Dataset Information

Effect of Mailed Human Papillomavirus Test Kits vs Usual Care Reminders on Cervical Cancer Screening Uptake, Precancer Detection, and Treatment: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT: Importance:In the United States, more than 50% of cervical cancers are diagnosed in underscreened women. Cervical cancer screening guidelines now include primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing as a recommended strategy. Home-based HPV self-sampling is a viable option for increasing screening compliance and effectiveness; however, US data are needed to inform health care system implementation. Objective:To evaluate effectiveness of mailed HPV self-sampling kits vs usual care reminders for in-clinic screening to increase detection and treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and uptake of cervical cancer screening. Design, Setting, and Participants:Randomized clinical trial conducted in Kaiser Permanente Washington, a US integrated health care delivery system. Women aged 30 to 64 years with health plan enrollment for 3 years and 5 months or more, a primary care clinician, no Papanicolaou test within 3 years and 5 months, and no hysterectomy were identified through electronic medical records and enrolled from February 25, 2014, to August 29, 2016, with follow-up through February 26, 2018. Interventions:The control group received usual care (annual patient reminders and ad hoc outreach from primary care clinics). The intervention group received usual care plus a mailed HPV self-sampling kit. Main Outcomes and Measures:Two primary outcomes were (1) CIN2+ detection within 6 months of screening and (2) treatment within 6 months of CIN2+ detection. Screening uptake within 6 months of randomization was a secondary outcome. Results:A total of 19 851 women (mean [SD] age, 50.1 [9.5] years) were included, with 9960 randomized to the intervention group and 9891 randomized to the control group. All women randomized were included in analysis. In the intervention group, 12 participants with CIN2+ were detected compared with 8 in the control group (relative risk, 1.49; 95% CI, 0.61-3.64) and 12 cases were treated vs 7 in the control group (relative risk, 1.70; 95% CI, 0.67-4.32). Screening uptake was higher in the intervention group (2618 participants [26.3%] vs 1719 participants [17.4%]; relative risk, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.43-1.60). Conclusions and Relevance:Mailing HPV kits to underscreened women increased screening uptake compared with usual care alone, with no significant differences in precancer detection or treatment. Results support the feasibility of mailing HPV kits to women who are overdue for screening as an outreach strategy to increase screening uptake in US health care systems. Efforts to increase kit uptake and follow-up of positive results are warranted to maximize detection and treatment of CIN2+. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02005510.

SUBMITTER: Winer RL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6865279 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDetermining cervical precancer risk among human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected women who despite a normal Pap test are positive for oncogenic human papillomavirus (oncHPV) types is important for setting screening practices.MethodsA total of 2791 HIV-infected and 975 HIV-uninfected women in the Women's Interagency HIV Study were followed semiannually with Pap tests and colposcopy. Cumulative risks of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or greater (CIN-2+; threshold used for CIN treatment) and grade 3 or greater (CIN-3+; threshold to set screening practices) were measured in HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected women with normal Pap tests, stratified by baseline HPV results, and also in HIV-infected women with a low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL; benchmark indication for colposcopy).ResultsAt baseline, 1021 HIV-infected and 518 HIV-uninfected women had normal Pap tests, of whom 154 (15%) and 27 (5%), respectively, tested oncHPV positive. The 5-year CIN-2+ cumulative risk in the HIV-infected oncHPV-positive women was 22% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9%-34%), 12% (95% CI, 0%-22%), and 14% (95% CI, 2%-25%) among those with CD4 counts <350, 350-499, and ≥500 cells/µL, respectively, whereas it was 10% (95% CI, 0%-21%) in those without HIV. For CIN-3+, the cumulative risk averaged 4% (95% CI, 1%-8%) in HIV-infected oncHPV-positive women, and 10% (95% CI, 0%-23%) among those positive for HPV type 16. In HIV-infected women with LSIL, CIN-3+ risk was 7% (95% CI, 3%-11%). In multivariate analysis, HIV-infected HPV16-positive women had 13-fold (P = .001) greater CIN-3+ risk than oncHPV-negative women (referent), and HIV-infected women with LSIL had 9-fold (P < .0001) greater risk.ConclusionsHIV-infected women with a normal Pap result who test HPV16 positive have high precancer risk (similar to those with LSIL), possibly warranting immediate colposcopy. Repeat screening in 1 year may be appropriate if non-16 oncHPV is detected.

Project description:ImportanceCurrent US cervical cancer screening guidelines do not differ by human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination status. However, as the positive predictive value (PPV) of a screening test decreases, the risk of a false-positive result increases.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether HPV vaccination is associated with decreased PPV for abnormal cervical cytology.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study conducted via electronic medical record review included eligible patients aged 21 to 35 years who had at least 1 cervical cytology result within a single health system between January 2015 and December 2018. The health system comprises a partnership between an academic health center and a private not-for-profit health center. Patients with abnormal screening cytology and no diagnostic test results were omitted from analysis. Data were analyzed from December 2019 to November 2021.ExposuresHPV vaccination, defined as receiving at least 1 dose of HPV vaccine. Subgroup analyses were performed for those completing all vaccination doses per Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices guidelines and by age at vaccination initiation, dichotomized as younger than 21 years vs 21 years or older.Main outcomes and measuresPPV of abnormal cervical cytology for risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 or more severe diagnosis.ResultsA total of 46 988 patients (mean [SD] age, 28.7 [4.5] years; 3058 [6.5%] Asian; 4159 [8.9%] Black or African American; 35 446 [75.4%] White) were included; 15 494 (33.0%) were at least partially vaccinated, and 4289 (9.1%) had abnormal cytology results during the study period. Among the individuals with abnormal cytology, the PPV for CIN 2 or more severe diagnosis was lower among vaccinated individuals (17.4%; 95% CI, 16.4%-18.4%) than unvaccinated individuals (21.3%; 95% CI, 20.4%-22.3%). Among vaccinated individuals, PPV was significantly lower among those completing vaccination (15.9%; 95% CI, 14.9%-17.0%) than those with incomplete vaccination (22.4%; 95% CI, 20.0%-25.0%), especially among those initiating vaccination when younger than 21 years (11.9%; 95% CI, 10.9%-12.9%) vs those initiating at age 21 years or older (30.7%; 95% CI, 27.3%-34.4%).Conclusions and relevanceAmong a population with relatively low HPV vaccine coverage, the PPV of cervical cytology for CIN 2 or more severe diagnosis was significantly lower among vaccinated individuals. PPV will likely further decrease in the future as a population with higher HPV vaccination coverage ages into screening. Confirmation of these results will call for changes in screening strategies, particularly for completely vaccinated individuals who initiated vaccination when younger than 21 years.

Project description:BackgroundSelf-collected human papillomavirus (HPV) testing could reduce barriers to cervical cancer screening, with performance comparable to clinician-collected specimens. The ability of self-collected specimens to cross-sectionally and prospectively detect precursor lesions was investigated in an HPV vaccine randomized trial in Costa Rica.MethodsIn the trial, 7466 women age 18 to 25 years received an HPV16/18 or control vaccine and were followed at least annually for four years. In this secondary analysis, we included all women who provided a self-collected cervicovaginal specimen six months after enrollment (5109 women = full analytical cohort). A subset (615 women = restricted cohort) also had clinician-collected specimens at the six-month postenrollment visit. High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or repeat low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion prompted colposcopic referral throughout the study. HPV testing was performed with SPF10PCR/DEIA/LiPA25. Cross-sectional and prospective sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were estimated.ResultsIn the full cohort, one-time HPV testing on self-collected samples detected prevalent CIN2+ with a sensitivity of 88.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] =77.0% to 95.7%) and a specificity of 68.9% (95% CI = 67.6% to 70.1%). For predicting incident CIN2+ in the subsequent four years, sensitivity was 73.9% (95% CI = 65.8% to 81.0%) and specificity 69.4% (95% CI = 68.1% to 70.7%). In the restricted cohort, for incident CIN2+, self-collected HPV was much more sensitive than cytology (80.0% vs 10.0%); relative sensitivity was 0.1 (95% CI = 0.03% to 0.5%). Furthermore, three times more women with normal baseline cytology developed incident CIN2+ than those with negative self-collected HPV. Self-collected and clinician-collected HPV testing had comparable performance. Agreement between self- and clinician-collected samples was 89.7% (kappa = 0.78, McNemar χ2 = 0.62) for carcinogenic HPV types.ConclusionsSelf-collected specimens can be used for HPV-based screening, providing sensitivity and specificity comparable with clinician-collected specimens and detecting disease earlier than cytology.

Dataset Information

Effect of Mailed Human Papillomavirus Test Kits vs Usual Care Reminders on Cervical Cancer Screening Uptake, Precancer Detection, and Treatment: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets