Cargando…
Clinical performance of high-risk HPV testing on self-samples versus clinician samples in routine primary HPV screening in the Netherlands: An observational study
BACKGROUND: High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing on self-collected samples has potential as a primary screening tool in cervical screening, but real-world evidence on its accuracy in hrHPV-based screening programmes is lacking. METHODS: In the Netherlands, women aged 30–60 years invited fo...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8642706/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34918001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lanepe.2021.100235 |
_version_ | 1784609724181774336 |
---|---|
author | Inturrisi, Federica Aitken, Clare A. Melchers, Willem J.G. van den Brule, Adriaan J.C. Molijn, Anco Hinrichs, John W.J. Niesters, Hubert G.M. Siebers, Albert G. Schuurman, Rob Heideman, Daniëlle A.M. de Kok, Inge M.C.M. Bekkers, Ruud L.M. van Kemenade, Folkert J. Berkhof, Johannes |
author_facet | Inturrisi, Federica Aitken, Clare A. Melchers, Willem J.G. van den Brule, Adriaan J.C. Molijn, Anco Hinrichs, John W.J. Niesters, Hubert G.M. Siebers, Albert G. Schuurman, Rob Heideman, Daniëlle A.M. de Kok, Inge M.C.M. Bekkers, Ruud L.M. van Kemenade, Folkert J. Berkhof, Johannes |
author_sort | Inturrisi, Federica |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing on self-collected samples has potential as a primary screening tool in cervical screening, but real-world evidence on its accuracy in hrHPV-based screening programmes is lacking. METHODS: In the Netherlands, women aged 30–60 years invited for cervical screening can choose between sampling at the clinician's office (Cervex Brush) or self-sampling at home (Evalyn Brush). HrHPV testing is performed using Roche Cobas 4800. We collected screening test results between January 2017 and March 2018 and histological follow-up until August 2019. The main outcome measures were mean cycle threshold (Ct) value, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 3 or cancer (CIN3+) and CIN grade 2 or worse (CIN2+). FINDINGS: 30,808 women had a self-collected and 456,207 had a clinician-collected sample. In hrHPV-positive women with adequate cytology, Ct values were higher for self-collection than clinician-collection with a mean Ct difference of 1·25 (95% CI 0·98–1·52) in women without CIN2+, 2·73 (1·75–3·72) in CIN2 and 3·59 (3·03–4·15) in CIN3+. The relative sensitivity for detecting CIN3+ was 0·94 (0·90–0·97) for self-collection versus clinician-collection and the relative specificity was 1·02 (1·02–1·02). INTERPRETATION: The clinical accuracy of hrHPV testing on a self-collected sample for detection of CIN3+ is high and supports its use as a primary screening test for all invited women. Because of the slightly lower sensitivity of hrHPV testing on a self-collected compared to a clinician-collected sample, an evaluation of the workflow procedure to optimise clinical performance seems warranted. FUNDING: National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (the Netherlands) and the European Commission. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8642706 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86427062021-12-15 Clinical performance of high-risk HPV testing on self-samples versus clinician samples in routine primary HPV screening in the Netherlands: An observational study Inturrisi, Federica Aitken, Clare A. Melchers, Willem J.G. van den Brule, Adriaan J.C. Molijn, Anco Hinrichs, John W.J. Niesters, Hubert G.M. Siebers, Albert G. Schuurman, Rob Heideman, Daniëlle A.M. de Kok, Inge M.C.M. Bekkers, Ruud L.M. van Kemenade, Folkert J. Berkhof, Johannes Lancet Reg Health Eur Research Article BACKGROUND: High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing on self-collected samples has potential as a primary screening tool in cervical screening, but real-world evidence on its accuracy in hrHPV-based screening programmes is lacking. METHODS: In the Netherlands, women aged 30–60 years invited for cervical screening can choose between sampling at the clinician's office (Cervex Brush) or self-sampling at home (Evalyn Brush). HrHPV testing is performed using Roche Cobas 4800. We collected screening test results between January 2017 and March 2018 and histological follow-up until August 2019. The main outcome measures were mean cycle threshold (Ct) value, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 3 or cancer (CIN3+) and CIN grade 2 or worse (CIN2+). FINDINGS: 30,808 women had a self-collected and 456,207 had a clinician-collected sample. In hrHPV-positive women with adequate cytology, Ct values were higher for self-collection than clinician-collection with a mean Ct difference of 1·25 (95% CI 0·98–1·52) in women without CIN2+, 2·73 (1·75–3·72) in CIN2 and 3·59 (3·03–4·15) in CIN3+. The relative sensitivity for detecting CIN3+ was 0·94 (0·90–0·97) for self-collection versus clinician-collection and the relative specificity was 1·02 (1·02–1·02). INTERPRETATION: The clinical accuracy of hrHPV testing on a self-collected sample for detection of CIN3+ is high and supports its use as a primary screening test for all invited women. Because of the slightly lower sensitivity of hrHPV testing on a self-collected compared to a clinician-collected sample, an evaluation of the workflow procedure to optimise clinical performance seems warranted. FUNDING: National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (the Netherlands) and the European Commission. Elsevier 2021-11-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8642706/ /pubmed/34918001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lanepe.2021.100235 Text en © 2021 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Research Article Inturrisi, Federica Aitken, Clare A. Melchers, Willem J.G. van den Brule, Adriaan J.C. Molijn, Anco Hinrichs, John W.J. Niesters, Hubert G.M. Siebers, Albert G. Schuurman, Rob Heideman, Daniëlle A.M. de Kok, Inge M.C.M. Bekkers, Ruud L.M. van Kemenade, Folkert J. Berkhof, Johannes Clinical performance of high-risk HPV testing on self-samples versus clinician samples in routine primary HPV screening in the Netherlands: An observational study |
title | Clinical performance of high-risk HPV testing on self-samples versus clinician samples in routine primary HPV screening in the Netherlands: An observational study |
title_full | Clinical performance of high-risk HPV testing on self-samples versus clinician samples in routine primary HPV screening in the Netherlands: An observational study |
title_fullStr | Clinical performance of high-risk HPV testing on self-samples versus clinician samples in routine primary HPV screening in the Netherlands: An observational study |
title_full_unstemmed | Clinical performance of high-risk HPV testing on self-samples versus clinician samples in routine primary HPV screening in the Netherlands: An observational study |
title_short | Clinical performance of high-risk HPV testing on self-samples versus clinician samples in routine primary HPV screening in the Netherlands: An observational study |
title_sort | clinical performance of high-risk hpv testing on self-samples versus clinician samples in routine primary hpv screening in the netherlands: an observational study |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8642706/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34918001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lanepe.2021.100235 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT inturrisifederica clinicalperformanceofhighriskhpvtestingonselfsamplesversuscliniciansamplesinroutineprimaryhpvscreeninginthenetherlandsanobservationalstudy AT aitkenclarea clinicalperformanceofhighriskhpvtestingonselfsamplesversuscliniciansamplesinroutineprimaryhpvscreeninginthenetherlandsanobservationalstudy AT melcherswillemjg clinicalperformanceofhighriskhpvtestingonselfsamplesversuscliniciansamplesinroutineprimaryhpvscreeninginthenetherlandsanobservationalstudy AT vandenbruleadriaanjc clinicalperformanceofhighriskhpvtestingonselfsamplesversuscliniciansamplesinroutineprimaryhpvscreeninginthenetherlandsanobservationalstudy AT molijnanco clinicalperformanceofhighriskhpvtestingonselfsamplesversuscliniciansamplesinroutineprimaryhpvscreeninginthenetherlandsanobservationalstudy AT hinrichsjohnwj clinicalperformanceofhighriskhpvtestingonselfsamplesversuscliniciansamplesinroutineprimaryhpvscreeninginthenetherlandsanobservationalstudy AT niestershubertgm clinicalperformanceofhighriskhpvtestingonselfsamplesversuscliniciansamplesinroutineprimaryhpvscreeninginthenetherlandsanobservationalstudy AT siebersalbertg clinicalperformanceofhighriskhpvtestingonselfsamplesversuscliniciansamplesinroutineprimaryhpvscreeninginthenetherlandsanobservationalstudy AT schuurmanrob clinicalperformanceofhighriskhpvtestingonselfsamplesversuscliniciansamplesinroutineprimaryhpvscreeninginthenetherlandsanobservationalstudy AT heidemandanielleam clinicalperformanceofhighriskhpvtestingonselfsamplesversuscliniciansamplesinroutineprimaryhpvscreeninginthenetherlandsanobservationalstudy AT dekokingemcm clinicalperformanceofhighriskhpvtestingonselfsamplesversuscliniciansamplesinroutineprimaryhpvscreeninginthenetherlandsanobservationalstudy AT bekkersruudlm clinicalperformanceofhighriskhpvtestingonselfsamplesversuscliniciansamplesinroutineprimaryhpvscreeninginthenetherlandsanobservationalstudy AT vankemenadefolkertj clinicalperformanceofhighriskhpvtestingonselfsamplesversuscliniciansamplesinroutineprimaryhpvscreeninginthenetherlandsanobservationalstudy AT berkhofjohannes clinicalperformanceofhighriskhpvtestingonselfsamplesversuscliniciansamplesinroutineprimaryhpvscreeninginthenetherlandsanobservationalstudy |