Self-taken Samples Research Articles

Implementation preferences for the management of sexually transmitted infections in the South African health system: a discrete choice experiment

ObjectivesDespite strengthening HIV prevention with the introduction of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), STI services have remained relatively unchanged and the standard of care remains syndromic management. We used a discrete choice...

Accuracy of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Testing on Urine and Vaginal Self-Samples Compared to Clinician-Collected Cervical Sample in Women Referred to Colposcopy.

In the context of cervical cancer prevention, where human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is pivotal, HPV testing is replacing Pap Smear in primary screening. This transition offers an opportunity for integrating self-sampling to enhance coverage. We evaluated the accuracy of HPV testing using self-collected urine and vaginal samples, comparing them to physician-collected cervical swabs. From a cohort of 245 women with abnormal cytology, we collected self-sampled vaginal, urine, and clinician-administered cervical specimens. Employing Anyplex™II HPV28 assay, outcomes revealed HPV positivity rates of 75.1% (cervical), 78.4% (vaginal), and 77.1% (urine). Significant, hr-HPV detection concordance was observed between self-taken cervical samples and clinical counterparts (k = 0.898 for vaginal; k = 0.715 for urine). This study extends beyond accuracy, highlighting self-collected sample efficacy in detecting high-grade cervical lesions. The insight underscores self-sampling's role in bolstering participation and aligns with WHO's goal to eliminate cervical cancer by 2030.

Influence of resuspension volume on dry sampling devices taken for human papillomavirus testing: implications for self-sampling.

Optimization of technical parameters that influence the performance of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing on self-taken samples is important. Here, the authors assessed the impact of resuspension volume on the detection of HPV using four validated HPV assays. Two self-sampling devices, FLOQSwabs® and Evalyn® Brushes, were inoculated with dilutions of HPV-16-positive cell line, then resuspended in various volumes of ThinPrep. The influence of vortexing during resuspension was also assessed. At target concentrations around the assay cutoff, larger volumes led to decreased HPV detection. Interestingly, the effect(s) of vortexing differed by the self-sampling device. Resuspension in 5ml or less may maximize the detection of HPV sequences. Using a proxy of clinical material, the current observations underline the importance of optimizing preanalytical laboratory processes to support high-quality HPV testing of self-samples.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) detection in vaginal self-samples: evaluation of eNat® as an alternative suspension medium to ThinPrep®PreservCyt® for vaginal swabs.

Human Papillomavirus (HPV) testing on self-collected samples allows for improved coverage rates of cervical cancer (CC) screening programs. ThinPrep®PreservCyt® (HOLOGIC®, USA) medium is widely used for the suspension of cervical and vaginal self-samples. However, this medium is costly, toxic, and flammable, involving special handling procedures which make its use difficult in screening programs, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. This pilot study aimed to evaluate the analytical performance of eNat ® (Copan SpA), an alternative non-alcohol-based suspension medium, compared to ThinPrep®PreservCyt® (HOLOGIC®) for high-risk HPV (hrHPV) detection in vaginal self-collected swabs using three different real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) HPV assays: Anyplex™II HPV28 (Seegene, Korea), Papilloplex® High Risk HPV (GeneFirst, UK), and HPV OncoPredict (Hiantis, Italy). 30 women, referred to colposcopy, were enrolled in this observational, prospective pilot study and asked to collect two vaginal self-taken samples, which were suspended in 5 mL of ThinPrep®PreservCyt® or eNat®. Nucleic acids were extracted from 200 μL using Microlab Nimbus platform (Seegene, Korea) and tested with the three different RT-PCR full-genotyping high-risk HPV assays. The HPV results of vaginal samples resuspended in the two different media were compared to those obtained from the reference clinician-collected cervical sample from the same woman. hrHPV detection in vaginal self-samples suspended in both media demonstrated a substantial agreement with cervical samples with the three assays under-investigation (0.667 <k <0.796). Moreover, the discordances between vaginal self-samples collected from the same woman were found only in cases of normal cytology or low-grade cytological lesions and were generally related to low hrHPV viral loads as indicated by the quantitative HPV OncoPredict assay (6.24E+02 copies/10,000 cells). The study's preliminary findings demonstrated a very good agreement between cervical and vaginal self-collected samples suspended in ThinPrep®PreservCyt® and eNat®, suggesting that the latter could represent a good alternative medium in HPV screening programs based on self-collection.

A prospective diagnostic evaluation of accuracy of self-taken and healthcare worker-taken swabs for rapid COVID-19 testing.

Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) developed for point of care detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen are recommended by WHO to use trained health care workers to collect samples. We hypothesised that self-taken samples are non-inferior for use with RDTs to diagnose COVID-19. We designed a prospective diagnostic evaluation comparing self-taken and healthcare worker (HCW)-taken throat/nasal swabs to perform RDTs for SARS-CoV-2, and how these compare to RT-PCR. Eligible participants 18 years or older with symptoms of COVID-19. 250 participants recruited at the NHS Test and Trace drive-through community PCR testing site (Liverpool, UK); one withdrew before analysis. Self-administered throat/nasal swab for the Covios® RDT, a trained HCW taken throat/nasal sample for PCR and HCW comparison throat/nasal swab for RDT were collected. RDT results were compared to RT-PCR, as the reference standard, to calculate sensitivity and specificity. Seventy-five participants (75/249, 30.1%) were positive by RT-PCR. RDTs with self-taken swabs had a sensitivity of 90.5% (67/74, 95% CI: 83.9-97.2), compared to 78.4% (58/74, 95% CI: 69.0-87.8) for HCW-taken swabs (absolute difference 12.2%, 95% CI: 4.7-19.6, p = 0.003). Specificity for self-taken swabs was 99.4% (173/174, 95% CI: 98.3-100.0), versus 98.9% (172/174, 95% CI: 97.3-100.0) for HCW-taken swabs (absolute difference 0.6%, 95% CI: 0.5-1.7, p = 0.317). The PPV of self-taken RDTs (98.5%, 67/68, 95% CI: 95.7-100.0) and HCW-taken RDTs (96.7%, 58/60, 95% CI 92.1-100.0) were not significantly different (p = 0.262). However, the NPV of self-taken swab RDTs was significantly higher (96.1%, 173/180, 95% CI: 93.2-98.9) than HCW-taken RDTs (91.5%, 172/188, 95% CI 87.5-95.5, p = 0.003). In conclusion, self-taken swabs for COVID-19 testing offer an accurate alternative to healthcare worker taken swabs for use with RDTs. Our results demonstrate that, with no training, self-taken throat/nasal samples can be used by lay individuals as part of rapid testing programmes for symptomatic adults. This is especially important where the lack of trained healthcare workers restricts access to testing.

Human papillomavirus self-sampling with mRNA testing benefits routine screening.

High risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) based screening provides the possibility of vaginal self-sampling as a tool to increase screening attendance. In order to evaluate the impact and feasibility of opt-in self-sampling in the Finnish setting, we invited a randomized population of 5350 women not attending screening after age group invitation or after reminder, to attend HPV self-sampling-based screening in the autumn of 2018 in Helsinki. Out of those, 1282 (24.0%) expressed their interest and ordered the sampling package. Eventually 787 women (14.7% of the total invited population) took part in screening, 770 women by providing a vaginal sample within 2months from invitation and 17 by providing a pap smear in the laboratory. Self-taken samples were collected in Aptima Multitest vials and tested using the Aptima HPV mRNA assay. A high proportion, 158/770 (20.5%) of the samples were positive in the Aptima HPV assay. One hundred and forty-one samples were further submitted to Aptima HPV Genotyping and extended genotyping by a Luminex based assay. Of those, 23 samples (16.3%) were HPV 16 positive and 7 (5.0%) were positive for HPV 18/45; extended genotyping revealed multiple high-risk and low-risk HPV genotypes. At follow-up seven cases of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) were diagnosed, which represents 4.4% of HPV positive women and 0.9% of screened women, whereas the rate was 0.5% in routine screening. Our findings suggest that self-sampling with HPV mRNA testing is a feasible approach to improve screening efficacy in a high-risk population among original nonattendees.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) detection in vaginal self-samples: evaluation of eNat® as an alternative suspension medium to ThinPrep®PreservCyt® for vaginal swabs

Human Papillomavirus (HPV) testing on self-collected samples allows for improved coverage rates of cervical cancer (CC) screening programs. ThinPrep®PreservCyt® (HOLOGIC®, USA) medium is widely used for the suspension of cervical and vaginal self-samples. However, this medium is costly, toxic, and flammable, involving special handling procedures which make its use difficult in screening programs, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. This pilot study aimed to evaluate the analytical performance of eNat® (Copan SpA), an alternative non-alcohol-based suspension medium, compared to ThinPrep®PreservCyt® (HOLOGIC®) for high-risk HPV (hrHPV) detection in vaginal self-collected swabs using three different real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) HPV assays: Anyplex™II HPV28 (Seegene, Korea), Papilloplex® High Risk HPV (GeneFirst, UK), and HPV OncoPredict (Hiantis, Italy). 30 women, referred to colposcopy, were enrolled in this observational, prospective pilot study and asked to collect two vaginal self-taken samples, which were suspended in 5 mL of ThinPrep®PreservCyt® or eNat®. Nucleic acids were extracted from 200 μL using Microlab Nimbus platform (Seegene, Korea) and tested with the three different RT-PCR full-genotyping high-risk HPV assays. The HPV results of vaginal samples resuspended in the two different media were compared to those obtained from the reference clinician-collected cervical sample from the same woman. hrHPV detection in vaginal self-samples suspended in both media demonstrated a substantial agreement with cervical samples with the three assays under-investigation (0.667&lt;k&lt;0.796). Moreover, the discordances between vaginal self-samples collected from the same woman were found only in cases of normal cytology or low-grade cytological lesions and were generally related to low hrHPV viral loads as indicated by the quantitative HPV OncoPredict assay (6.24E+02 copies/10,000 cells). This study demonstrated a very good agreement between cervical and vaginal self-collected samples suspended in ThinPrep®PreservCyt® and eNat®, suggesting that the latter could represent a good alternative medium in HPV screening programs based on self-collection.

Prikaz HPV testiranja kao primarnog skrininga raka grlića materice

Cytology-based cervical cancer screening achieved undisputable success in reducing the incidence and mortality of cervical cancer in many countries of the world, especially high-income countries. However, in lowand middle-income countries substantial reductions in cervical cancer incidence rates have not been achieved, mainly due to the difficulties in realization of complex conditions for implementing high quality cytology-based cervical cancer screening programs. Most international guidelines, including the World Health Organisation (WHO) Global Strategy, now recommend high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing as the preferred cervical screening test, for several reasons, primarily due to its sensitivity, less subjectivity in diagnosis and possibility of easier program organization and implementation. The advantages of primary hrHPV screening include higher sensitivity of technology compared to cytology based examinations, and increased specificity in populations where large proportions of women have been vaccinated against the human papillomavirus (HPV), while the high-negative predictive value enables prolongation of screening intervals to 7 to 10 years, which increases the cost effectiveness of the screening programme, when applied at population level. Also, primary hrHPV screening for cervical cancer can be carried out by self-taken samples which increases the feasibility of such cervical cancer screening programme. However, implementing primary hrHPV cervical cancer screening requires at the same time organised system of monitoring the implementation of the program, coordination and quality assurance of all processes within the implementation of cervical cancer screening.Effective hrHPV primary cervical cancer screening programme requires the triage of hrHPV positive women to maximise the detection of clinically relevant cervical lesions for further investigation. Most of the countries that introduced hrHPV primary cervical cancer screening use visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), cytology based examination or HPV geno-typing with cytology for triage testing. The choice of triage strategy depends on various factors, including availability of resources, effectiveness and cost of procedures to recall women for triage testing as well as the capacity and quality of existing health services to deliver the triage tests. Implementation of self-sampling also requires a number of issues to be addressed, including communication to motivate participation and to inform women about the self-sampling procedure, delivery of the self-sampling kits and return of the samples to the laboratories, laboratory procedures, communication of results, recalling screen-positive women for further examination and triage and motivating them to attend for follow-up and treatment. Finally, the introduction primary screening for HPV on the mucous membrane of the cervix should be accompanied by awareness-raising programs to improve the information and knowledge of women and the entire population about the importance of the cervical cancer screening, which would improve the results of population based cervical cancer screening programs and increase the women's participation.

Weekly population testing could stop this pandemic and prevent the next.

The rapid spread of the SARS-COV-2 delta variant in the UK despite high vaccination coverage will inevitably accelerate when social restrictions end unless testing and contact tracing become much more effective. To minimize further social and economic damage, the effect on R of introducing weekly population testing as social restrictions are relaxed should be evaluated. The large increase in testing capacity required can be achieved with self-taken saliva samples analysed by RT-LAMP in local testing facilities. The costs and effectiveness can be evaluated in whole-city demonstration studies. A local population register in each city or district is essential to issue weekly invitations, manage sample collection, monitor results and achieve rapid notification of households and other contacts when a test is positive. In the UK, weekly test invitations should be managed, like vaccination invitations, by the NHS, with social and financial support for quarantined households to make self-isolation acceptable. A framework for effective population testing that had been established and evaluated during this pandemic could be rapidly reinstated to suppress the next pandemic while vaccines for a new and perhaps more deadly virus are developed and rolled out.

The challenges of defining sample adequacy in an era of HPV based cervical screening.

The implementation of Human Papillomavirus based cervical screening continues apace on a global scale. Understanding the basis and burden of inadequate or invalid samples is important to ensure confidence in high quality laboratory results and inform the development of new technologies. Here we present population based data from Scotland and Denmark which detail the extent of invalid samples for HPV detection in both clinician-taken and self-taken samples. As a comparator we report on the rate of inadequate cytology preparations in both countries. The proportion of samples with an invalid HPV test result was calculated by retrospective analysis of routine laboratory data associated with cervical screening programmes in the two countries. Two assays were in use for the programmes at the time (the Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV assay and the BD Onclarity); both have internal endogenous controls for human genes. In addition, acellular cytology samples were reported through a prospective audit (Scotland) and National quality reporting (Denmark). In total, 89,418 clinician samples and 14,677 self-taken samples were assessed. We observed low rates of invalid HPV tests in clinician taken samples (0.05-0.10 %), irrespective of sample collection media (ThinPrep or SurePath), HPV test system/endogenous control type or clinical indication for testing (primary screening, triage or test of cure). For self-taken samples, the number of invalid samples was 0.18 %. Complete absence of sample material (acellular) in clinician taken samples were observed at a level of 1 in approximately 16.5 thousand. Clinician and self-taken samples appear robust specimens for HPV testing and acellular samples are very rare. Efforts to develop endogenous controls for HPV assays that provide greater insight into true sample adequacy for cervical disease detection, beyond measuring the presence of human cells, will be welcome.

Long term results of follow-up after HPV self-sampling with devices Qvintip and HerSwab in women non-attending cervical screening programme

BackgroundWe are presenting the results of the Slovenian human papillomaviruses (HPV) self-sampling pilot study in colposcopy population of National Cervical Cancer Screening Programme ZORA for the first time. One-year and four-year follow-up results are presented for two different self-sampling devices.Participants and methodsA total of 209 women were enrolled in the study at colposcopy clinic. Prior to the gynaecological examination, all women performed self-collected vaginal swab at the clinic; 111 using Qvintip and 98 using HerSwab self-sampling device. After self-sampling, two cervical smears were taken by a clinician; first for conventional cytology and second for HPV test. After that, all women underwent colposcopy and a cervical biopsy if needed. We compared sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of cytology (at the cut-off atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or more [ASC-US+]) and HPV test (on self- and clinician-taken samples) for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more (CIN2+) after one and four years of follow-up. Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) assay was used for all HPV testing.ResultsThe mean age of 209 women was 37.6 years and HPV positivity rate 67.0% (140/209), 36.9 years and 70.3% (78/111) in the Qvintip group and 38.4 years and 63.3% (62/98) in the HerSwab group, respectively. Overall, percent agreement between self and clinician-taken samples was 81.8% (kappa 0.534) in the Qvintip and 77.1% (kappa 0.456) in the HerSwab group. In the Qvintip group, the longitudinal sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were 71.8%, 75.0%, 83.6%, 60.0% for cytology; 83.1%, 51.3%, 75.6% and 62.5% for HPV test of self-taken samples and 94.4%, 57.5%, 79.8% and 85.2% for HPV test on clinician-taken samples. In the HerSwab group, the corresponding results were 71.7%, 46.7%, 61.3%, 58.3% for cytology; 75.0%, 47.7%, 62.9% and 61.8% for HPV test on self-taken samples and 94.3%, 44.4%, 66.7% and 87.0% for clinician-taken samples, respectively.ConclusionsThe results confirm that HPV self-sampling is not as accurate as clinician sampling when HC2 is used. All HPV tests showed a higher sensitivity in detecting CIN2+ compared to cytology. Due to non-inferior longitudinal sensitivity of HPV self-sampling compared to cytology, HPV self-sampling might be an option for non-attenders to the National Cancer Screening Programme.

Pilot implementation of a home-care programme with chlamydia, gonorrhoea, hepatitis B, and syphilis self-sampling in HIV-positive men who have sex with men

BackgroundNot all men who have sex with men (MSM) at risk for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection currently receive sexual healthcare. To increase the coverage of high-quality HIV/STI care for MSM, we developed a home-care programme, as extended STI clinic care. This programme included home sampling for testing, combined with treatment and sexual health counselling. Here, we pilot implemented the programme in a hospital setting (HIV-positive MSM) to determine the factors for the successful implementation of STI home sampling strategies.MethodsHealthcare providers from the HIV hospital treatment centre (Maastricht) were invited to offer free STI sampling kits (syphilis, hepatitis B, [extra]genital chlamydia and gonorrhoea laboratory testing) to their HIV-positive MSM patients (March to May 2018). To evaluate implementation of the program, quantitative and qualitative data were collected to assess adoption (HIV care providers offered sampling kits to MSM), participation (MSM accepted the sampling kits) and sampling-kit return, STI diagnoses, and implementation experiences.ResultsAdoption was 85.3% (110/129), participation was 58.2% (64/110), and sampling-kit return was 43.8% (28/64). Of the tested MSM, 64.3% (18/28) did not recently (< 3 months) undergo a STI test; during the programme, 17.9% (5/28) were diagnosed with an STI. Of tested MSM, 64.3% (18/28) was vaccinated against hepatitis B. MSM reported that the sampling kits were easily and conveniently used. Care providers (hospital and STI clinic) considered the programme acceptable and feasible, with some logistical challenges. All (100%) self-taken chlamydia and gonorrhoea samples were adequate for testing, and 82.1% (23/28) of MSM provided sufficient self-taken blood samples for syphilis screening. However, full syphilis diagnostic work-up required for MSM with a history of syphilis (18/28) was not possible in 44.4% (8/18) of MSM because of insufficient blood sampled.ConclusionThe home sampling programme increased STI test uptake and was acceptable and feasible for MSM and their care providers. Return of sampling kits should be further improved. The home-care programme is a promising extension of regular STI care to deliver comprehensive STI care to the home setting for MSM. Yet, in an HIV-positive population, syphilis diagnosis may be challenging when using self-taken blood samples.

Swab-Yourself Trial With Economic Monitoring and Testing for Infections Collectively (SYSTEMATIC): Part 2. A Diagnostic Accuracy and Cost-effectiveness Study Comparing Rectal, Pharyngeal, and Urogenital Samples Analyzed Individually, Versus as a Pooled Specimen, for the Diagnosis of Gonorrhea and Chlamydia.

Sexual history does not accurately identify those with extragenital Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) and Chlamydia trachomatis (CT), so universal extragenital sampling is recommended. Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are expensive. If urogenital, plus rectal and pharyngeal, samples are analyzed, the diagnostic cost is trebled. Pooling samples into 1 NAAT container would cost the same as urogenital samples alone. We compared clinician triple samples analyzed individually with self-taken pooled samples for diagnostic accuracy, and cost, in men who have sex with men (MSM) and females. This was a prospective, convenience sample in United Kingdom sexual health clinic. Randomized order of clinician and self-samples from pharynx, rectum, plus first-catch urine (FCU) in MSM and vulvovaginal swabs (VVS) in females, for NG and CT detection. Of 1793 participants (1284 females, 509 MSM), 116 had NG detected (75 urogenital, 83 rectum, 72 pharynx); 276 had CT detected (217 urogenital, 249 rectum, 63 pharynx). There was no difference in sensitivities between clinician triple samples and self-pooled specimens for NG (99.1% and 98.3%), but clinician samples analyzed individually identified 3% more chlamydia infections than pooled (99.3% and 96.0%; P = .027). However, pooled specimens identified more infections than VVS/FCU alone. Pooled specimens missed 2 NG and 11 CT infections, whereas VVS/FCU missed 41 NG and 58 CT infections. Self-taken pooled specimens were the most cost-effective. FCU/VVS testing alone missed many infections. Self-taken pooled samples were as sensitive as clinician triple samples for identifying NG, but clinician samples analyzed individually identified 3% more CT infections than pooled. The extragenital sampling was achievable at no additional diagnostic cost to the FCU/VVS. NCT02371109.

Swab-yourself Trial With Economic Monitoring and Testing for Infections Collectively (SYSTEMATIC): Part 1. A Diagnostic Accuracy and Cost-effectiveness Study Comparing Clinician-taken vs Self-taken Rectal and Pharyngeal Samples for the Diagnosis of Gonorrhea and Chlamydia.

Urogenital testing misses extragenital Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) and Chlamydia trachomatis (CT). Extragenital self-sampling is frequently undertaken despite no robust randomized, controlled trial evidence of efficacy. We compared clinician-taken rectal and pharyngeal samples with self-taken samples for diagnostic accuracy and cost in men who have sex with men (MSM) and in females. This was a prospective convenience sample from a UK sexual health clinic. We randomized the order of clinician- and self-taken samples from the pharynx and rectum, plus first catch urine (MSM) and vulvovaginal swabs (females), for NG/CT detection. Of 1793 participants (1284 females, 509 MSM), 116 had NG detected (75 urogenital, 83 rectum, 72 pharynx); 9.4% infected females and 67.3% MSM were urogenital-negative. A total of 276 had CT detected (217 urogenital, 249 rectum, 63 pharynx); 13.1% infected females and 71.8% MSM were urogenital-negative. Sexual history did not identify those with rectal infections. There was no difference in diagnostic accuracy between clinician- and self-taken samples from the rectum or pharynx. Clinicians took swabs more quickly than participants, so costs were lower. However, in asymptomatic people, nonqualified clinicians would oversee self-swabbing making these costs lower. There was no difference in the diagnostic accuracy of clinician-taken compared with self-taken extragenital samples. Sexual history did not identify those with rectal infections, so individuals should have extragenital clinician- or self-taken samples. Clinician-taken swabs cost less than self-taken swabs; however, in asymptomatic people or those who perform home testing, the costs would be lower than for clinician-taken swabs. NCT02371109.

Test of cure study: a feasibility study to estimate the time to test of cure (TOC) for Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Chlamydia trachomatis infections

ObjectivesTest of cure (TOC) for Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) and Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) infection is an important tool in the public health management of STIs. However, there are limited data about...

Near patient chlamydia and gonorrhoea screening and treatment in further education/technical colleges: a cost analysis of the \u2018Test n Treat\u2019 feasibility trial

BackgroundCommunity-based screening may be one solution to increase testing and treatment of sexually transmitted infections in sexually active teenagers, but there are few data on the practicalities and cost of running such a service. We estimate the cost of running a ‘Test n Treat’ service providing rapid chlamydia (CT) and gonorrhoea (NG) testing and same day on-site CT treatment in technical colleges.MethodsProcess data from a 2016/17 cluster randomised feasibility trial were used to estimate total costs and service uptake. Pathway mapping was used to model different uptake scenarios. Participants, from six London colleges, provided self-taken genitourinary samples in the nearest toilet. Included in the study were 509 sexually active students (mean 85/college): median age 17.9 years, 49% male, 50% black ethnicity, with a baseline CT and NG prevalence of 6 and 0.5%, respectively. All participants received information about CT and NG infections at recruitment. When the Test n Treat team visited, participants were texted/emailed invitations to attend for confidential testing. Three colleges were randomly allocated the intervention, to host (non-incentivised) Test n Treat one and four months after baseline. All six colleges hosted follow-up Test n Treat seven months after baseline when students received a £10 incentive (to participate).ResultsThe mean non-incentivised daily uptake per college was 5 students (range 1 to 17), which cost £237 (range £1082 to £88) per student screened, and £4657 (range £21,281 to £1723) per CT infection detected, or £13,970 (range £63,842 to £5169) per NG infection detected.The mean incentivised daily uptake was 19 students which cost £91 per student screened, and £1408/CT infection or £7042/NG infection detected.If daily capacity for screening were achieved (49 students/day), costs including incentives would be £47 per person screened and £925/CT infection or £2774/NG infection detected.ConclusionsDelivering non-incentivised Test n Treat in technical colleges is more expensive per person screened than CT and NG screening in clinics. Targeting areas with high infection rates, combined with high, incentivised uptake could make costs comparable.Trial registrationISRCTN58038795, Assigned August 2016, registered prospectively.

HPV testing on vaginal/cervical nurse-assisted self-samples versus clinician-taken specimens and the HPV prevalence, in Adama Town, Ethiopia.

This study aimed to determine the feasibility of vaginal/cervical nurse-assisted self-sampling (NASS) and the agreement between human papilloma virus (HPV) tests on self-samples versus clinician-taken (CT) specimens.Women participated voluntarily for cervical cancer screening at St. Aklesia Memorial Hospital. Eighty-three women provided a total of 166 coupled self-taken and CT specimens collected. Specimens were stored at room temperature for a maximum of 10 months and analyzed using validated the RIATOL qPCR HPV genotyping test, a quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) high-throughput HPV E6, E7 assay. The average age of the participating women was 32 years. Seventy-three women (87.9%) felt that NASS was easy to use. An overall HPV, high-risk (HR) HPV, and low-risk HPV prevalence was 22.7% (15/66), 18.2% (12/66), and 6.1% (4/66), respectively. The overall HR HPV prevalence was 17.2% (NASS) and 15.5% (CT). The most prevalent HPV type was HPV51; HPV 16 was only detected in 1 woman (CT+NASS) and HPV18 only in 1 woman (CT). The overall measurement agreement between self-taken and CT samples was moderate with a kappa value of 0.576 (P < .001). Lifetime partnered with >2 men were associated with HR HPV positivity (P < .001). There was a strong statistical association between HR HPV positivity and visual inspection with acetic acid- positive (P < .001). The NASS for HPV testing could be seen as an alternative option and might be acceptable to Ethiopian women. The overall HR HPV prevalence was comparable with Sub-Saharan countries in the general population.

Understanding the attitudes and acceptability of extra-genital Chlamydia testing in young women: evaluation of a feasibility study

BackgroundChlamydia trachomatis (C. trachomatis) is the most common bacterial sexually transmitted infection in the UK. Recent studies suggest that in addition to the genital tract, C. trachomatis is found in the throat and rectum, suggesting the number of infections is under-reported. There is an urgent need to study the impact of extending diagnosis to include extra-genital samples; however, there is a lack of evidence on the acceptability of asking young women to provide these samples.MethodA mixed methods single group feasibility study explored the acceptability of combined genital and extra-genital testing in young women aged 16–25 years consecutively attending a sexual health centre in Edinburgh, Scotland. Young women were asked to complete a self- administered anonymous questionnaire whether they would be willing to give self-taken throat and ano-rectal samples. Interviews with women (n = 20) willing to self-sample were conducted before and after self-sampling, and these explored the underlying reasons behind their decision, and feelings about the tests.ResultsOf 500 women recruited to the study, 422 (84.4%) women provided sufficient data for analysis. From completed questionnaires, 86.3% of respondents reported willingness to self-sample from the throat. Willingness of ano-rectal self-sampling was lower (59.1%), particularly in women under 20 (< 20 years: 44.4%; ≥20 years, 68.2%). Willingness of ano-rectal self-sampling was higher in women who had more sexual partners in the last 6 months (0 partners, 48.3%, n = 14, 3 or more partners, 67.4%, n = 60) and in those who have previous experience of a positive test for a sexually transmitted infection (STI) (positive: 64.5%; negative: 57%). Interviewed women suggested that a lack of knowledge of STIs, embarrassment and lack of confidence in the ability to carry out the sampling were barriers towards acceptability.ConclusionsIn this study, self-sampling of throat samples is largely acceptable; however, the acceptability of taking an ano-rectal sample for C. trachomatis testing in young women was lower in younger women. The study suggests further research to investigate the acceptability of extra-genital testing as an addition to routine C. trachomatis testing, and whether this increases detection and prevents infective sequelae for women.

Self-Collected Samples in Cervical Cancer Screening: Results of HPV and Pap Self-Collected Samples Compared to Physician-Obtained Specimens

Objective: In order to increase overall participation in cervical cancer screening, several investigators propose a concept of introducing self-tests. The study presented here compared test results of the Pap test and 4 different HPV test systems of self-collected and physician-collected vaginal specimens. Study Design: 208 patients of a colposcopy clinic had physician-taken and self-taken vaginal samples. All cell samples enabled a liquid-based Pap test and testing for carcinogenic HPV genotypes. In addition, all patients had a colposcopy with or without cervical biopsy and/or conisation. Results: 99 patients had the histological diagnosis of CIN2+. The HPV test sensitivity of self-collected samples differed significantly in this patient group depending on the test system performed. The sensitivity of the self-collected Pap test was significantly lower than HPV testing, but the positive predictive value of the Pap self-test was very high. Conclusion: The results of this study indicate that under the circumstances of self-testing HPV test systems differ in test sensitivity and specificity. Self-collected Pap tests can provide a test result with a very high positive predictive value and introduce therapeutic strategies. In order to improve screening strategies, it could be an opportunity to combine HPV and Pap tests in self-taken vaginal samples, especially in countries with a low income level. In countries with a good medical infrastructure, self-testing has to be introduced with caution.

A comparison of cotton and flocked swabs for vaginal self-sample collection.

ObjectiveVaginal self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing has recently been proposed to optimize cervical cancer screening coverage. The objective of this study was to compare the performance of self-taken samples using flocked and cotton swabs for HPV detection and cellular retrieval.MethodsWe recruited women aged 21–65 years, referred to colposcopy at the Division of Gynecology of the Geneva University Hospitals between May and September 2016. Each participant collected 2 vaginal samples: 1 with a cotton swab and 1 with a flocked swab. A 1:1 randomization determined the order in which the 2 samples were taken. The swabs were introduced into a 20 mL PreservCyt® vial. Real-time polymerase chain reaction analysis using the Anyplex™ II HPV HR assay, cytofluorometric analysis and cytological cell counting were performed on each sample.ResultsA total of 119 participants were recruited in the study. Their mean ± standard deviation age was 35.1±8.9 years. The HPV prevalence was 29.7% and 38.1% according to the cotton and flocked swab, respectively (p=0.006). The mean number of cells collected per milliliter according to cytofluorometry was 96,726.6 with the cotton swab and 425,544.3 with the flocked swab (p<0.001). The mean number of cells detected at cytological cell count was 13,130.42 using the cotton swab and 17,503.6 using the flocked swab (p<0.001).ConclusionThe flocked swab achieved a greater cellular retrieval and showed an improved performance in HPV detection. Further studies are needed to assess the usability and cost-effectiveness of the 2 self-sampling devices.