Investigator

Anna Gottschlich

University of Michigan

AGAnna Gottschlich
Papers(8)
A Comparison of Neigh…Cervical Cancer Scree…HPV Extended Genotypi…Assessing 10-Year Saf…Using self-collection…Experiences with ther…Human papillomavirus‐…Evidence of Decreased…
Collaborators(10)
Gina S. OgilvieStuart PeacockEduardo L. FrancoLaurie W. SmithDarrel A. CookJoy MelnikowLily ProctorMarette LeeRuth E. MartinKaitlin Burchett
Institutions(7)
Wayne State UniversityBC Centre for Disease…Simon Fraser Universi…Mcgill UniversityGenome British Columb…University Of Califor…University Of British…

Papers

A Comparison of Neighborhood Socioeconomic Deprivation Measures and the Association with Survival among Black and White Women with Endometrial Cancer

Abstract Background: Black women with endometrial cancer have twice the mortality compared with White. Survival disparities remain after accounting for individual-level socioeconomic and cancer-related factors. We investigated associations between area-based deprivation and survival and explored whether area-based deprivation attenuates the association between race and survival, among a cohort of Black and White women. Methods: Data from endometrial cancers diagnosed between 2013 and 2022 were collected from a comprehensive cancer registry covering Metropolitan Detroit. Addresses at diagnosis were linked to the area deprivation (ADI) and social vulnerability (SVI) indices. Adjusted Fine and Gray models and Cox proportional hazard models were run investigating associations between area-based deprivation measures and survival; analyses were conducted estimating the proportion of the association between race and survival that was attenuated by area-based measures. Results: Higher deprivation was associated with poorer survival, adjusted for race, insurance status, and tumor characteristics. Compared with the least disadvantaged quartile, the quartile with the highest disadvantage using ADI and SVI had 1.18 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.99–1.43] and 1.40 (1.14–1.71) times the hazard of endometrial cancer–specific mortality, respectively. ADI and SVI attenuated 18% (3%–38%) and 27% (10%–48%) of associations between race and mortality overall and 24% (95% CI, 3%–61%) and 40% (95% CI, 16%–78%) among those with high-grade histology. Conclusions: This study demonstrates a clear association between neighborhood-level disadvantage and survival among women with endometrial cancer living in Metropolitan Detroit. Neighborhood disadvantage attenuates the relationship between race and survival, particularly among those with high-grade histology. Impact: These findings serve as motivation to understand how neighborhood affects cancer outcomes.

Cervical Cancer Screening Cascade: A Framework for Monitoring Uptake and Retention Along the Screening and Treatment Pathway

Background: Cervical cancer is a major global health concern, causing approximately 350,000 deaths annually. It is also preventable through effective prevention and early detection. To facilitate elimination, the World Health Organization (WHO) set targets for HPV vaccination, screening, and treatment. Achieving these goals requires frameworks to monitor screening program performance. As many regions transition to HPV primary screening, a standardized Cervical Cancer Screening Cascade can track performance, identify gaps in follow-up, and optimize resource allocation. Methods: This paper introduces a structured cascade developed to monitor uptake, retention, and outcomes in HPV-based screening programs. The Cascade was created through collaboration between public health experts, clinicians, and researchers at the University of British Columbia (UBC), the Women’s Health Research Institute, and BC Cancer. Results: The Cascade outlines four phases: screening, triage, detection, and treatment. Each phase includes two substages: “uptake” and “results,” with an additional substage in screening (“invitation”). “Screening” assesses invitation effectiveness and participation. “Triage” tracks follow-up after a positive screen. “Detection” evaluates attendance at diagnostic appointments, and “Treatment” measures the treatment rate for those with precancerous lesions. Conclusions: The Cascade can guide emerging and existing HPV screening programs within Canada and other similarly resourced settings and serve as a benchmark tool for programs to assess their progress towards cervical cancer elimination.

HPV Extended Genotyping to Triage Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screens—Balancing the Harms and Benefits of an Additional Triage Test before Direct Colposcopy Referral

Abstract The Netherlands’ cervical cancer screening program transitioned to primary human papillomavirus (HPV) screening in 2017. After the introduction of HPV-based screening, the country saw increases in colposcopy referral rates and detections of low-grade lesions. In July 2022, genotyping was introduced, and those with borderline or mild dyskaryotic (BMD) cytologic abnormalities were only referred to colposcopy if positive for HPV type 16 or 18, and repeat screening otherwise. In this article, various strategies using extended genotyping (HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58) as a triage test after an abnormal screen were explored using data from HPV-positive participants with normal or BMD cytology in the Population-Based Screening Study Amsterdam (POBASCAM) trial. The authors assessed positive and negative predictive values and colposcopy referral rates for each strategy using extended genotyping to triage women to either direct referral to colposcopy or repeat screening. Direct referral did not meet positive and negative predictive value thresholds for efficiency for any strategies. However, the authors note that direct referral may nonetheless be useful among those with BMD due to minimal increases in colposcopy referrals and concerns of loss to follow-up at repeat screening. These findings demonstrate the potential utility of extended genotyping as a triage test in primary HPV screening programs. The results should be considered alongside the fact that referral to repeat screening may result in loss of engagement of women who need treatment to prevent invasive cancer. See related article by Kroon et al., p. 1037

Assessing 10-Year Safety of a Single Negative HPV Test for Cervical Cancer Screening: Evidence from FOCAL-DECADE Cohort

Abstract Background: Long-term safety of a single negative human papillomavirus (HPV) test for cervical cancer screening is unclear. The HPV FOr cerviCAL Cancer Trial (FOCAL) was a randomized trial comparing HPV testing with cytology. The FOCAL-DECADE cohort tracked women who received one HPV test during FOCAL, and were HPV negative, for up to 10 years to identify cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) detected through a provincial screening program. Methods: FOCAL participants who received one HPV test, were negative, and had at least one post-FOCAL cervix screen were included (N = 5,537). We constructed cumulative incidence curves of CIN2+/CIN3+ detection, analyzed cumulative risk of detection at intervals post-HPV test, calculated average incidence rates for detection, and compared hazard across ages. Results: Ten years after one negative HPV test, the probability of CIN2+ detection was lower than 1%, with most lesions detected 7 years or later. Average incidence rates of CIN2+/CIN3+ lesions over follow-up were 0.50 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.31–0.78] and 0.18 (95% CI, 0.07–0.36) per 1,000 person-years, respectively. Hazards were higher for younger ages (nonsignificant trend). Conclusions: Among women with a single negative HPV test, long-term risk of CIN2+ detection was low, particularly through 7 years of follow-up; thus, one negative HPV test appears to confer long-term protection from precancerous lesions. Even 10-year risk is sufficiently low to support extended testing intervals in average-risk populations. Impact: Our findings support the safety of screening policies using HPV testing alone at 5-year or longer intervals.

Using self-collection HPV testing to increase engagement in cervical cancer screening programs in rural Guatemala: a longitudinal analysis

Abstract Background Cervical cancer is a leading cause of death in low- and middle-income countries. Self-collection testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) is an alternative form of cervical cancer screening that can be completed privately and at home. Understanding how the use of HPV testing influences follow-up care in low-resourced settings is crucial before broad implementation. This study aimed to identify if access to self-collection HPV testing impacts participation in established cervical cancer screening programs among women in two rural communities in Guatemala. Methods A cohort of 956 women was recruited in 2016 and followed for 2 years for the HPV Multiethnic Study (HPV MES). At baseline, women answered a questionnaire assessing cervical cancer screening history and were offered self-collection HPV testing. Women were re-contacted yearly to determine receipt of additional screening. Statistical changes in screening behavior before and throughout study participation, stratified by self-collection status, were assessed using McNemar pair tests for proportions. Alluvial plots were constructed to depict changes in individual screening behavior. The odds of changes in Pap-compliance (screened in past 3 years), given collection status, were assessed using multivariate logistic regressions. Results Reported screening rates increased 2 years after enrollment compared to rates reported for the 3 years before study entry among women who collected a sample (19.1% increase, p < 0.05), received results of their test (22.1% increase, p < 0.05), and received positive (24.2% increase, p < 0.1) or negative results (21.7% increase, p < 0.05). However, most increases came from one community, with minimal changes in the other. The adjusted odds of becoming Pap compliant were higher for women who collected a sample vs. did not (OR: 1.48, 95% CI: 0.64, 3.40), received their result vs. did not (OR: 1.29, 95% CI: 0.52, 3.02), and received a positive result vs. negative (OR: 2.43, 95% CI: 0.63, 16.10). Conclusions Participation in self-collection HPV testing campaigns may increase likelihood of involvement in screening programs. However, results varied between communities, and reporting of screening histories was inconsistent. Future work should identify what community-specific factors promote success in HPV testing programs and focus on improving education on existing cervical cancer interventions.

Experiences with thermal ablation for cervical precancer treatment after self‐collection HPV‐based screening in the ASPIRE Mayuge randomized trial

AbstractCervical cancer remains a significant public health burden in low‐resourced countries. Thus, the WHO prioritized cervix screening, and recently recommended thermal ablation treatment for cervical precancer. However, there is limited information on side effects during treatment and recovery, and acceptability among those treated. The ASPIRE Mayuge trial recruited women to participate in self‐collection cervix screening between 2019 and 2020 (N = 2019). Screen‐positive women (N = 531, 26.3%) were referred for visual inspection with acetic acid and thermal ablation treatment, per Uganda Ministry of Health recommendations; 71.2% of those referred attended follow‐up. Six months post‐screening, a subset of trial participants were recontacted. Those who received thermal ablation completed a survey assessing side effects during and after the procedure, and willingness to recommend the treatment to others. We summarized the results to describe the side effects and acceptability of thermal ablation treatment. Of 2019 participants, 349 (17%) received thermal ablation. A subset of 135 completed the follow‐up survey, where 90% reported pain during treatment; however, intensity and duration were low. Over a third of women reported problems with recovery for reasons including pain, discharge and bleeding. Regardless, 98% reported they would recommend the treatment to others. The use of thermal ablation to treat cervical precancer appears to be highly acceptable in this population. While many women reported side effects during the procedure and recovery, the majority said they would recommend the treatment to others. However, given the substantial proportion who reported problems with recovery, efforts should be made to provide additional resources to women after receiving thermal ablation treatment for cervical precancer.

Human papillomavirus‐based screening at extended intervals missed fewer cervical precancers than cytology in the HPV For Cervical Cancer (HPV FOCAL) trial

AbstractWhile cervix screening using cytology is recommended at 2‐ to 3‐year intervals, given the increased sensitivity of human papillomavirus (HPV)‐based screening to detect precancer, HPV‐based screening is recommended every 4‐ to 5‐years. As organized cervix screening programs transition from cytology to HPV‐based screening with extended intervals, there is some concern that cancers will be missed between screens. Participants in HPV FOr CervicAL Cancer (HPV FOCAL) trial received cytology (Cytology Arm) at 24‐month intervals or HPV‐based screening (HPV Arm) at 48‐month intervals; both arms received co‐testing (cytology and HPV testing) at exit. We investigated the results of the co‐test to identify participants with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+) who would not have had their precancer detected if they had only their arm's respective primary screen. In the Cytology Arm, 25/62 (40.3%) identified CIN2+s were missed by primary screen (ie, normal cytology/positive HPV test) and all 25 had normal cytology at the prior 24‐month screen. In the HPV arm, three CIN2+s (3/49, 6.1%) were missed by primary screen (ie, negative HPV test/abnormal cytology). One of these three misses had low‐grade cytology findings and would also not have been referred to colposcopy outside of the trial. Multiple rounds of cytology did not detect some precancerous lesions detected with one round of HPV‐based screening. In our population, cytology missed more CIN2+, even at shorter screening intervals, than HPV‐based screening. This assuages concerns about missed detection postimplementation of an extended interval HPV‐based screening program. We recommend that policymakers consider a shift from cytology to HPV‐based cervix screening.

Evidence of Decreased Long-term Risk of Cervical Precancer after Negative Primary HPV Screens Compared with Negative Cytology Screens in a Longitudinal Cohort Study

Abstract Background: The growing use of primary human papillomavirus (HPV) cervical cancer screening requires determining appropriate screening intervals to avoid overtreatment of transient disease. This study examined the long-term risk of cervical precancer after HPV screening to inform screening interval recommendations. Methods: This longitudinal cohort study (British Columbia, Canada, 2008 to 2022) recruited women and individuals with a cervix who received 1 to 2 negative HPV screens (HPV1 cohort, N = 5,546; HPV2 cohort, N = 6,624) during a randomized trial and women and individuals with a cervix with 1 to 2 normal cytology results (BCS1 cohort, N = 782,297; BCS2 cohort, N = 673,778) extracted from the provincial screening registry. All participants were followed through the registry for 14 years. Long-term risk of cervical precancer or worse [cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+)] was compared between HPV and cytology cohorts. Results: Cumulative risks of CIN2+ were 3.2/1,000 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.6–4.7] in HPV1 and 2.7/1,000 (95% CI, 1.2–4.2) in HPV2 after 8 years. This was comparable with the risk in the cytology cohorts after 3 years [BCS1: 3.3/1,000 (95% CI, 3.1–3.4); BCS2: 2.5/1,000 (95% CI, 2.4–2.6)]. The cumulative risk of CIN2+ after 10 years was low in the HPV cohorts [HPV1: 4.7/1,000 (95% CI, 2.6–6.7); HPV2: 3.9 (95% CI, 1.1–6.6)]. Conclusions: Risk of CIN2+ 8 years after a negative screen in the HPV cohorts was comparable with risk after 3 years in the cytology cohorts (the benchmark for acceptable risk). Impact: These findings suggest that primary HPV screening intervals could be extended beyond the current 5-year recommendation, potentially reducing barriers to screening.

1Works
8Papers
23Collaborators
1Trials

Positions

Researcher

University of Michigan