Investigator
Consultant · Skåne University Hospital, Obstetrics and Gynecology
Comparing visual inspection with acetic acid, with and without Lugol’s Iodine for triage of HPV self-sample positive women in Ethiopia: a randomized controlled trial
Most women who are high-risk human papilloma virus (hrHPV) positive in a cervical cancer screening test will spontaneously heal from their infection. Visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) is recommended by the World Health Organization as a triage test for cervical screening, however its accuracy as a triage test has been questioned. In this study, we aimed to examine the sensitivity and specificity of VIA with and without Lugol's iodine as a triage test to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+) among women who tested positive for hrHPV after self-sampling. This two-armed randomized controlled trial (RCT) took place in Adama, Ethiopia. The women who tested positive for vaginal hrHPV (Anyplex ΙΙ, Seegene) after self-sampling were randomized to VIA with or without iodine and appointed to a midwife-led clinic. The result of the triage test was categorized as positive, negative, suspicion of cancer or inconclusive, and treated accordingly. Cervical biopsies were collected from women who were hrHPV positive to serve as a gold standard. 22.4% (197/878) of women tested hrHPV positive. Sensitivity and specificity for VIA to detect CIN2+was 25.0% (95% CI 0.6 to 80.0) and 82.7% (95% CI 69.7 to 91.8), respectively. For VIA with iodine, the sensitivity was 50.0% (95% CI 0.7 to 93.2) and the specificity 86.3% (95% CI 71.4 to 93.0). The difference between the two methods was not statistically significant, p=0.5. The odds of detecting CIN2+ was 5.4 times higher if positive for VIA with iodine compared with a negative result. For VIA without iodine, the odds of detecting CIN2+ was 1.6 compared with a negative result. The odds of detecting CIN2+ was 6.4 times higher if the women were HIV positive than for those who were HIV negative. VIA with iodine improved detection of CIN2+ in women who were hrHPV DNA positive but was not significantly better than VIA alone. NCT05125380.
HPV self-sampling versus healthcare provider collection on the effect of cervical cancer screening uptake and costs in LMIC: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract Background Cervical cancer is a major global health issue, with 89% of cases occurring in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling tests have been suggested as an innovative way to improve cervical cancer screening uptake and reduce the burden of disease. The objective of this review was to examine the effect of HPV self-sampling on screening uptake compared to any healthcare provider sampling in LMICs. The secondary objective was to estimate the associated costs of the various screening methods. Method Studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL (by Cochrane), Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov up until April 14, 2022, and a total of six trials were included in the review. Meta-analyses were performed mainly using the inverse variance method, by pooling effect estimates of the proportion of women who accepted the screening method offered. Subgroup analyses were done comparing low- and middle-income countries, as well as low- and high-risk bias studies. Heterogeneity of the data was assessed using I2. Cost data was collected for analysis from articles and correspondence with authors. Results We found a small but significant difference in screening uptake in our primary analysis: RR 1.11 (95% CI: 1.10–1.11; I2 = 97%; 6 trials; 29,018 participants). Our sensitivity analysis, which excluded one trial that measured screening uptake differently than the other trials, resulted in a clearer effect in screening uptake: RR: 1.82 (95% CI: 1.67–1.99; I2 = 42%; 5 trials; 9590 participants). Two trials reported costs; thus, it was not possible to make a direct comparison of costs. One found self-sampling more cost-effective than the provider-required visual inspection with acetic acid method, despite the test and running costs being higher for HPV self-sampling. Conclusion Our review indicates that self-sampling improves screening uptake, particularly in low-income countries; however, to this date, there remain few trials and associated cost data. We recommend further studies with proper cost data be conducted to guide the incorporation of HPV self-sampling into national cervical cancer screening guidelines in low- and middle-income countries. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020218504.
Cervical Cancer Screening by Self-sampling in a Cohort of Younger Women in Ethiopia
The overall purpose of the project is to evaluate an algorithm for an HPV self-sampling based cervical cancer screening algorithm in a mid-size town in Ethiopia that could be applicable for nationwide implementation in low and middle-income countries (LMIC). Specific aims are the following: * To evaluate the algorithm using Visual Inspection with Acetic acid (VIA) and VIA together with Lugol's Iodine (VILI) as triage and to use HPV self-sample to follow up those treated and those with persisting HPV. * To evaluate the prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae and other STIs in the cohort. * To determine immune response profiles in high-risk HPV-positive women who cleared, persisted, or developed Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia 2/3 (CIN). * To assess how specific cervicovaginal microbiota compositions are associated with HPV infection, cervical dysplasia, and cancer
Consultant
Skåne University Hospital · Obstetrics and Gynecology
PhD
Lund University · Medical Oncology