Investigator

Jorge Salmerón

National Autonomous University of Mexico, Research Center on Policies, Population and Health, Faculty of Medicine

JSJorge Salmerón
Papers(5)
Performance of urine …Performance of an aff…Comparative performan…Prevalence of <i>Chla…Clinical Performance …
Collaborators(10)
Eduardo Lazcano‐PonceLeith León-MaldonadoLuis HermosilloLuz Cárdenas‐CárdenasNenetzen Saavedra‐LaraRubí Hernández-LópezSonia Hernández-Salaz…Yvonne N. FloresBerenice Rivera-Pared…Betania Allen‐Leigh
Institutions(4)
Universidad Nacional …Instituto Nacional de…Bank Of MexicoMexican Social Securi…

Papers

Performance of urine samples compared to cervical samples for detection of precancer lesions among HPV-positive women attending colposcopy clinic in Mexico City

Abstract Background High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) detection in self-collected urine samples (SeCUS) may be a promising alternative for cervical cancer screening because of its greater acceptability, as long as it can offer comparable sensitivity to clinician-collected cervical samples (CCoS) for detecting precancer lesions. Objective To evaluate the performance of the SeCUS compared to that of the CCoS for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN3) detection among hrHPV-positive women receiving colposcopy in Mexico City using different specific extended HPV typing procedures: HPV16/18, HPV16/18/35/39/68 or HPV16/18/35/39/68/31. Methods From March 2017 to August 2018, 4,158 female users of the cervical cancer screening program at Tlalpan Sanitary Jurisdiction in Mexico City were invited to participate in the FRIDA-Tlalpan study. All participants provided ≥ 30 mL of SeCUS, and then a CCoS was obtained with Cervex-Brush®, which was used for hrHPV typing. Participants who tested positive for hrHPV in CCoS were referred for colposcopy for diagnostic confirmation, and all SeCUS of these women were also tested for hrHPV typing. Results In total, 561 hrHPV-positive women were identified by CCoS via colposcopy, and 82.2% of the SeCUS of these women were also hrHPV positive. From both CCoS and SeCUS, 7 cases of CIN3 were detected. Considering HPV16/18 typing, CCoS and SeCUS detected 4 cases of CIN3, but after HPV16/18/35/39/68/31 extension typing, both CCoS and SeCUS detected all 7 of the CIN3 cases among the hrHPV-positive women. Conclusions Using extended hrHPV typing based on HPV16/18/35/39/68/31, our results suggest that the performance of SeCUS may be equivalent to that of CCoS for detecting CIN3 lesions. Although our results are inconclusive, they support the hypothesis that SeCUS may be an attractive alternative worthy of further research.

Performance of an affordable urine self-sampling method for human papillomavirus detection in Mexican women

Introduction Urine self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening is a non-invasive method that offers several logistical advantages and high acceptability, reducing barriers related to low screening coverage. This study developed and evaluated the performance of a low-cost urine self-sampling method for HPV-testing and explored the acceptability and feasibility of potential implementation of this alternative in routine screening. Methods A series of sequential laboratory assays examined the impact of several pre-analytical conditions for obtaining DNA from urine and subsequent HPV detection. Initially, we assessed the effect of ethylaminediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) as a DNA preservative examining several variables including EDTA concentration, specimen storage temperature, time between urine collection and DNA extraction, and first-morning micturition versus convenience sample collection. We further evaluated the agreement of HPV-testing between urine and clinician-collected cervical samples among 95 women. Finally, we explored the costs of self-sampling supplies as well as the acceptability and feasibility of urine self-sampling among women and healthcare workers. Results Our results revealed higher DNA concentrations were obtained when using a 40mM EDTA solution, storing specimens at 25°C and extracting DNA within 72 hrs. of urine collection, regardless of using first-morning micturition or a convenience sampling. We observed good agreement (Kappa = 0.72) between urine and clinician-collected cervical samples for HPV detection. Furthermore, urine self-sampling was an affordable method (USD 1.10), well accepted among cervical cancer screening users, healthcare workers, and decision-makers. Conclusion These results suggest urine self-sampling is feasible and appropriate alternative for HPV-testing in HPV-based screening programs in lower-resource contexts.

Comparative performance of the human papillomavirus test and cytology for primary screening for high‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia at the population level

AbstractThe World Health Organization recommends high‐risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)‐based screening for women 39 to 49 years, based on the greater accuracy of hrHPV‐based screening for cervical cancer detection. Many cervical cancer screening programs have incorporated hrHPV testing and multiple early cervical cancer detection strategies have been evaluated, mostly under controlled conditions. However, there are few evaluations of combined hrHPV and cytology strategies post‐implementation at the population level. Our study sought to estimate the relative yield of hrHPV testing compared to cervical cytology, as a primary screening test for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN2+), used at the population level. We analyzed screening data from Mexico's public cervical cancer prevention program from 2010 to 2015 in women 35 to 64 years. The study population consisted of two cohorts: one from a total of 2 881 962 cytology‐based screening tests and another from a total of 2 004 497 hrHPV‐based screening tests, which are concurrent in time. We performed a relative yield analysis using Poisson regression models to compare the effectiveness of hrHPV testing for CIN2+ with cervical cytology. A total of 4 886 459 records were analyzed, including 23 999 biopsies; 0.12% (n = 6166) had a CIN2+ histologic diagnosis. hrHPV testing with cytological triage detects twice as many CIN2+ cases as screening using cytology alone.

Clinical Performance of hrHPV Primary Screening Using Vaginal versus Cervical Samples to Detect High-grade Intraepithelial Lesions

Abstract High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing is now the most recommended primary method for cervical cancer screening worldwide. Clinician-collected cervical sampling continues to be the main sampling method, but hrHPV vaginal self-sampling is an appealing alternative because of its greater acceptability and potentially higher cost-effectiveness. This study aimed to determine whether hrHPV vaginal self-sampling is comparable with clinician-collected cervical sampling for detecting histologically confirmed high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2/3) as part of a cervical cancer screening program in Mexico. We analyzed data from 5,856 women screened during a hrHPV-based screening study. Clinical performance and diagnostic efficiency metrics were estimated for the two sampling methods for the CIN3 and CIN2+ endpoints, using three triage strategies: HPV16/18 genotyping, HPV16/18/33/58 extended genotyping, and HPV16/18/31/33/58 extended genotyping. hrHPV-positivity was found in 801 (13.7%) cervical and 897 (15.3%) vaginal samples. All women with hrHPV-positive samples were referred to colposcopy, which detected 17 total CIN3 cases before considering retrospective triage strategies. Using the HPV16/18/31/33/58 extended genotyping strategy, 245 women had hrHPV-positive cervical samples and 269 had hrHPV-positive vaginal samples. Ten CIN3 cases were detected each among women with hrHPV-positive cervical samples and among those with hrHPV-positive vaginal samples when using this strategy, with no significant differences in sensitivity and specificity observed. We observe that self- and clinician-collected sampling methods are comparable for detecting CIN3 and CIN2+ regardless of the triage strategy used. These findings can help public health officials to develop more cost-effective cervical cancer screening programs that maximize participation. Prevention Relevance: We found that hrHPV vaginal self-sampling is comparable with hrHPV clinician cervical sampling when using any triage strategy to refer women to colposcopy, so self-sampling is a viable cervical screening method. Therefore, policymakers should consider incorporating self-sampling into cervical screening programs to increase screening coverage and reduce cervical cancer burden. See related Spotlight, p. 649

221Works
5Papers
17Collaborators
Papillomavirus InfectionsMetabolic SyndromeGenetic Predisposition to DiseasePrognosisPrecancerous ConditionsChlamydia Infections

Positions

2017–

Researcher

National Autonomous University of Mexico · Research Center on Policies, Population and Health, Faculty of Medicine

2010–

Honorary Research Professor in Medical Sciences F

National Institute of Public Health · Center for Population Health Research

2001–

Head of Unit

Mexican Social Security Institute · Unit of Epidemiologic Research and Health Services

2008–

President of the Ethics Committee

Mexican Social Security Institute · National Commission for Scientific Research

1992–

Full-time researcher

Mexican Social Security Institute · Health Research Coordination

Education

1997

DOCTOR OF SCIENCE

National Institute of Public Health · Epidemiology

1993

MASTER OF SCIENCE

National Autonomous University of Mexico · School of Medicine

1986

Bachelor of Medicine

Universidad La Salle · School of Medicine

Country

MX