Attitudes to multi-cancer early detection (MCED) blood tests for population-based screening: A qualitative study in Great Britain.

BACKGROUND: Trials are underway to test the clinical utility of multi-cancer early detection (MCED) blood tests for screening asymptomatic individuals. We sought to understand the acceptability of MCED blood test screening and potential barriers and facilitators to participation among the general public. METHODS: We conducted eleven semi-structured online focus groups with 50-77-year-olds (n = 53) in April-November 2022. Participants were purposefully sampled to include a mix of socio-economic and ethnic backgrounds as well as people who would not want 'a blood test for cancer'. Participants were shown information about MCED blood tests. Transcripts were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Participants showed enthusiasm for MCED screening. Perceived benefits included procedural familiarity and the potential to screen for many cancers. Enthusiasm was driven by beliefs that cancer is a real and increasing risk (both at population level and personally with age) and that early detection reduces treatment burden and cancer mortality. Some felt they would not want to know if they had cancer. The potential for MCED tests to raise anxiety was a concern, especially in a false-positive scenario. Participants wanted to avoid unpleasant and unnecessary procedures. The initial blood test was deemed "less invasive" than current screening tests, but potential follow-up procedures were a concern. Views on MCED screening were influenced by wider factors including dislike of uncertainty, desire for choice and control over one's health, and existing relationships with the NHS. CONCLUSION: The introduction of MCED screening is likely to be appealing due to the simplicity and familiarity of the primary test procedure. Test accuracy needs to be high to facilitate acceptability and should be communicated from the outset. Some people would rather not know if they have cancer, and MCEDs will not appeal to all

Human papillomavirus (HPV) information needs: a theoretical framework

Background With the introduction of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing and vaccination in the UK, health professionals will start to receive questions about the virus from their patients. This study aimed to identify the key questions about HPV that British women will ask when considering having an HPV test or vaccination.Methods Face-to-face interviews were carried out with 21 women to discover what they wanted to know about HPV. A thematic framework approach was used to analyse the data and identify key themes in women's HPV knowledge requirements.Results Women's questions about HPV fell into six areas: identity (e.g. What are the symptoms?), cause (e.g. How do you get HPV?), timeline (e.g. How long does it last?), consequences (e.g. Does it always cause cervical cancer?) and control-cure (e.g. Can you prevent infection?). In addition, they asked procedural questions about testing and vaccination (e.g. Where do I get an HPV test?). These mapped well onto the dimensions identified in Leventhal's description of Jay models of illness, called the 'Common Sense Model' (CSM).Discussion and conclusions These results indicated that the majority of the questions women asked about HPV fitted well into the CSM, which therefore provides a structure for women's information needs. The findings could help health professionals understand what questions they may be expected to answer. Framing educational materials using the CSM themes may also help health educators achieve a good fit with what the public want to know

Role of ethnicity in human papillomavirus vaccination uptake: a cross-sectional study of girls from ethnic minority groups attending London schools

OBJECTIVE: Research suggests that girls from ethnic minority groups are less likely to receive the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination than white British girls; however, the specific ethnic minority groups that have lower uptake have not been identified. This study aimed to examine the relationship between school-level uptake and ethnicity as well as uptake and other ethnicity-related factors, to understand which specific groups are less likely to receive the vaccination. METHODS: Aggregated uptake rates from 195 schools were obtained for each of the three recommended vaccine doses from 2008 to 2010. Census data at the lower super output area (LSOA) level for the postcode of each school were also obtained, describing the ethnic breakdown of the resident population (ethnicity, language spoken, religion, proficiency in English and duration of residency in the UK). These were used as proxy measures of the ethnic make-up of the schools. The most prevalent non-majority group for each ethnicity and ethnicity-related factor was assigned to each school. Analyses explored differences in uptake by ethnicity and ethnicity-related factors. RESULTS: No significant differences in vaccination uptake were found by ethnicity or ethnicity-related factors, although descriptive differences were apparent. Schools in areas where black ethnicities were the most prevalent non-white British ethnicities had consistently low rates of uptake for all doses. Schools in areas where some Asian ethnicities were the most prevalent non-white British ethnicities had consistently high rates of uptake for all doses. There was evidence of variability in mean uptake rates for ethnicities within ‘black’ and ‘Asian’ ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Future research would benefit from focusing on specific ethnicities rather than broad ethnic categories. Replication of this study with a larger sample and using complete individual-level data, collected on a national level, would provide a clearer indication of where ethnic differences in HPV vaccination uptake exist

Exploring Reasons for Variations in Anxiety After Testing Positive for Human Papillomavirus with Normal Cytology: A Comparative Qualitative Study

OBJECTIVE: To explore reasons for variations in anxiety in women testing positive for human papillomavirus (HPV) with normal cytology at routine HPV primary cervical cancer screening. METHODS: In-depth interviews were conducted with 30 women who had tested HPV-positive with normal cytology, including 15 with low-to-normal anxiety and 15 with high anxiety. Data were analysed using Framework Analysis to compare themes between low and high anxiety groups. RESULTS: Several HPV-related themes were shared across anxiety groups, but only highly anxious women expressed fear and worry, fatalistic cognitions about cancer, fertility-related cognitions, adverse physiological responses, and changes in health behaviour(s). In comparison to those with low anxiety, women with high anxiety more strongly voiced cognitions about relationship infidelity, the 12-month wait for follow-up screening, a lower internal locus of control, and HPV-related symptom attributions. CONCLUSIONS: Receiving an HPV-positive with normal cytology result related to various emotional, cognitive, behavioural, and physiological responses; some of which were specific to, or more pronounced in, women with high anxiety. If our observations are confirmed in hypothesis-driven quantitative studies, the identification of distinct themes relevant to women experiencing high anxiety can inform targeted patient communications and HPV primary screening implementation policy. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

Self-sampling for cervical screening offered at the point of invitation: A cross-sectional study of preferences in England

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed preferences for human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling if offered as an alternative to clinician-based screening at the point of invitation for cervical screening. SETTING AND METHODS: An online questionnaire was completed by screening-eligible women living in England (n = 3672). Logistic regressions explored associations between demographic characteristics and screening preferences, stratified by previous screening attendance. Reasons for preferences were also assessed. RESULTS: Half of participants (51.4%) intended to choose self-sampling, 36.5% preferred clinician screening, 10.5% were unsure, and <2% preferred no screening. More irregular and never attenders chose self-sampling, compared with regular attenders (71.1% and 70.1% vs. 41.0% respectively). Among regular attenders, self-sampling was preferred more frequently by the highest occupational grade, older and lesbian, gay and bisexual women, and those with experience of blood self-tests. In the irregular attender group, older women and those with experience of blood self-tests were more likely to choose self-sampling. In ‘never attenders’, self-sampling was less popular in ethnic minority groups. CONCLUSIONS: If offered a choice of screening, around half of women in England may choose self-sampling, but a substantial proportion would still opt for clinician screening. Screening providers will need to manage a high take-up of self-sampling if many regular attenders switch to self-sampling

Concerns about disclosing a high-risk cervical human papillomavirus (HPV) infection to a sexual partner: a systematic review and thematic synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical screening is now replacing cytology-based screening in several countries and many women in screening programmes will consequently receive HPV-positive results. Because of the sexually transmitted nature of HPV, receiving an HPV-positive result may raise questions about disclosing the infection to a sexual partner. OBJECTIVE: To review the quantitative and qualitative literature exploring women's concerns about disclosing a high-risk cervical HPV infection to a sexual partner. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science and EMBASE for studies reporting at least one disclosure-related outcome among women with high-risk HPV. We also searched the grey literature and carried out forward/backward citation searches. A narrative synthesis for quantitative studies and a thematic synthesis for qualitative studies were conducted. RESULTS: Thirteen articles met the inclusion criteria (12 qualitative, 1 quantitative). In the quantitative study, 60% of HPV-positive women felt disclosing an HPV result was 'risky'. Concerns about disclosing HPV to a sexual partner were influenced by the stigma that is associated with having an STI and uncertainty about how their partner would respond. Women questioned how, when and to whom they should disclose their HPV-positive status. CONCLUSIONS: The studies included in this review provide rich information about the range of concerns women have, the reasons for these concerns, and the questions women have about disclosing HPV to sexual partners. As studies were predominantly qualitative, the prevalence of concerns is unclear

Trust and experience as predictors of HPV vaccine acceptance

Background: Awareness of factors associated with uptake of new childhood vaccinations could help physicians focus attention on parents who are most likely to decline to help and ensure that they are fully informed before making a vaccination decision.Aim: To examine the association between general vaccine attitudes, trust in doctors and the government, past experience with vaccination and acceptance of HPV vaccination.Design: School-based survey.Setting: Questionnaires were sent through 10 schools in England.Participants: Questionnaires were sent to 1205 mothers of 8-14 year old girls. Responses from 684 mothers were included in analyses. Outcome measures: Intended acceptance of prophylactic HPV vaccination.Results: Mothers who had high trust in doctors or the government were more likely to accept the vaccine (OR = 1.35, CI:1.22-1.50), as were those who believed their own doctor would take their vaccine concerns seriously (OR = 1.70, CI: 1.23-2.36). Mothers who had delayed (OR = 0.31, Cl: 0.19-0.51), refused (OR = 0.33, CI: 0.18-0.59) or regretted (OR = 0.43, CI: 0.19-0.99) a previous paediatric vaccination were less likely to accept the HPV vaccine. The child having experienced adverse effects from a previous vaccination was not significantly associated with acceptance (OR = 0.48, CI: 0.21-1.10).Conclusions: Past experience and trust in doctors and government were associated with differential acceptance of a new vaccine. These results suggest that doctors should listen to parents' worries about vaccination, especially parents who have previously delayed or refused vaccines. It may also be beneficial for health information to emphasize the general importance of vaccination as an effective disease prevention strategy