Characteristics of Clinicians Caring for Transgender Men and Nonbinary Individuals and Guideline Concordance of Clinicians' Cervical Cancer Screening Counseling for Cisgender Individuals Versus Transgender Men and Nonbinary Individuals with a Cervix.

Purpose: We examined characteristics of clinicians caring for transgender men and nonbinary (TMNB) individuals and guideline concordance of clinicians' cervical cancer screening recommendations. Methods: Using a survey of clinicians who performed ≥10 cervical cancer screenings in 2019, we studied characteristics of clinicians who do versus do not report caring for TMNB individuals and guideline concordance of screening recommendations for TMNB individuals with a cervix versus cisgender women. Results: In our sample (N = 492), 49.2% reported caring for TMNB individuals, and 25.4% reported performing cervical cancer screening for TMNB individuals with a cervix. Differences in guideline concordance of screening recommendations for TMNB individuals with a cervix versus cisgender women (45.8% vs. 50% concordant) were not statistically significant. Conclusion: Sizable proportions of clinicians cared for and performed cervical cancer screening for TMNB individuals. Research is needed to better understand clinicians' identified knowledge deficits to develop interventions (e.g., clinician trainings) to improve gender-affirming cervical cancer prevention.

Assessing Management of Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Results and Concordance with Guideline Recommendations in Three US Healthcare Settings.

BACKGROUND: Follow-up of abnormal results is essential to cervical cancer screening, but data on adherence to follow-up are limited. We describe patterns of follow-up after screening abnormalities and identify predictors of guideline-concordant follow-up. METHODS: We identified the index screening abnormality (positive human papillomavirus [HPV] test or atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance [ASC-US] or more severe cytology) among women 25-65 years old at three U.S. healthcare systems during 2010-2019. We estimated the cumulative incidence of surveillance testing, colposcopy, or treatment after the index abnormality and initial colposcopy. Logistic regressions were fit to identify predictors of guideline-concordant follow-up according to contemporaneous guidelines. RESULTS: Among 43,007 patients with an index abnormality, the cumulative incidence of any follow-up was 49.6% by 4 years for those with ASC-US/HPV-negative and higher for abnormalities warranting immediate colposcopy. The 1-year cumulative incidence of any follow-up after colposcopy was 70% for patients with normal results or cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) I and 90% for patients with CIN II+. Rates of concordant follow-up after screening and colposcopy were 52% and 47%. Discordant follow-up was associated with factors including age, race/ethnicity, overweight/obese BMI, and specific types of public payor coverage or being uninsured. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to recommended follow-up of cytologic and histopathologic abnormalities is inconsistent in clinical practice. Concordance was poor for mild abnormalities and improved, though suboptimal, for more severe abnormalities. IMPACT: There remain gaps in the cervical cancer screening process in clinical practice. Further work is needed to understand barriers to appropriate management of cervical abnormalities.

Associations of geographic-based socioeconomic factors and HPV vaccination among male and female children in five US states.

BACKGROUND: We assessed whether five geographic-based socioeconomic factors (medically underserved area (MUA); healthcare provider shortage area (HPSA); persistent poverty; persistent child poverty; and social vulnerability index (SVI)) were associated with the odds of HPV vaccination initiation, series completion, and parental vaccine hesitancy, and whether the observed relationships varied by gender of the child. METHODS: An online panel service, administered through Qualtrics®, was used to recruit parents of adolescents 9-17 years of age to complete a one-time survey in 2021. Coverage of the panel included five US states: Arkansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Tennessee, and Southern Illinois. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) models were used to assess population-level associations between five geographic-based socioeconomic factors (MUA; HPSA; persistent poverty; persistent child poverty; and SVI) and three HPV vaccination outcomes (initiation, series completion, and hesitancy). All GEE models were adjusted for age of child and clustering at the state level. RESULTS: Analyses were conducted using responses from 926 parents about their oldest child in the target age range (9-17 years). The analytic sample consisted of 471 male children and 438 female children across the five states. In adjusted GEE models, persistent child poverty and HPSA were negatively associated with HPV vaccination initiation and series completion among female children, respectively. Among male children, high social vulnerability was negatively associated with HPV vaccine series completion. Additionally, persistent poverty and high social vulnerability were negatively associated with HPV vaccine hesitancy in male children. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this cross-sectional study suggest that geographic-based socioeconomic factors, particularly, HPSA, persistent poverty, and SVI, should be considered when implementing efforts to increase HPV vaccine coverage for adolescents. The approaches to targeting these geographic factors should also be evaluated in future studies to determine if they need to be tailored for male and female children.

The association of caregiver attitudes, information sources, and trust with HPV vaccine initiation among adolescents.

This study described caregiver attitudes and the information sources they access about HPV vaccination for adolescents and determined their influence on human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination initiation. An online survey was administered to 1,016 adults in July 2021. Participants were eligible if they were the caregiver of a child aged 9-17 residing in Mississippi, Arkansas, Tennessee, Missouri, and select counties in Southern Illinois. Multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate the association of caregiver attitudes and information sources with HPV vaccination. Information from doctors or healthcare providers (87.4%) and internet sources other than social media (31.0%) were the most used sources for HPV vaccine information. The highest proportion of caregivers trusted their doctor or healthcare providers (92.4%) and family or friends (68.5%) as sources of information. The HPV vaccine series was more likely to be initiated in children whose caregivers agreed that the vaccine is beneficial (AOR = 4.39, 95% CI = 2.05, 9.39), but less likely with caregivers who were concerned about side effects (AOR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.42, 0.88) and who received HPV vaccination information from family or friends (AOR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.35, 0.93). This study found that caregivers' attitudes, information sources, and trust in those sources were associated with their adolescent's HPV vaccination status. These findings highlight the need to address attitudes and information sources and suggest that tailored interventions considering these factors could increase HPV vaccination rates.

Factors associated with shorter-interval cervical cancer screening for young women in three United States healthcare systems.

Frequently changing cervical cancer screening guidelines over the past two decades have been inconsistently adopted in the United States. Current guidelines set the recommended screening interval to three years for average-risk women aged 21-29 years. Few studies have evaluated how patient and provider factors are associated with implementation of cervical cancer screening intervals among younger women. This study evaluated multilevel factors associated with screening interval length among 69,939 women aged 21-29 years with an initial negative Pap screen between 2010 and 2015 across three large health systems in the U.S. Shorter-interval screening was defined as a second screening Pap within 2.5 years of an initial negative Pap. Mixed-effects logistic regression was performed for each site to identify provider and patient characteristics associated with shorter-interval screening. The odds of shorter-interval screening decreased over the study period across all sites, though the proportion of patients screened within 2.5 years remained between 7.5% and 20.7% across sites in 2014-2015. Patient factors including insurance, race/ethnicity, and pregnancy were associated with shorter-interval screening, though the patterns differed across sites. At one site, the variation in shorter-interval screening explained by the provider was 10.6%, whereas at the other two sites, the provider accounted for < 2% of the variation in shorter-interval screening. Our results highlight the heterogeneity in factors driving cervical cancer screening interval across health systems and point to the need for tailored approaches targeted to both providers and patients to improve guideline-concordant screening.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Cervical Cancer Screening From Three U.S. Healthcare Settings.

INTRODUCTION: This study sought to characterize racial and ethnic disparities in cervical cancer screening and follow-up of abnormal findings across 3 U.S. healthcare settings. METHODS: Data were from 2016 to 2019 and were analyzed in 2022, reflecting sites within the Multi-level Optimization of the Cervical Cancer Screening Process in Diverse Settings & Populations Research Center, part of the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process consortium, including a safety-net system in the southwestern U.S., a northwestern mixed-model system, and a northeastern integrated healthcare system. Screening uptake was evaluated among average-risk patients (i.e., no previous abnormalities) by race and ethnicity as captured in the electronic health record, using chi-square tests. Among patients with abnormal findings requiring follow-up, the proportion receiving colposcopy or biopsy within 6 months was reported. Multivariable regression was conducted to assess how clinical, socioeconomic, and structural characteristics mediate observed differences. RESULTS: Among 188,415 eligible patients, 62.8% received cervical cancer screening during the 3-year study period. Screening use was lower among non-Hispanic Black patients (53.2%) and higher among Hispanic (65.4%,) and Asian/Pacific Islander (66.5%) than among non-Hispanic White patients (63.5%, all p<0.001). Most differences were explained by the distribution of patients across sites and differences in insurance. Hispanic patients remained more likely to screen after controlling for a variety of clinical and sociodemographic factors (risk ratio=1.14, CI=1.12, 1.16). Among those receiving any screening test, Black and Hispanic patients were more likely to receive Pap-only testing (versus receiving co-testing). Follow-up from abnormal results was low for all groups (72.5%) but highest among Hispanic participants (78.8%, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort receiving care across 3 diverse healthcare settings, cervical cancer screening and follow-up were below 80% coverage targets. Lower screening for Black patients was attenuated by controlling for insurance and site of care, underscoring the role of systemic inequity. In addition, it is crucial to improve follow-up after abnormalities are identified, which was low for all populations.

Leveraging health infrastructure to optimize HPV vaccination for adolescents in Zambia: Protocol for an implementation study.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in Zambia, where HIV prevalence is also high (11.3%). HIV heightens the risk of developing and dying from cervical cancer. The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine can prevent 90% of cervical cancers, and in Zambia is recommended for adolescent girls ages 14-15 years, including those with HIV. Currently they mainly deliver HPV vaccination via school-based campaigns, which may exclude the most vulnerable adolescents-those out-of-school or who irregularly attend. Adolescents living with HIV (ALHIV) are more likely to have these vulnerabilities. Further, school-based campaigns are not tailored to the WHO-recommended HPV vaccination schedule for ALHIV (3 versus 2 doses). Integrating HPV vaccination into routine care in adolescent HIV clinics may ensure that ALHIV have access to vaccine at the WHO-recommended schedule. Such integration requires a multilevel approach, stakeholder engagement, and diversified implementation strategies, given known challenges of providing the HPV vaccine in LMICs, including Zambia. METHODS: Our study aims to integrate HPV vaccination into routine care in adolescent HIV clinics. To achieve success, we will co-design a package of implementation strategies using a previously successful implementation research approach developed for cervical cancer prevention in LMICs: the Integrative Systems Praxis for Implementation Research (INSPIRE). INSPIRE is a novel, comprehensive approach to develop, implement, and evaluate implementation science efforts. Following key elements of INSPIRE, our specific aims are to: 1) Identify the unique multilevel contextual factors (barriers and facilitators) across HIV settings (rural, urban, peri-urban) that influence HPV vaccine uptake; 2) Use Implementation Mapping to translate stakeholder feedback and findings from Aim 1 into a package of implementation strategies to integrate HPV vaccine into HIV clinics; 3) Conduct a Hybrid Type 3 effectiveness-implementation trial to evaluate the package of multilevel implementation strategies for integrating HPV vaccine into HIV clinics. DISCUSSION: Our research team has strong support, technical expertise, and resources (e.g., vaccines) from the Zambian Ministry of Health; and political will for scale-up. This stakeholder-based implementation model has the potential to be transported to HIV clinics across Zambia and serve as a model to address cancer prevention priorities for those with HIV in other LMICs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: To be registered prior to Aim 3, when implementation strategies finalized.

Provider beliefs in effectiveness and recommendations for primary HPV testing in 3 health-care systems.

In 2018, the US Preventive Services Task Force endorsed primary human papillomavirus testing (pHPV) for cervical cancer screening. We aimed to describe providers' beliefs about pHPV testing effectiveness and which screening approach they regularly recommend. We invited providers who performed 10 or more cervical cancer screens in 2019 in 3 healthcare systems that had not adopted pHPV testing: Kaiser Permanente Washington, Mass General Brigham, and Parkland Health; 53.7% (501/933) completed the survey between October and December 2020. Response distributions varied across modalities (P < .001), with cytology alone or cotesting being more often viewed as somewhat or very effective for 30- to 65-year-olds compared with pHPV (cytology alone 94.1%, cotesting 96.1%, pHPV 66.0%). In 21- to 29-year-olds, the pattern was similar (cytology alone 92.2%, 64.7% cotesting, 50.8% pHPV). Most providers were either incorrect or unsure of the guideline-recommended screening interval for pHPV. Educational efforts are needed about the relative effectiveness and recommended use of pHPV to promote guideline-concordant care.

Estimating Cancer Screening Sensitivity and Specificity Using Healthcare Utilization Data: Defining the Accuracy Assessment Interval.

The effectiveness and efficiency of cancer screening in real-world settings depend on many factors, including test sensitivity and specificity. Outside of select experimental studies, not everyone receives a gold standard test that can serve as a comparator in estimating screening test accuracy. Thus, many studies of screening test accuracy use the passage of time to infer whether or not cancer was present at the time of the screening test, particularly for patients with a negative screening test. We define the accuracy assessment interval as the period of time after a screening test that is used to estimate the test's accuracy. We describe how the length of this interval may bias sensitivity and specificity estimates. We call for future research to quantify bias and uncertainty in accuracy estimates and to provide guidance on setting accuracy assessment interval lengths for different cancers and screening modalities.

Variation in the receipt of human papilloma virus co-testing for cervical screening: Individual, provider, facility and healthcare system characteristics.

Since 2012, cervical cancer screening guidelines allow for choice of screening test for women age 30-65 years (i.e., Pap every 3 years or Pap with human papillomavirus co-testing every 5 years). Intended to give patients and providers options, this flexibility reflects a trend in the growing complexity of screening guidelines. Our objective was to characterize variation in cervical screening at the individual, provider, clinic/facility, and healthcare system levels. The analysis included 296,924 individuals receiving screening from 3626 providers at 136 clinics/facilities in three healthcare systems, 2010 to 2017. Main outcome was receipt of co-testing vs. Pap alone. Co-testing was more common in one healthcare system before the 2012 guidelines (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) of co-testing at the other systems relative to this system 0.00 and 0.50) but was increasingly implemented over time in a second with declining uptake in the third (2017: AORs shifted to 7.32 and 0.01). Despite system-level differences, there was greater heterogeneity in receipt of co-testing associated with providers than clinics/facilities. In the three healthcare systems, providers in the highest quartile of co-testing use had an 8.35, 8.81, and 25.05-times greater odds of providing a co-test to women with the same characteristics relative to the lowest quartile. Similarly, clinics/ facilities in the highest quartile of co-testing use had a 4.20, 3.14, and 6.56-times greater odds of providing a co-test relative to the lowest quartile. Variation in screening test use is associated with health system, provider, and clinic/facility levels even after accounting for patient characteristics.

De-implementation of cervical cancer screening before age 21.

In 2012, United States consensus guidelines were modified to recommend that cervical cancer screening not begin before age 21 and, since 2014, the Health Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS), a health plan quality measurement too, has included a measure for non-recommended cervical cancer screening among females ages 16-20. Our goal was to describe prevalence over time of cervical cancer screening before age 21 following the 2012 guideline change, and provide information to help understand how rapidly new guidelines may be disseminated and implemented into clinical practice. We used longitudinal clinical and administrative data from three diverse healthcare systems in the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR II) consortium to examine annual trends in screening before age 21. We identified 55,316 average-risk, screening-eligible females ages 18-20 between 2011 and 2017. For each calendar year, we estimated the proportion of females who received a Papanicolaou (Pap) test. We observed a steady decline in the proportion of females under age 21 who received a Pap test, from an average of 8.3% in 2011 to <1% in 2017 across the sites. The observed steady decline suggests growing adherence to the 2012 consensus guidelines. This trend was consistent across diverse geographic regions, healthcare systems, and patient populations, strengthening the generalizability of the results; however, since we only had 1-2 years of study data prior to the consensus guidelines, we cannot discern whether screening under age 21 was already in decline. Nonetheless, these results provide data to compare with other guideline changes to de-implement non-recommended screening practices.

Achieving equity in cervical cancer screening in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs): Strengthening health systems using a systems thinking approach.

The World Health Organization (WHO) is leading a call to action to eliminate cervical cancer by the end of the century through global implementation of two effective evidence-based preventive interventions: HPV vaccination and cervical screening and management (CSM). Models estimate that without intervention, over the next 50 years 12.2 million new cases of cervical cancer will occur, nearly 60% of which are preventable only through CSM. Given that more than 80% of the cervical cancer occurs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), scaling up sustainable CSM programs in these countries is a top priority for achieving the global elimination goals. Multiple technologies have been developed and validated to meet this need. Now it is critical to identify strategies to implement these technologies into complex, adaptive health care delivery systems. As part of the coordinated cervical cancer elimination effort, we applied a systems thinking lens to reflect on our experiences with implementation of HPV-based CSM programs using the WHO health systems framework. While many common health system barriers were identified, the effectiveness of implementation strategies to address them was context dependent; often reflecting differences in stakeholder's belief in the quality of the evidence supporting a CSM algorithm, the appropriateness of the evidence and algorithm to context, and the 'implementability' of the algorithm under realistic assessments of resource availability and constraints. A structured planning process, with early and broad stakeholder engagement, will ensure that shared-decisions in CSM implementation are appropriately aligned with the culture, values, and resource realities of the setting.

Rates of New Human Papillomavirus Detection and Loss of Detection in Middle-aged Women by Recent and Past Sexual Behavior.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the source of newly detected human papillomavirus (HPV) in middle-aged women is important to inform preventive strategies, such as screening and HPV vaccination. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study in Baltimore, Maryland. Women aged 35-60 years underwent HPV testing and completed health and sexual behavior questionnaires every 6 months over a 2-year period. New detection/loss of detection rates were calculated and adjusted hazard ratios were used to identify risk factors for new detection. RESULTS: The new and loss of detection analyses included 731 women, and 104 positive for high-risk HPV. The rate of new high-risk HPV detection was 5.0 per 1000 woman-months. Reporting a new sex partner was associated with higher detection rates (adjusted hazard ratio, 8.1; 95% confidence interval, 3.5-18.6), but accounted only for 19.4% of all new detections. Among monogamous and sexually abstinent women, new detection was higher in women reporting ≥5 lifetime sexual partners than in those reporting <5 (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-4.2). CONCLUSION: Although women remain at risk of HPV acquisition from new sex partners as they age, our results suggest that most new detections in middle-aged women reflect recurrence of previously acquired HPV.

Accuracy of Self-reported Colonic Polyps: Results from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Screening Trial Study of Colonoscopy Utilization.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy follow-up recommendations depend on the presence or absence of polyps, and if found, their number, size, and histology. Patients may be responsible for conveying results between primary and specialty care or providing medical information to family members; thus, accurate reporting is critical. This analysis assessed the accuracy of self-reported colonoscopy findings. METHODS: 3,986 participants from the Study of Colonoscopy Utilization, an ancillary study nested within the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Screening Trial, were included. Self-reports of polyp and adenoma were compared to medical records, and measures of sensitivity and specificity were calculated. Correlates of accurate self-report of polyp were assessed using logistic regression and weighted to account for study sampling. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of self-reported polyp findings were 88% and 85%, respectively, and for adenoma 11% and 99%, respectively. Among participants with a polyp, older age was associated with lower likelihood while polyp severity and non-white race were associated with increased likelihood of accurate recall. Among participants without a polyp, having multiple colonoscopies was associated with lower likelihood while family history of colorectal cancer was associated with increased likelihood of accurate recall. Among both groups, longer time since colonoscopy was associated with lower likelihood of accurate recall. CONCLUSIONS: Participants recalled with reasonable accuracy whether they had a prior polyp; however, recall of histology, specifically adenoma, was much less accurate. IMPACT: Identification of strategies to increase accurate self-report of colonic polyps are needed, particularly for patient-provider communications and patient reporting of results to family members.

Exacerbating disparities?: Cervical cancer screening and HPV vaccination.

The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine is a powerful tool in cancer prevention. In combination with cervical cancer screening programs, this vaccine has the potential to nearly eliminate death from cervical cancer. However, this remarkable public health success can only be realized if vaccines reach those most at risk-unscreened women. Vaccinating only those already well-screened would have little impact on cervical cancer mortality, exacerbate disparities, and be a striking public health failure. We use data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System optional Adult HPV Vaccination module between 2013 and 2016 to assess the association between HPV vaccine status and cervical cancer screening behavior. Only 27% of eligible women had received any HPV vaccination. Uninsured women were less likely to be vaccinated (aOR: 0.48, 95% CI:0.30-0.76) and less likely to be screened (aOR: 0.41, 95% CI:0.28-0.60) than insured women. Vaccinated women were more than twice as likely to be up to date on screening than unvaccinated women (aOR: 2.14, 95% CI:1.46-3.12). Younger women were 49% less likely to be up to date on screening (aOR: 0.51, 95% CI:0.37-0.71), but over 4 times more likely to be vaccinated (aOR: 4.44, 95% CI:3.20-6.17) than older women. Unvaccinated, unscreened women are at continued risk for cervical cancer. Uninsured women were most likely to be in this group. Concerted efforts should be focused on increasing vaccination and screening in this population. Cancer prevention innovations, like the HPV vaccine, must reach at-risk populations to avoid further protecting the protected and failing to reduce existing health disparities.

Cancer screening: health impact, prevalence, correlates, and interventions.

Objective: Cancer screening tests have helped to reduce cancer deaths. We provide an overview of recent research pertaining to the definition, health impact, and prevalence of several screening tests. We also discuss the multilevel correlates and determinants of screening and interventions designed to increase uptake. Design: Narrative review. Results: Epidemiologic evidence supports the effectiveness of several cancer screening tests in reducing mortality and are therefore routinely recommended. Nevertheless, uptake of routine screening falls short of recommendations in many countries, especially for colorectal cancer. Screening behaviour varies according to sociodemographic factors in addition to a range of other correlates and determinants at multiple levels. Though health behaviour theories have frequently been used to understand and identify intrapersonal level mechanisms to improve screening uptake, research suggests that additional factors from psychological and affective science, decision science, and behavioural economics should also be considered. Empirical support exists for patient education and provider recommendation interventions. Recent research has considered interventions at other levels, such as clinic, with mixed results. Conclusion: As screening recommendations evolve and become more nuanced with personalised screening, psychologists are well-placed to consider psychological factors, in conjunction with factors from other levels, that are helpful in understanding and changing screening behaviour.

Differences in Family Health History Knowledge Among Bisexual and Lesbian Women.

PURPOSE: We aimed to determine whether there are differences between sexual minority women and heterosexual women in family health history knowledge. METHODS: We used data from Dr. Susan Love Research Foundation's The Health of Women Study®. We included women who completed two of six online surveys between 2012 and 2015 (n = 22,410). RESULTS: Compared with heterosexual women, bisexual and lesbian women had consistently greater odds of not knowing their family health history (e.g., odds ratios of 2.59 and 1.56 for breast cancer, respectively). CONCLUSION: To avoid exacerbating existing health disparities, in the era of precision medicine, we must address gaps in knowledge of family health history.

Concordance with BRCA1/2 testing guidelines among women in The Health of Women (HOW) Study®.

PURPOSE: To evaluate factors associated with compliance to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for BRCA1/2 testing and identify groups who are at risk of under- and over-use of BRCA1/2 testing. METHODS: Data included 20,758 women from Dr. Susan Love Research Foundation's The Health of Women (HOW) Study®. Multinomial logistic regression was used to examine the association of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics with whether the woman was over-, under-, or appropriately tested for BRCA1/2 mutations, per 2015 NCCN guidelines. RESULTS: 3894 women (18.8%) reported BRCA1/2 testing. 5628 (27.1%) women who met NCCN criteria for testing were not tested. Among women with a history of breast cancer, those without health insurance were more likely to be under-tested (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.15-3.60) than those with managed care insurance, and higher education was associated with a lower likelihood of under-testing (Graduate/professional degree OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.55-0.91). CONCLUSION: Almost 30% of women were under-tested, indicating that many high-risk women who may benefit from genetic testing are currently being missed. Without appropriate testing, providers are unable to tailor screening recommendations to those carrying mutations who are at highest risk. Patient and healthcare provider education and outreach targeted to low-income and under-served populations may assist in reducing under-testing.

Association between the vaginal microbiota, menopause status, and signs of vulvovaginal atrophy.

OBJECTIVE: The vaginal microbiota helps protect the female genital tract from disease. We sought to describe the composition of the vaginal microbiota in premenopausal, perimenopausal, and postmenopausal women and to explore the association between the microbiota and vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA). METHODS: Eighty-seven women (aged 35-60 y) were classified as premenopausal (n = 30), perimenopausal (n = 29), or postmenopausal (n = 28) according to Stages of Reproductive Aging Workshop guidelines. Midvaginal bacterial community composition was characterized by 16S ribosomal RNA gene analysis. RESULTS: Bacterial communities clustered into six community state types (CSTs), of which four were dominated by Lactobacillus crispatus, Lactobacillus gasseri, Lactobacillus iners, or Lactobacillus jensenii, and two (CST IV-A and CST IV-B) had low relative abundance of Lactobacillus. CST IV-A was characterized by Streptococcus and Prevotella, whereas CST IV-B was characterized by Atopobium. There were significant associations between menopause stage and CST (P = 0.004) and between VVA and CST (P = 0.002). Perimenopausal women were more likely to be classified as CST IV-A or L. gasseri CST, whereas postmenopausal women were often classified as CST IV-A. CSTs dominated by L. crispatus and L. iners were more prevalent in premenopausal women. Nineteen participants had signs of mild or moderate VVA. Compared with women with no VVA, the vaginal microbiota of women with mild or moderate atrophy had 25-fold greater odds of being classified as CST IV-A versus L. crispatus CST (adjusted odds ratio, 25.89; 95% credible interval, 2.98-406.79). CONCLUSIONS: A distinct bacterial community state (CST IV-A) with a low relative abundance of Lactobacillus is associated with VVA. Future studies recruiting a larger number of women are needed to replicate the findings. This study provides an impetus for future longitudinal studies designed to manage, modulate, and restore vaginal microbiota homeostasis, which would provide stronger evidence for a causal relationship with VVA and ultimately improve the treatment and prevention of atrophic vaginitis in menopause.

Risk of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia 2 or Worse by Cytology, Human Papillomavirus 16/18, and Colposcopy Impression: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To calculate pooled risk estimates for combinations of cytology result, human papillomavirus (HPV) 16/18 genotype and colposcopy impression to provide a basis for risk-stratified colposcopy and biopsy practice. DATA SOURCE: A PubMed search was conducted on June 1, 2016, and a ClinicalTrials.gov search was conducted on June 9, 2018, using key words such as "uterine cervical neoplasms," "cervical cancer," "mass screening," "early detection of cancer," and "colposcopy." METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Eligible studies must have included colposcopic impression and either cytology results or HPV 16/18 partial genotype results as well as a histologic biopsy diagnosis from adult women. Manuscripts were reviewed for the following: cytology, HPV status, and colposcopy impression as well as age, number of women, and number of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2, CIN 3, and cancer cases. Strata were defined by the various combinations of cytology, genotype, and colposcopic impression. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Of 340 abstracts identified, nine were eligible for inclusion. Data were also obtained from three unpublished studies, two of which have since been published. We calculated the risk of CIN 2 or worse and CIN 3 or worse based on cytology, colposcopy, and HPV 16/18 test results. We found similar risk patterns across studies in the lowest risk groups such that risk estimates were similar despite different referral populations and study designs. Women with a normal colposcopy impression (no acetowhitening), less than high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion cytology, and HPV 16/18-negative were at low risk of prevalent precancer. Women with at least two of the following: high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion cytology, HPV16- or HPV18-positive, and high-grade colposcopic impression were at highest risk of prevalent precancer. CONCLUSION: Our results support a risk-based approach to colposcopy and biopsy with modifications of practice at the lowest and highest risk levels.