Gynécologie et obstétrique[What's new in gynecology and obstetrics]

Because of the lack of screening methods, ovarian cancer remains one of the major causes of mortality in gynecological oncology. Prevention by salpingectomy, based on a concept about the origin of serous carcinoma, may be proven effective in the future. Regarding cervical cancer, screening methods are improving and the benefit of HPV-HR testing has been recently demonstrated. Metabolic requirements and exercise are modified during pregnancy. Present recommendations are for pregnant women to practice regular moderate exercise, as in a non-pregnant population. This guideline, despite being reasonable, is not based on strong evidence. A randomised trial is ongoing in our Department to evaluate the effects of exercise in women with gestational diabetes

HPV self-sampling in the follow-up of women after treatment of cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia: A prospective study in a high-income country

Current follow-up strategy for women after large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) for cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia (CIN) is burdened by a low compliance. We evaluated the performance of home-based Human Papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling (Self-HPV) after treatment for CIN with the aim to assess the (i) feasibility and (ii) follow-up compliance. This study took place at the Geneva University Hospitals between May 2016 and September 2020. Women aged 18 years or older, undergoing LLETZ for a biopsy-proven cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 or worse (CIN1 + ) were invited to participate. Agreement statistics, interpreted according to the scale of κ values, were calculated for Self-HPV and HPV performed by the physician (Dr-HPV). The samples were analyzed using GeneXpert and Cobas. Sample size was calculated to provide a 10% precision to estimate the kappa coefficient. A total of 127 women were included, with a median age of 35 years (interquartile range 30-41 years). There was a substantial agreement between Self-HPV and Dr-HPV using GeneXpert at 6 and 12 months, with a κ value of 0.63 (95%CI: 0.47-0.79) and 0.66 (95%CI: 0.50-0.82), respectively. Up to 9/10 (90%) women who did not come to their follow-up visit did not send their Self-HPV, either. In the follow-up after LLETZ treatment, home-based self-HPV is feasible, with substantial agreement between the two groups, however, concern remains regarding adherence to Self-HPV performance at home and loss to follow-up. The trial was registered on clinicaltrials.gov with the identifier NCT02780960

Human papillomavirus prevalence and type-specific distribution of high- and low-risk genotypes among Malagasy women living in urban and rural areas

Cervical cancer (CC) is the most common cancer among sub-Saharan African women. Efficient, global reduction of CC will only be achieved by incorporation of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination into existing programmes. We aimed to investigate the overall and type-specific prevalences and distributions of oncogenic HPVs

Randomized Comparison of Two Vaginal Self-Sampling Methods for Human Papillomavirus Detection: Dry Swab versus FTA Cartridge

Human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling (self-HPV) is valuable in cervical cancer screening. HPV testing is usually performed on physician-collected cervical smears stored in liquid-based medium. Dry filters and swabs are an alternative. We evaluated the adequacy of self-HPV using two dry storage and transport devices, the FTA cartridge and swab

Smartphone Use for Cervical Cancer Screening in Low-Resource Countries: A Pilot Study Conducted in Madagascar.

Visual inspection of the cervix after application of 5% acetic acid (VIA) is a screening technique for cervical cancer used widely in low and middle-income countries (LMIC). To improve VIA screening performance, digital images after acid acetic application (D-VIA) are taken. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of a smartphone for on- and off-site D-VIA diagnosis.Women aged 30-65 years, living in the city of Ambanja, Madagascar, were recruited through a cervical cancer screening campaign. Each performed a human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sample as a primary screen. Women testing positive for HPV were referred for VIA followed by D-VIA, cervical biopsy and endocervical curettage according to routine protocol. In addition, the same day, the D-VIA was emailed to a tertiary care center for immediate assessment. Results were scored as either D-VIA normal or D-VIA abnormal, requiring immediate therapy or referral to a tertiary center. Each of the three off-site physicians were blinded to the result reported by the one on-site physician and each gave their individual assessment followed by a consensus diagnosis. Statistical analyses were conducted using STATA software.Of the 332 women recruited, 137 (41.2%) were HPV-positive and recalled for VIA triage; compliance with this invitation was 69.3% (n = 95). Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia was detected in 17.7% and 21.7% of digital images by on-site and off-site physicians, respectively. The on-site physician had a sensitivity of 66.7% (95%CI: 30.0-90.3) and a specificity of 85.7% (95%CI: 76.7-91.6); the off-site physician consensus sensitivity was 66.7% (95%CI: 30.0-90.3) with a specificity of 82.3% (95%CI: 72.4-89.1).This pilot study supports the use of telemedicine for off-site diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, with diagnostic performance similar to those achieved on-site. Further studies need to determine if smartphones can improve cervical cancer screening efficiency in LMIC

Barriers to Cervical Cancer Screening in Geneva (DEPIST Study)

Cervical screening is only efficient if a large part of eligible women participate. Our aim was to identify sociodemographic barriers to cervical screening and consider self-reported reasons to postpone screening

Use of swabs for dry collection of self-samples to detect human papillomavirus among Malagasy women

Most women in developing countries have never attended cervical screening programmes and often little information exists on type-specific human papillomavirus (HPV) prevalence among these populations. Self-sampling for HPV testing (self-HPV) using a dry swab may be useful for establishing a screening program and evaluating HPV prevalence. Our aim was to evaluate self-HPV using a dry swab stored at room temperature

Accuracy of self-collected vaginal dry swabs using the Xpert human papillomavirus assay

<div><p>Background</p><p>Polymerase chain reaction-based Xpert human papillomavirus (HPV) assay is a rapid test that detects high-risk HPV (hrHPV) infection. This point-of-care test is usually performed by collecting a cervical specimen in a vial of PreservCyt® transport medium. We compared HPV test positivity and accuracy between self-collected sample with a dry swab (s-DRY) versus physician-collected cervical sampling using a broom like brush and immediate immersion in PreservCyt (dr-WET).</p><p>Methods</p><p>In this cross-sectional study, we recruited 150 women ≥ 18 years old attending the colposcopy clinic in the University Hospital of Geneva. Each participant first self-collected a vaginal sample using a dry swab and then the physician collected a cervical specimen in PreservCyt. HPV analysis was performed with Xpert. Part of the PreservCyt-collected sample was used for hrHPV detection with the cobas® HPV test. HPV test positivity and performance of the two collection methods was compared.</p><p>Results</p><p>HPV positivity was 49.1% for s-DRY, 41.8% for dr-WET and 46.2% for cobas. Good agreement was found between s-DRY and dr-WET samples (kappa±Standard error (SE) = 0.64±0.09,), particularly for low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL+) (kappa±SE = 0.80±0.17). Excellent agreement was found between the two samples for HPV16 detection in general (kappa±SE = 0.91±0.09) and among LSIL+ lesions (kappa±SE = 1.00±0.17). Sensitivities and specificities were, respectively, 84.2% and 47.1%(s-DRY), 73.1% and 58.7%. (dr-WET) and 77.8% and 45.7% (cobas) for CIN2+ detection. The median delay between sampling and HPV analysis was 7 days for the Xpert HPV assay and 19 days for cobas. There were 36 (24.0%) invalid results among s-DRY samples and 4 (2.7%) among dr-WET (p = 0.001). Invalid results happened due to the long interval between collection and analysis.</p><p>Conclusion</p><p>Self-collected vaginal dry swabs are a valid alternative to collecting cervical samples in PreservCyt solution for HPV testing with the Xpert HPV assay.</p><p>Impact</p><p>HPV self-collection with dry cotton swabs might assist in the implementation of an effective screening strategy in developing countries.</p><p>Trial registration</p><p>International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number Registry <a href="https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/DRKS00000584" target="_blank">ISRCTN83050913</a></p></div