Comparison of detection rate of high risk HPV infection between self-collected HPV testing and clinician-collected HPV testing in cervical cancer screening

Nutthachote, Pattiya; Oranratanaphan, Shina; Termrungruanglert, Wichai; Triratanachat, Surang; Chaiwongkot, Arkom; Baedyananda, Fern; Bhattarakosol, Parvapan

doi:10.1016/j.tjog.2019.05.008

Cited by 15 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Self-sampling for cervical cancer screening has has enough accuracy and reliability for the detection of hrHPV. The performance of hrHPV DNA test in self-sampling devices was reported to be comparable with clinician-sampling (Nutthachote et al, 2019;Porras et al, 2015). According to previous studies, sensitivity of self-sampled HPV test ranges between 84-100% ( BansilThe statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 22 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The accuracy of self-sampled HPV test (SS-HPV) has been proved worldwide. Several studies have shown high concordance rate between clinician-sampling and self-sampling in HPV detection (Nutthachote et al, 2019;Porras et al, 2015). The advantages of SS-HPV test were ease of use, higher accessibility, and induction of less painful (Oranratanaphan et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

CyclinA1 Promoter Methylation in Self-Sampling Test

Oranratanaphan

Kengsakul

Triratanachat

et al. 2020

Asian Pac J Cancer Prev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Self sampled HPV testing is a cervical cancer screening method . However, cytology in self-sampled specimen cannot be used as a triage test. Therefore, other methods for triage should be considered. CyclinA1 (CCNA1) promoter methylation has strong association with cervical precancerous and cancerous lesion. The objective of this study was to compare the diagnostic value of CCNA1 and self-sampled specimen for detecting high-grade cervical intraepithelial lesions or worse (CIN2+). Materials and Methods: A cross sectional study was conducted. Women with abnormal cytology or positive for high risk HPV (hrHPV) indicated for colposcopic examination were enrolled. Self-collected sampling for hrHPV DNA (SS-HPV) and CCNA1 were performed. hrHPV DNA testing was done by Cobas 4800 method. CCNA1 promoter methylation was detected by CCNA1 duplex methylation specific PCR. Histopathologic result as CIN2+ obtaining from colposcopic directed biopsy or excisional procedure was considered as positive a gold standard. The results of hrHPV and CCNA1 were reported as positive or negative. Sensitivity specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of SS-HPV and CCNA1 were calculated by comparing the results with the gold standard. Results: Two hundreds and eighty women were recruited. High-grade cervical lesions and cervical cancer (CIN2+) were diagnosed in 21.8% (61 cases) of the patients. The most common type of hrHPV was non 16, 18 subtype, followed by HPV16 and 18. CCNA1 was positive in 13 patients out of whom, twelve were CIN2+. Sensitivity of CCNA1 was 19.7 % and its specificity and accuracy were 99.5% and 82.14%, respectively. The sensitivity of SS-HPV was 70.5%, and its specificity and accuracy were 39.2% and 43.3%, respectively. Conclusion: Due to high specificity and positive predictive value of CCNA1, it can be used as alarming sign of having high-grade cervical intraepithelial lesions, especially in patient who has positive hrHPV DNA test based on self-collected sampling.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

CyclinA1 Promoter Methylation in Self-Sampling Test

Oranratanaphan

Kengsakul

Triratanachat

et al. 2020

Asian Pac J Cancer Prev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first limitation is the small sample size of both groups. The wide use of effective universal screening for cervical cancer (pap smear) in developed countries [62,84,85,86,87] has led to a dramatic decrease in LBS-CC prevalence rate. Moreover, the therapeutic choice for patients with LBS-CC is debated [88]; therefore the patients enrolled in the current study were mainly based on shared decision making, which directly influenced the sample size, resulting in an insufficient power to properly compare PFS and OS between the two types of surgery after NACT.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radical Hysterectomy After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Locally Bulky-Size Cervical Cancer: A Retrospective Comparative Analysis between the Robotic and Abdominal Approaches

Liu

Lee

Lin

et al. 2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Radical hysterectomy (RH) is the standard treatment for early stage cervical cancer, but the surgical approach for locally bulky-size cervical cancer (LBS-CC) is still unclear. We retrospectively compared the outcomes of women with LBS-CC treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and subsequent RH between the robotic (R-RH) and abdominal approaches (A-RH). Between 2012 and 2014, 39 women with LBS-CC FIGO (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics) stage IB2–IIB were treated with NACT-R-RH (n = 18) or NACT-A-RH (n = 21). Surgical parameters and prognosis were compared. Patient characteristics were not significantly different between the groups, but the NACT-R-RH group had significantly more patients with FIGO stage IIB disease, received multi-agent-based NACT, and had a lower percentage of deep stromal invasion than the NACT-A-RH group. After NACT-R-RH, surgical parameters were better, but survival outcomes, such as disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS), were significantly worse. On multivariate analysis, FIGO stage IIB contributed to worse DFS (p = 0.003) and worse OS (p = 0.012) in the NACT-A-RH group. Women with LBS-CC treated with NACT-R-RH have better perioperative outcomes but poorer survival outcomes compared with those treated with NACT-A-RH. Thus, patients with FIGO stage IIB LBS-CC disease might not be suitable for surgery after multi-agent-based NACT.

show abstract

“…In recent years, self-sampling has become popular, partly due to convenience and cultural conservation. Another benefit to self-collection is that the HPV-positive detection rate in tissue, ranging from dysplasia to high grade lesions, is comparable to that collected by medical professionals, as shown by studies conducted in Thailand, Hong Kong, and mainland China [ 121 , 122 , 123 ]. In addition to self-collected first-void urine [ 124 , 125 , 126 ], self-sampling kits for the Pap test and the detection of HPV DNA have also been made available for collection at designated health centres or posted via mail [ 123 ].…”

Section: Hpv Screeningmentioning

confidence: 97%

Current Updates on Cancer-Causing Types of Human Papillomaviruses (HPVs) in East, Southeast, and South Asia

Xia

Long

et al. 2021

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection remains one of the most prominent cancer-causing DNA viruses, contributing to approximately 5% of human cancers. While association between HPV and cervical cancers has been well-established, evidence on the attribution of head and neck cancers (HNC) to HPV have been increasing in recent years. Among the cancer-causing HPV genotypes, HPV16 and 18 remain the major contributors to cancers across the globe. Nonetheless, the distribution of HPV genotypes in ethnically, geographically, and socio-economically diverse East, Southeast, and South Asia may differ from other parts of the world. In this review, we garner and provide updated insight into various aspects of HPV reported in recent years (2015–2021) in these regions. We included: (i) the HPV genotypes detected in normal cancers of the uterine cervix and head and neck, as well as the distribution of the HPV genotypes by geography and age groups; (ii) the laboratory diagnostic methods and treatment regimens used within these regions; and (iii) the oncogenic properties of HPV prototypes and their variants contributing to carcinogenesis. More importantly, we also unveil the similarities and discrepancies between these aspects, the areas lacking study, and the challenges faced in HPV studies.

show abstract

Comparison of detection rate of high risk HPV infection between self-collected HPV testing and clinician-collected HPV testing in cervical cancer screening

Cited by 15 publications

References 20 publications

CyclinA1 Promoter Methylation in Self-Sampling Test

CyclinA1 Promoter Methylation in Self-Sampling Test

Radical Hysterectomy After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Locally Bulky-Size Cervical Cancer: A Retrospective Comparative Analysis between the Robotic and Abdominal Approaches

Current Updates on Cancer-Causing Types of Human Papillomaviruses (HPVs) in East, Southeast, and South Asia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About