Exploring the acceptability of two self-sampling devices for human papillomavirus testing in the cervical screening context: a qualitative study of Muslim women in London

Objectives We explored Muslim women's attitudes to self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) in the context of cervical cancer screening and their responses to two self-sampling devices.Setting A Muslim community centre in north-east London.Methods Following a talk given on the subject of cervical cancer and HPV at the community centre, 28 women were recruited to take part in three focus group discussions. The discussion covered cervical screening, self-sampling and HPV testing. Women were also asked for their responses to a swab self-sampling kit and a cervico-vaginal lavage device. Discussions were recorded and transcribed verbatim and the qualitative data were analysed using Framework Analysis.Results Participants were generally positive about cervical screening but acknowledged that some women in their community were reluctant to offend because of embarrassment, language difficulties, fear or because they were unmarried and did not want to communicate implicit messages about being sexually active. Self-sampling met a mixed response - women were concerned about not doing the test correctly, but thought that it might overcome barriers to screening for some women. HPV testing itself was thought to raise potentially difficult issues relating to trust and fidelity within marriages. Although most women said they would prefer to continue to have screening by a health professional, if they were to perform self-sampling, there was overwhelming preference for the swab over the lavage kit.Conclusions There was limited enthusiasm for self-sampling in this group of Muslim women who had mostly attended for cervical screening, but a clear preference for a swab rather than a cervico-vaginal lavage

Awareness of human papillomavirus among women attending a well woman clinic

Objectives: To assess the level and accuracy of public understanding of human papillomavirus (HPV) in the United Kingdom.Methods: Women attending a well woman clinic were asked to complete a questionnaire assessing HPV awareness and specific knowledge about the virus.Results: Questionnaires were completed by 1032 women, of whom 30% had heard of HPV. Older women, non-smokers, and those with a history of candida, genital warts, or an abnormal smear result were more likely to have heard of HPV. Even among those who had heard of HPV, knowledge was generally poor, and fewer than half were aware of the link with cervical cancer. There was also confusion about whether condoms or oral contraceptives could protect against HPV infection.Conclusions: In this relatively well educated sample, awareness and knowledge of HPV were poor. Public education is urgently needed so that women participating in cervical cancer screening are fully informed about the meaning of their results, especially if HPV testing is soon to be introduced

Testing positive for human papillomavirus in routine cervical screening: examination of psychosocial impact

Objective To examine the psychosocial impact of testing positive for high risk human papillomavirus (HPV) among women attending primary cervical screening.Design Cross sectional survey.Measures were taken at baseline and one week after the receipt of HPV and cytology screening results.Setting Well women's clinic in London, UK.Population or Sample Four hundred and twenty-eight women aged 20-64 years.Methods Postal questionnaire survey.Main outcome measures Psychosocial and psychosexual outcomes were anxiety, distress and feelings about current, past and future sexual relationships.Results Women with normal cytology who tested positive for HPV (HPVdivided by) were significantly more anxious and distressed than women who were negative (HPV-) using both a state anxiety measure [F(1,267)=29, P<0.0001] and a screening specific measure of psychological distress [F(1,267)=69, P<0.0001]. Women with an abnormal or unsatisfactory smear result, who tested HPV,. were significantly more distressed than HPV- women with the same smear result [F(1,267)=8.8, P=0.002], but there was no significant difference in state anxiety. Irrespective of cytology result, HPV women reported feeling significantly worse about their sexual relationships. Approximately one-third of women who tested positive reported feeling worse about past and future sexual relationships compared with less than 2% of HPV- women.Conclusion The findings suggest that testing positive for HPV may have an adverse psychosocial impact, with increased anxiety., distress and concern about sexual relationships. Psychosocial outcomes of HPV testing need further investigation and must be considered alongside clinical and economic decisions to include HPV testing in routine cervical screening

Attitudes to self-sampling for HPV among Indian, Pakistani, African-Caribbean and white British women in Manchester, UK

Objective: To examine attitudes to self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing among women from contrasting ethnic groups.Setting: Manchester, UK.Methods: Two hundred women of Indian, Pakistani, African-Caribbean and white British origin were recruited from social and community groups to participate in a questionnaire survey. The questionnaire included items on attitudes to self-sampling and intention to use the test.Results: Willingness to try to use the test was high, and women did not foresee religious or cultural barriers to self-sampling; however, a large proportion of women were concerned about doing the test properly. This concern was greatest in the Indian and African-Caribbean groups.Conclusions: Although women's willingness to try self-sampling for HPV is encouraging, worries about carrying out the procedure correctly must be addressed if women are to feel confident about the results of self-sampling methods and reassured by a negative result

Acceptability of unsupervised HPV self-sampling using written instructions

Objectives The study measured the acceptability of self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in the context of cervical cancer screening. Women carried out self-sampling unsupervised, using a written instruction sheet.Setting Participants were women attending either a family planning clinic or a primary care trust for routine cervical screening.Methods Women (n=902) carried out self-sampling for HPV testing and then a clinician did a routine cervical smear and HPV test. Immediately after having the two tests, participants completed a measure of acceptability for both tests, and answered questions about ease of using the instruction sheet and willingness to use self-sampling in the future.Results The majority of women found self-sampling more acceptable than the clinician-administered test, but there was a lack of confidence that the test had been done correctly. Significant demographic differences in attitudes were found, with married women having more favourable attitudes towards self-sampling than single women, and Asian women having more negative attitudes than women in other ethnic groups. Intention to use self-sampling in the future was very high across all demographic groups.Conclusion Self-sampling for HPV testing was highly acceptable in this large and demographically diverse sample, and women were able to carry out the test alone, using simple written instructions. Consistent with previous studies, women were concerned about doing the test properly and this issue will need to be addressed if self-sampling is introduced. More work is needed to see whether the demographic differences we found are robust and to identify reasons for lower acceptability among single women and those from Asian background

A comparison of different human papillomavirus tests in PreservCyt versus SurePath in a referral population-PREDICTORS 4

AbstractBackgroundTwo transport media, PreservCyt and SurePath, are widely used for cervical cytology screening. There are concerns that they may perform differently for HPV testing.ObjectivesA comparison of the performance of six different HPV tests in SurePath and PreservCyt in a referral population using two samples from each woman. The primary goal was to compare the performance of each test in the two media. Comparisons between assays and viral load comparisons between media were secondary aims.Study designTwo cervical samples were collected in random order at the same visit in women with abnormal cytology. One sample was placed in 20ml of PreservCyt and the other in 10ml of SurePath. Aliquots were taken for 4 DNA based tests: digene HC2 High-Risk HPV DNA Test, Abbott Realtime, BD Onclarity and Genera PapType, an RNA based test—: Hologic Aptima and a protein test: OncoHealth.Results630 sample pairs were included in the analyses. For all tests except the protein test sensitivities were in excess of 90% for CIN2+ and 95% for CIN3+ for both media and with no significant differences except for a lower sensitivity for CIN2+ of Aptima in SurePath (93% vs 98%, P=0.005). Specificity for <CIN2 was significantly better in Surepath for HC2, RealTime and Aptima, and generally lower relative signal strengths were seen with SurePath except for Onclarity, especially when it was the second sample.ConclusionsWe found similar sensitivity for CIN3+ in PreservCyt and SurePath for 5 nucleic acid tests in the two media in a referral population, but signal strength and positivity rates were lower in SurePath except for the Onclarity test. These results need to be replicated in a screening population

Awareness of human papillomavirus among women attending a well woman clinic

Objectives: To assess the level and accuracy of public understanding of human papillomavirus (HPV) in the United Kingdom. Methods: Women attending a well woman clinic were asked to complete a questionnaire assessing HPV awareness and specific knowledge about the virus. Results: Questionnaires were completed by 1032 women, of whom 30% had heard of HPV. Older women, non-smokers, and those with a history of candida, genital warts, or an abnormal smear result were more likely to have heard of HPV. Even among those who had heard of HPV, knowledge was generally poor, and fewer than half were aware of the link with cervical cancer. There was also confusion about whether condoms or oral contraceptives could protect against HPV infection. Conclusions: In this relatively well educated sample, awareness and knowledge of HPV were poor. Public education is urgently needed so that women participating in cervical cancer screening are fully informed about the meaning of their results, especially if HPV testing is soon to be introduced

A DNA methylation classifier of cervical precancer based on human papillomavirus and human genes

Cancer Research UK. Grant Number: C569/A1040

A randomized controlled trial in non-responders from Newcastle upon Tyne invited to return a self-sample for Human Papillomavirus testing versus repeat invitation for cervical screening.

Background Non-attenders for cervical screening are at increased risk of cervical cancer. Studies offering self-sampling for high-risk Human Papillomavirus (HrHPV) testing have shown greater uptake than sending another invitation for cytology. Objectives To explore whether uptake would increase in a less diverse, more stable population than the previous English study, which demonstrated a lower response rate than other studies. The primary objective was whether non-attenders were more likely to respond to a postal invitation, including kit, to collect a self-sample compared with a further invitation for cytology screening. The secondary objective was whether women with an abnormal result would attend for follow-up. Methods 6000 non-attenders for screening in this pragmatic, randomized (1:1) controlled trial in Newcastle-upon-Tyne were sent an HPV self-sample kit (intervention) or a further invitation for cytology screening (comparator). Results 411(13%) responded to the intervention, returning a self-sample (247(8%)) or attending for cytology (164(5%)), compared with 183(6%) attending for cytology, relative risk 2.25 (95% CI 1.90–2.65) (comparator arm). Of those testing hrHPV positive (32(13%)), 19(59%) subsequently attended cytology screening. Of those in the intervention group who attended for cytology screening without returning an hrHPV self-sample (n = 164), 5% (n = 8) were referred for colposcopy - all attended. In the comparator group eight of the nine referred for colposcopy attended. Conclusion Persistent non-responders to invitations for cervical screening are significantly more likely to respond to a postal invitation to return a self-collected sample for HPV testing than a further invitation for cytology screening. However, just over half followed up on this positive HPV result

Barriers to cervical screening in women who have experienced sexual abuse: an exploratory study

To explore self-reported cervical screening history and barriers to attendance among women who have been sexually abused and to identify measures to improve the experience of cervical screening for these women