Design and feasibility of a novel program of cervical screening in Nigeria: self-sampled HPV testing paired with visual triage.
Automated visual evaluation
Cervical screening
HPV
Self-sampling
Triage
Journal
Infectious agents and cancer
ISSN: 1750-9378
Titre abrégé: Infect Agent Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101276559
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
28
07
2020
accepted:
22
09
2020
entrez:
19
10
2020
pubmed:
20
10
2020
medline:
20
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Accelerated global control of cervical cancer would require primary prevention with human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in addition to novel screening program strategies that are simple, inexpensive, and effective. We present the feasibility and outcome of a community-based HPV self-sampled screening program. In Ile Ife, Nigeria, 9406 women aged 30-49 years collected vaginal self-samples, which were tested for HPV in the local study laboratory using Hybrid Capture-2 (HC2) (Qiagen). HPV-positive women were referred to the colposcopy clinic. Gynecologist colposcopic impression dictated immediate management; biopsies were taken when definite acetowhitening was present to produce a histopathologic reference standard of precancer (and to determine final clinical management). Retrospective linkage to the medical records identified 442 of 9406 women living with HIV (WLWH). With self-sampling, it was possible to screen more than 100 women per day per clinic. Following an audio-visual presentation and in-person instructions, overall acceptability of self-sampling was very high (81.2% women preferring self-sampling over clinician collection). HPV positivity was found in 17.3% of women. Intensive follow-up contributed to 85.9% attendance at the colposcopy clinic. Of those referred, 8.2% were initially treated with thermal ablation and 5.6% with large loop excision of transformation zone (LLETZ). Full visibility of the squamocolumnar junction, necessary for optimal visual triage and ablation, declined from 68.5% at age 30 to 35.4% at age 49. CIN2+ and CIN3+ (CIN- Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia), including five cancers, were identified by histology in 5.9 and 3.2% of the HPV-positive women, respectively (0.9 and 0.5% of the total screening population), leading to additional treatment as indicated. The prevalences of HPV infection and CIN2+ were substantially higher (40.5 and 2.5%, respectively) among WLWH. Colposcopic impression led to over- and under-treatment compared to the histopathology reference standard. A cervical cancer screening program using self-sampled HPV testing, with colposcopic immediate management of women positive for HPV, proved feasible in Nigeria. Based on the collected specimens and images, we are now evaluating the use of a combination of partial HPV typing and automated visual evaluation (AVE) of cervical images to improve the accuracy of the screening program.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Accelerated global control of cervical cancer would require primary prevention with human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in addition to novel screening program strategies that are simple, inexpensive, and effective. We present the feasibility and outcome of a community-based HPV self-sampled screening program.
METHODS
METHODS
In Ile Ife, Nigeria, 9406 women aged 30-49 years collected vaginal self-samples, which were tested for HPV in the local study laboratory using Hybrid Capture-2 (HC2) (Qiagen). HPV-positive women were referred to the colposcopy clinic. Gynecologist colposcopic impression dictated immediate management; biopsies were taken when definite acetowhitening was present to produce a histopathologic reference standard of precancer (and to determine final clinical management). Retrospective linkage to the medical records identified 442 of 9406 women living with HIV (WLWH).
RESULTS
RESULTS
With self-sampling, it was possible to screen more than 100 women per day per clinic. Following an audio-visual presentation and in-person instructions, overall acceptability of self-sampling was very high (81.2% women preferring self-sampling over clinician collection). HPV positivity was found in 17.3% of women. Intensive follow-up contributed to 85.9% attendance at the colposcopy clinic. Of those referred, 8.2% were initially treated with thermal ablation and 5.6% with large loop excision of transformation zone (LLETZ). Full visibility of the squamocolumnar junction, necessary for optimal visual triage and ablation, declined from 68.5% at age 30 to 35.4% at age 49. CIN2+ and CIN3+ (CIN- Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia), including five cancers, were identified by histology in 5.9 and 3.2% of the HPV-positive women, respectively (0.9 and 0.5% of the total screening population), leading to additional treatment as indicated. The prevalences of HPV infection and CIN2+ were substantially higher (40.5 and 2.5%, respectively) among WLWH. Colposcopic impression led to over- and under-treatment compared to the histopathology reference standard.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
A cervical cancer screening program using self-sampled HPV testing, with colposcopic immediate management of women positive for HPV, proved feasible in Nigeria. Based on the collected specimens and images, we are now evaluating the use of a combination of partial HPV typing and automated visual evaluation (AVE) of cervical images to improve the accuracy of the screening program.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33072178
doi: 10.1186/s13027-020-00324-5
pii: 324
pmc: PMC7556552
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
60Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2020.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interestsThe HC2 test kits were donated by Qiagen. The OncoE6 test kits were donated by Arborvitae. The MobileODT EVA system devices and data management software were donated by MobileODT. None of the companies had any role in design, analysis, interpretation, and finalization of the manuscript.
Références
BMJ. 2018 Dec 5;363:k4823
pubmed: 30518635
Papillomavirus Res. 2019 Jun;7:176-179
pubmed: 30974183
J Clin Microbiol. 2019 Apr 26;57(5):
pubmed: 30814267
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Dec 05;107(1):400
pubmed: 25479804
Lancet. 2007 Sep 8;370(9590):890-907
pubmed: 17826171
J Clin Virol. 2016 Mar;76 Suppl 1:S49-S55
pubmed: 26643050
Int J Cancer. 2020 Apr 30;:
pubmed: 32356305
Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2007 Oct;26(4):441-6
pubmed: 17885496
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010 Mar 3;102(5):315-24
pubmed: 20157096
Lancet Oncol. 2019 Feb;20(2):229-238
pubmed: 30658933
Int J Cancer. 2012 May 1;130(9):2111-7
pubmed: 21630264
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Jan 1;33(1):83-9
pubmed: 25422481
Br J Cancer. 1996 Aug;74(3):488-90
pubmed: 8695371
Int J Cancer. 2015 Mar 1;136(5):E359-86
pubmed: 25220842
Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Dec;130(6):1218-1225
pubmed: 29112672
Int J Cancer. 2012 Dec 15;131(12):2903-9
pubmed: 22473652
Eur J Cancer. 2013 Oct;49(15):3262-73
pubmed: 23751569
Lancet Glob Health. 2020 Feb;8(2):e191-e203
pubmed: 31812369
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2019 Sep 1;111(9):923-932
pubmed: 30629194