Rachel L. Winer

A qualitative assessment of the acceptability of human papillomavirus self‐sampling and informational materials among diverse populations

AbstractBackgroundDisparities in cervical cancer screening rates among marginalized groups is a driver of inequalities in cervical cancer. Self‐sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is a newly emerging alternative to clinician‐performed testing to screen for cervical cancer, and has high potential to reduce screening barriers in under‐screened and marginalized groups. We study the acceptability in of HPV self‐sampling and informational materials among Black/African American, Hispanic/Spanish speaking, American Indian/Alaska Native and transgender/nonbinary populations.MethodsWe conducted qualitative interviews with patients, ages 30–65, who were Black/African American, Hispanic, American Indian, and/or transgender/nonbinary individuals assigned female at birth. Telephone interviews were conducted in English or Spanish. Patients did not complete the test, rather were asked about the attractiveness, comprehensibility, and acceptability of the HPV self‐test, instructions, and messaging.ResultsAmong 23 completed interviews (5 American Indian/Alaska Native, 7 Hispanic [2 bilingual, 5 Spanish‐speaking], 5 Black/African American, and 6 transgender/nonbinary), patients from all groups thought the test was straightforward and convenient, and they would complete the test at home or in clinic. The transgender/nonbinary patients preferred at‐home testing. American Indian and transgender/nonbinary patients liked that the test might avoid pain, discomfort, and invasiveness. All patients liked the letter and instructions. All groups had specific suggestions for making the materials more culturally acceptable.ConclusionsThe HPV self‐test and the instructions and materials for use were acceptable for a diverse group of patients. Tailored outreach and messaging should be considered to reduce screening disparities among groups that have been historically underserved by the medical system.

Cost-effectiveness studies of HPV self-sampling: A systematic review

HPV self-sampling (HPV-SS) can increase cervical cancer screening participation by addressing barriers in high- and low- and middle-income settings. Successful implementation of HPV-SS programs will depend on understanding potential costs and health effects. Our objectives were to summarize the methods and results of published HPV-SS cost and cost-effectiveness studies, present implications of these results for HPV-SS program implementation, and identify knowledge gaps. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. One reviewer searched online databases for articles published through June 12, 2019, identified eligible studies, and extracted data; a second reviewer checked extracted data for accuracy. Eligible studies used an economic model to compare HPV-SS outreach strategies to standard-of-care tests. Of 16 eligible studies, 14 reported HPV-SS could be a cost-effective strategy. Studies differed in model type, HPV-SS delivery methods, triage strategies for positive results, and target populations. Most (9/16) modeled HPV-SS in European screening programs, 6/16 targeted women who were underscreened for cervical cancer, and 5/16 modeled HPV-SS in low- and middle-income countries. The most commonly identified driver of HPV-SS cost-effectiveness was the level of increase in cervical cancer screening attendance. Lower HPV-SS material and testing costs, higher sensitivity to detect cervical precancer, and longer duration of underscreening among HPV-SS users were also associated with increased cost-effectiveness. Future HPV-SS models in high-income settings should explore the effect of widespread vaccination and new triage strategies such as partial HPV genotyping. Knowledge gaps remain about the cost-effectiveness of HPV-SS in low- and middle-income settings.

Reactions of women underscreened for cervical cancer who received unsolicited human papillomavirus self-sampling kits

Objectives To evaluate experiences and reactions after receiving a mailed, unsolicited human papillomavirus self-sampling kit and identify psychosocial correlates of using kits. Methods Survey participants were underscreened women aged 30–64 who were mailed human papillomavirus kits as part of a pragmatic trial at Kaiser Permanente Washington, a United States integrated health care system. Six months after the mailing, we invited kit returners and non-returners to complete a web survey that measured psychosocial factors (e.g. cervical cancer/human papillomavirus knowledge, attitudes toward screening), experiences, and reactions to kits. We compared responses between kit returners and non-returners. Results Comparing 116 kit returners (272 invited) and 119 non-returners (1083 invited), we found no clinically significant differences in psychosocial factors. Overall, survey respondents showed knowledge gaps in human papillomavirus natural history (82% did not know human papillomavirus infection can clear on its own) and interpreting human papillomavirus test results (37% did not know a human papillomavirus-negative result indicates low cancer risk). Kit returners found kits convenient and easy to use (>90%). The most common reason for non-return was low confidence in ability to correctly use a kit, although many non-returners (49%) indicated that they would consider future use. Women reported low trust in human papillomavirus testing to identify women at high risk for cervical cancer (52% in returners, 42% in non-returners). Conclusions Screening programs could improve uptake and acceptability of human papillomavirus self-sampling through outreach materials that emphasize the high efficacy of human papillomavirus testing for cervical cancer screening and educate patients about how to interpret results.

Modeling HPV Self-Sampling Impact on Cervical Cancer in East African Immigrants

Cervical cancer screening uptake among East African immigrants in the U.S. is low. Offering self-collected samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing increases screening coverage among underserved populations, but the potential impact on cervical cancer incidence and mortality is understudied. A Markov cohort state-transition model was used to predict the impact of primary HPV screening with self-sampling on cervical cancer incidence and mortality among East African immigrant women in Washington state. The model estimated cervical cancer cases and deaths for a hypothetical cohort from ages 25 to 80 years under alternative screening, diagnostic colposcopy and treatment scenarios. Base case scenarios compared primary HPV testing by clinician-sampling exclusively (standard of care) with self-sampling exclusively, assuming higher screening coverage (70% vs 63%) but lower colposcopy adherence with self-sampling (67% vs 83%) with equal treatment coverage of 85%, based on Washington state patient data. Sensitivity analyses with varied coverages, and also the combinations of the 2 strategies were evaluated. The model was developed and fitted between 2022 and 2024. In the base case scenario, an exclusive self-sampling strategy results in 4% higher cervical cancer incidence and mortality compared to the standard of care. Self-sampling results in lower cancer incidence and mortality if colposcopy adherence is raised to the level of the standard of care and/or if coverage is increased beyond 90%. In scenarios combining clinician- with self-sampling, the benefits of reaching more women with self-sampling are attenuated if more than 34% of screening is done by self-sampling. Self-sampling has the potential to improve cervical cancer prevention for underserved populations. The impact of the strategy can be enhanced with stronger linkage to follow-up care.