (AOR=3.49 and 2.29, respectively) and having friends who use HTPs (AOR=1.83 and 7.28, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Among this sample of adolescents in Guatemala City, where tobacco control is weak, the prevalence of HTP use was low but susceptibility to future use was high. Tobacco prevention and intervention strategies for cigarettes and e-cigarettes should now also include HTPs, which tend to be used by similar adolescent populations (ie, those who use other substances or are exposed to tobacco through family and friends).

Using self-collection HPV testing to increase engagement in cervical cancer screening programs in rural Guatemala: a longitudinal analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is a leading cause of death in low- and middle-income countries. Self-collection testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) is an alternative form of cervical cancer screening that can be completed privately and at home. Understanding how the use of HPV testing influences follow-up care in low-resourced settings is crucial before broad implementation. This study aimed to identify if access to self-collection HPV testing impacts participation in established cervical cancer screening programs among women in two rural communities in Guatemala. METHODS: A cohort of 956 women was recruited in 2016 and followed for 2 years for the HPV Multiethnic Study (HPV MES). At baseline, women answered a questionnaire assessing cervical cancer screening history and were offered self-collection HPV testing. Women were re-contacted yearly to determine receipt of additional screening. Statistical changes in screening behavior before and throughout study participation, stratified by self-collection status, were assessed using McNemar pair tests for proportions. Alluvial plots were constructed to depict changes in individual screening behavior. The odds of changes in Pap-compliance (screened in past 3 years), given collection status, were assessed using multivariate logistic regressions. RESULTS: Reported screening rates increased 2 years after enrollment compared to rates reported for the 3 years before study entry among women who collected a sample (19.1% increase, p < 0.05), received results of their test (22.1% increase, p < 0.05), and received positive (24.2% increase, p < 0.1) or negative results (21.7% increase, p < 0.05). However, most increases came from one community, with minimal changes in the other. The adjusted odds of becoming Pap compliant were higher for women who collected a sample vs. did not (OR: 1.48, 95% CI: 0.64, 3.40), received their result vs. did not (OR: 1.29, 95% CI: 0.52, 3.02), and received a positive result vs. negative (OR: 2.43, 95% CI: 0.63, 16.10). CONCLUSIONS: Participation in self-collection HPV testing campaigns may increase likelihood of involvement in screening programs. However, results varied between communities, and reporting of screening histories was inconsistent. Future work should identify what community-specific factors promote success in HPV testing programs and focus on improving education on existing cervical cancer interventions.

Barriers to cervical cancer screening in Guatemala: a quantitative analysis using data from the Guatemala Demographic and Health Surveys.

OBJECTIVES: Examine the association between commonly reported barriers to health care, including discordant spoken languages between patients and providers, and reported previous cervical cancer screening. METHODS: Data from the nationally representative Guatemala National Maternal and Child Health Survey from the Demographic and Health Surveys Program were used to explore associations between barriers and screening rates nationwide and in high-risk populations, such as rural and indigenous communities. Negative binomial regressions were run accounting for survey sample weights to calculate prevalence ratios. RESULTS: 64.0%, 57.5% and 47.5% of women reported ever screening, in the overall, indigenous, and rural populations, respectively. Overall, never screened for cervical cancer was associated with the following health barriers: needing permission, cost, distance, not wanting to go alone, and primary language not spoken by health providers, even after adjustment for age, ethnicity, and literacy. CONCLUSIONS: Offering screening programs alone is not enough to reduce the burden of cervical cancer in Guatemala. Measures need to be taken to reduce barriers to health care, particularly in rural areas, where screening rates are lowest.

Barriers to cervical cancer screening and acceptability of HPV self-testing: a cross-sectional comparison between ethnic groups in Southern Thailand.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer rates are higher in low-resourced countries than high, partly due to lower rates of screening. Incidence in Thailand is nearly three times higher than in the USA (16.2 vs 6.5 age-standardised incidence), even with Thailand's universal health coverage, which includes screening, suggesting that alternative methods are needed to reduce the burden. We investigated barriers to screening, as well as acceptability of self-collection human papillomavirus (HPV) testing as a primary form of cervical cancer screening among Buddhist and Muslim communities in Southern Thailand. METHODS: 267 women from the Buddhist district of Ranot and Muslim district of Na Thawi, Songkhla were recruited to complete a survey assessing knowledge and risk factors of HPV and cervical cancer. Participants were offered an HPV self-collection test with a follow-up survey assessing acceptability. Samples were processed at Prince of Songkhla University and results were returned to participants. RESULTS: 267 women participated in the study (132 Buddhist, 135 Muslim), 264 (99%) self-collecting. 98% reported comfort and ease, and 70% preferred it to doctor-facilitated cytology. The main predictor of prior screening was religion (92% Buddhist vs 73% Muslim reporting prior Pap). After adjustment with multivariate logistic models, Muslim women had an OR of prior Pap of 0.30 compared with Buddhist (95% CI: 0.12 to 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: Self-collection HPV testing was highly acceptable across religious groups, suggesting that it could be beneficial for cervical cancer reduction in this region. Focus should be put into educating women from all backgrounds about the importance of screening to further improve screening rates among Thai women.

HPV self-sampling acceptability in rural and indigenous communities in Guatemala: a cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: Cervical cancer disproportionately burdens low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) such as Guatemala. Self-collection testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) has been suggested as a form of cervical cancer screening to facilitate access in LMICs. This study assessed and compared the acceptability of self-collection HPV testing in two rural, indigenous and ethnically distinct communities in Guatemala: Santiago Atitlán, Sololá and Livingston, Izabal. METHODS: All participants, women between the ages of 18 and 60, completed a questionnaire. Eligible participants were also asked to self-collect a vaginal sample and complete a questionnaire regarding comfort and acceptability. Self-collected samples were tested for high-risk HPV using the real-time PCR Hybribio kit. RESULTS: In the indigenous community of Santiago Atitlán, of 438 age-eligible participants, 94% completed self-collection. Of those, 81% found it comfortable and 98% were willing to use it as a form of screening. In the multiethnic (Afro-Caribbean, indigenous) community of Livingston, of 322 age-eligible participants, 53% chose to self-collect. Among those who took the test, 83% found it comfortable and 95% were willing to use it as a form of screening. In Livingston, literacy (can read and/or write vs cannot read or write) was higher in women who chose to self-collect (prevalence ratio 2.25; 95% CI 1.38 to 3.68). Ethnicity, history of screening and reproductive history were not associated with willingness to self-collect in Livingston. Women in Santiago reported less prior use of healthcare than women in Livingston. Overall, 19% (106/549) of samples tested positive for high-risk HPV. CONCLUSION: Among women willing to self-collect in rural and indigenous communities in Guatemala, self-collection for HPV testing is highly acceptable. However, willingness to try self-collection might vary across communities and settings. Women from a community that used less healthcare were more likely to choose self-collection. Further research is necessary to determine what factors influence a woman's choice to self-collect.

Acceptability of Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling for Cervical Cancer Screening in an Indigenous Community in Guatemala.

PURPOSE: Cervical cancer rates in Latin America are higher than those in developed countries, likely because of the lower prevalence of screening. Specifically, less than 40% of women in Guatemala are regularly screened and even fewer women are screened in indigenous communities. Current screening strategies-Pap smears and visual inspection with acetic acid-might not be the most effective methods for controlling cancer in these settings. We thus investigated the potential of self-collection of cervical samples with testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) to help prevent cervical cancer in an indigenous community in Guatemala. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A community representative random sample of 202 indigenous women age 18 to 60 years residing in Santiago Atitlan, Guatemala, were surveyed to assess knowledge of and risk factors for HPV and cervical cancer. Women were then invited to self-collect a cervical sample using HerSwab collection kits to assess the prevalence of HPV and the acceptability of self-sampling. RESULTS: Of 202 women who completed the survey, 178 (89%) provided a self-sample. In all, 79% of these women found the test comfortable, 91% found the test easy to use, and 100% reported they were willing to perform the test periodically as a screening method. Thirty-one samples (17%) were positive for at least one of 13 high-risk HPV types, and eight (4.5%) were positive for HPV 16/18. CONCLUSION: HPV testing by using self-collected samples was well accepted, suggesting that it is a plausible modality for cervical cancer screening in indigenous communities. Further studies are needed to assess rates of follow-up after a positive test and to determine whether these findings extend to other indigenous and nonindigenous communities in Guatemala and Latin America.