Dataset Information

An evaluation of solid versus liquid transport media for high-risk HPV detection and cervical cancer screening on self-collected specimens.

ABSTRACT: Background: The solid transport media is a small size card that allows fast, easy DNA extraction from a variety of biological samples. In 2016 we developed a solid media transport card; for that pilot study to control the self-collection we used a pseudo-self-collection technique. The current study expands this prior work using true self-collections and only the POI card, and aims to evaluate the solid media transport card to detect HR-HPV in self-samples compared to liquid transport media.

Methods: Ten thousand eight hundred eighty-five women between the ages of 30-59 with no screening for 3?years were enrolled. The self-collected sample was first applied to a new solid media transport card (Labeled as SC) then the brush placed in 6?ml ThinPrep liquid (Labeled as SL). Then a physician collected a direct endocervical specimen into ThinPrep liquid (Labeled as DL). Samples were tested with Cobas 4800 and the SeqHPV NGS assay for HR-HPV. Patients positive on any test were recalled for colposcopy and biopsy.

Results: Ten thousand three hundred thirty-nine participants had complete data. The mean age was 43.9?years. CIN 2+ rates were 1.4% (142/10339). The agreement in HPV detection between the two different self-sample collection media was also good (Cobas HPV kappa?=?0.86; SeqHPV kappa?=?0.98). Tested with Cobas, the sensitivity of Cobas-SL and Cobas-SC for CIN 2+ was95.07 and 94.37%; and for CIN3+ was 96.30, 96.30% respectively. The specificity of Cobas-SC, and Cobas-SL for CIN2+ was 88.74 and 87.35%; for CIN3 was 88.04and 86.65% respectively. Tested with SeqHPV, the sensitivity for CIN2+ of Seq-SC and Seq-SL was 95.77 and 96.48%; for CIN3+, both the SC and SL specimens had a sensitivity of 100%. The specificity for CIN2+ of Seq-SC and Seq-SL was 89.54 and 89.53%; for CIN3+ was 88.84,88.82% respectively. For both HR-HPV assays, the sensitivities were similar for the two self-sample media (SC vs SL, p?=?1.00).

Conclusions: The solid transport card for collecting vaginal self-samples as accurate as liquid transport media assayed by two different PCR based HR-HPV tests. The solid transport media is a suitable medium for collecting and storing vaginal self-samples.

SUBMITTER: Du H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7706049 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

An evaluation of solid versus liquid transport media for high-risk HPV detection and cervical cancer screening on self-collected specimens.

Du Hui H Duan Xianzhi X Liu Yan Y Shi Bin B Zhang Wei W Wang Chun C Qu Xinfen X Bao Juncui J Li Jingran J Zhao Chao C Jiang Jing J Liu Juan J Wu Kejia K Xiao Aimin A Duan Lvfang L Huang Xia X Bian Shuhuang S Zhang Lijie L Luo Hongxue H Wei Lihui L Belinson Jerome L JL Wu Ruifang R

Infectious agents and cancer 20201130 1

<h4>Background</h4>The solid transport media is a small size card that allows fast, easy DNA extraction from a variety of biological samples. In 2016 we developed a solid media transport card; for that pilot study to control the self-collection we used a pseudo-self-collection technique. The current study expands this prior work using true self-collections and only the POI card, and aims to evaluate the solid media transport card to detect HR-HPV in self-samples compared to liquid transport medi ...[more]

PMID: 33292341

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCervical cancer (CC) is the fourth leading cause of death from neoplasms in women and is caused by the human papilloma virus (HPV). Several methods have been developed for the screening of cervical lesions and HPV; however, some socio-cultural factors prevent women from undergoing gynecological inspection, which results in a higher risk of mortality from cervical cancer in certain population groups as indigenous communities. This study aimed to compare the concordance in HPV detection from urine and cervical samples, to propose an alternative to cervical scraping, which is commonly used in the cervical cancer screening.MethodologyThe DNA from cervical scrapings and urine samples was extracted using the proteinase K method followed by precipitation with alcohol, phenol andchloroform; a modification of the proteinase K method was developed in the management of urine sediment. Viral genotyping was performed using INNOLipa.ResultsThe study population consisted of 108 patients from an indigenous population at southern Mexico, 32 without squamous intraepithelial lesions (NSIL) and 76 with low squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL). The majority of NSIL cervical scrapes were negative for HPV (90.63%), whereas more than half of LSIL cases were high-risk HPV positive (51.32%), followed by multiple infection by HR-HPV (17.11%), and multiple infection by LR- and HR-HPV (9.21%). No statistically significant relationship between the cytological diagnosis and the HPV genotypes detected in the urine samples was observed. A concordance of 68.27% for HPV positivity from urine and cervical samples was observed. Similarly, a concordance of 64.52% was observed in the grouping of HPVs by oncogenic risk. HR-HPV was detected in 71% of the urine samples from women with LSIL diagnosis, which suggests that HR-HPV detected in a urine sample could indicate the presence or risk of developing SIL.ConclusionHR-HPV detection in urine samples could be an initial approach for women at risk of developing LSIL and who, for cultural reasons, refuse to undergo a gynecological inspection.

Project description:BackgroundAccording to international guidelines, Human Papillomavirus (HPV) DNA tests represent a valid alternative to Pap Test for primary cervical cancer screening, provided that they guarantee balanced clinical sensitivity and specificity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more (CIN2+) lesions. The study aimed to assess whether HPV Selfy (Ulisse BioMed - Trieste, Italy), a full-genotyping HPV DNA test that detects and differentiates 14 high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) types, meets the criteria for primary cervical cancer screening described in the international guidelines, on clinician-collected as well as on self-collected samples.MethodsFor each participant woman, consecutively referring to Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Giuliano Isontina (Trieste, Italy) and CRO-National Cancer Institute (Aviano, Italy) for the cervical cancer screening program, the following samples were tested: (a) a clinician-collected cervical specimen, analyzed with the reference test (Hybrid Capture®2 test, HC2) and HPV Selfy; and (b) a self-collected vaginal sample, analyzed with HPV Selfy. Enrolled women were also asked to fulfill a questionnaire about self-sampling acceptability. As required by guidelines, a non-inferiority test was conducted to compare the clinical performance of the test under evaluation with its reference test.ResultsHPV Selfy clinical sensitivity and specificity resulted non-inferior to those of HC2. By analysis of a total of 889 cervical liquid-based cytology samples from a screening population, of which 98 were from women with CIN2+, HPV Selfy showed relative sensitivity and specificity for CIN2+ of 0.98 and 1.00 respectively (non-inferiority score test: P = 0.01747 and P = 0.00414, respectively); the test reached adequate intra- and inter-laboratory reproducibility. Moreover, we demonstrated that the performance of HPV Selfy on self-collected vaginal samples was non-inferior to the performance obtained on clinician-collected cervical specimen (0.92 relative sensitivity and 0.97 relative specificity). Finally, through HPV Selfy genotyping, we were able to describe HPV types prevalence in the study population.ConclusionsHPV Selfy fulfills all the requirements of the international Meijer's guidelines and has been clinically validated for primary cervical cancer screening purposes. Moreover, HPV Selfy has also been validated for self-sampling according to VALHUDES guidelines. Therefore, at date, HPV Selfy is the only full-genotyping test validated both for screening purposes and for self-sampling. Trial registration ASUGI Trieste n. 16008/2018; CRO Aviano n.17149/2018.

Project description:BackgroundHPV self-sampling has been widely supported by the scientific community following a strong body of literature on the subject. Self-sampling is important in cervical cancer screening as it has been shown to improve participation. It is well documented that HPV-testing has proven superior to cytology with regards to sensitivity in detection of CIN and cancer. The value of self-collected samples is reliant on the quality of the molecular testing performed, as well as the patients' preference in sampling procedure and compliance to follow up on positive test results. Due to the incompatibility of self-samples and cytology, triage of HPV-DNA positives by testing for molecular biomarkers is highly warranted.MethodsOur objective was to compare the detection rate of genital Human Papillomavirus (HPV) infection in self- and clinician-collected samples by a 14-type HPV-DNA test and a 7-type mRNA E6/E7 test.ResultsFive hundred five women were recruited. Each study participant had two sample collection procedures performed upon the same visit, alternating order in execution of the self-collection or the clinician-taken procedure first or second, 1010 samples in total. HPV-DNA prevalence was 22.8% in self-collected versus 19.2% in clinician-collected samples (P = 0.19). Overexpression of mRNA E6/E7 from 7 HPV types was 7.1 and 6.3%, respectively (P = 0.71). The difference between HPV-DNA and HPV-mRNA positivity rates were statistically significant in both self-collected (22.8% versus 7.1%, P < 0.001) and clinician-collected samples (19.2% versus 6.3%, P < 0.001). Overall agreement between the two collection methods was fair, with a concordance rate of 78.2% (390/505), k = 0.34 (95% CI: 0.25-0.44), P < 0.001, for the HPV-DNA test and 92.5% (467/505), k = 0.40 (95% CI, 0.25-0.56), P < 0.001, for the mRNA test, respectively. 96.8% of the participants reported they felt confident carrying out the self-collection themselves, and 88.8% reported no discomfort at all performing the procedure.ConclusionsThis comparative study of two sampling methods reports fair agreement of HPV positivity rates between the self-collected and clinician-collected specimens using Abbott hrHPV and PreTect HPV-Proofer'7 tests. Only one third of HPV-DNA positive women had overexpression of mRNA E6/E7.Trial registrationISRCTN77337300 .

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the costs and effects of three sampling strategies for human papillomavirus (HPV) primary screening.DesignCost-consequence analysis from a health system perspective using a deterministic decision tree model.SettingEngland.ParticipantsA cohort of 10 000 women aged 25-65 years eligible for the National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme (NHSCSP).MethodsThe model was based on the NHSCSP HPV primary screening pathway and adapted for self-sampling. It used a 3-year cycle: routine screening (year 1) and recall screening (years 2/3). Parameter inputs were informed using published studies, NHSCSP reports and input from experts and manufacturers. Costs were from 2020/2021, British pound sterling (£).InterventionsThree sampling strategies were implemented: (1) routine clinician-collected cervical sample, (2) self-collected first-void (FV) urine, (3) self-collected vaginal swab. The hypothetical self-sampling strategies involved mailing women a sampling kit.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcomes: overall costs (for all screening steps to colposcopy), number of complete screens and cost per complete screen.Secondary outcomesnumber of women screened, number of women lost to follow-up, cost per colposcopy and total screening costs for a plausible range of uptake scenarios.ResultsIn the base case, the average cost per complete screen was £56.81 for clinician-collected cervical sampling, £38.57 for FV urine self-sampling and £40.37 for vaginal self-sampling. In deterministic sensitivity analysis, the variables most affecting the average cost per screen were the cost of sample collection for clinician-collected sampling and the cost of laboratory HPV testing for the self-sampling strategies. Scaled to consider routine screening in England, if uptake in non-attenders increased by 15% and 50% of current screeners converted to self-sampling, the NHSCSP would save £19.2 million (FV urine) or £16.5 million (vaginal) per year.ConclusionSelf-sampling could provide a less costly alternative to clinician-collected sampling for routine HPV primary screening and offers opportunities to expand the reach of cervical screening to under-screened women.

Project description:Background:The efficacy of cervical cancer screening programs is dependent on the participation rate. To increase participation among women not attending cervical cancer screening, self-collected samples for detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (hr-HPV) may be an option.The aims of this study were: to investigate the response rate to sending a self-collected vaginal sample for hr-HPV mRNA detection to long-term non-attendees; the compliance with follow-up among women positive for HPV in the self-sample; the prevalence of cervical dysplasia (high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL), atypical squamous cells that cannot exclude HSIL (ASC-H) or adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS)) or cancer among the responders; as well as to explore reasons for not returning a self-sample. Methods:A vaginal self-sampling kit was sent to 6023 women aged 30-70?years who had not provided a cervical screening sample for ?7?years in the Region of Skåne, Sweden in November and December 2017. The self-sample was analyzed by Aptima HPV mRNA assay (Hologic). All vaginal self-samples returned no later than May 31, 2018 were included in the study. Follow-up of the results was registered until January 31, 2019 with a follow-up time varying between eight to 14?months. Women positive for hr-HPV mRNA were invited for a follow-up examination. This examination consisted of a cervical sample for cytological analysis and renewed Aptima HPV mRNA testing. Two hundred thirty-five women who had not returned the self-sample were randomly selected for telephone interviews, in order to explore their reasons. Results:The response rate for the self-collected vaginal hr-HPV sample was 13.2% [(797/6023), 95% CI 12.4-14.1%] and 9.9% [(79/796), 95% CI 7.9-12.2%] were positive for hr-HPV mRNA. The prevalence of severe dysplasia or cancer in the whole group of responders was 1.3% [(10/796), 95% CI 0.6-2.3%], with a cervical cancer prevalence of 0.4% [(3/796), 95% CI 0.1-1.1%]. Only 27 women participated in the telephone interviews, no particular reason for not returning self-samples was observed. Conclusions:Self-collected vaginal hr-HPV samples increased participation in the cervical cancer screening among long-term non-attendees. The prevalence of cervical cancer was almost seven times higher for long-term non-attendees than in the organized screening population.

Dataset Information

An evaluation of solid versus liquid transport media for high-risk HPV detection and cervical cancer screening on self-collected specimens.

Publications

An evaluation of solid versus liquid transport media for high-risk HPV detection and cervical cancer screening on self-collected specimens.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets