Human papillomavirus DNA testing on self-collected vaginal tampon samples as a cervical cancer screening test in a Gauteng population

Mnisi, E.F.; Dreyer, Greta; Richter, Karin Louise; Horton, Amanda; Snyman, Leon Cornelius

doi:10.1080/20742835.2013.11441217

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The discrepancy may also be explained by incorrectly collected self-samples, incorrect transfer or storage of the samples, and an inadequate amount of cells, which may lead to the lower sensitivity of vaginal HPV self-sampling. South African studies have used the non-applicator tampon device [22,29,35,36] hence, women in the general population are more familiar with the non-applicator tampons compared to the applicator tampon used in this study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High-risk human papillomavirus detection in self-collected vaginal samples compared with healthcare worker collected cervical samples among women attending gynecology clinics at a tertiary hospital in Pretoria, South Africa

Tiiti

Mashishi

Nkwinika

et al. 2021

Virol J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In 2017, the South African National Department of Health (NDoH) Cervical Cancer Prevention and Control Policy was revised. Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing on self-collected samples may offer improved screening uptake. The objectives of the study were to compare the positivity of high-risk (hr)-HPV deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and hrHPV viral messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) between healthcare worker-collected cervical and self-collected vaginal samples and investigate the accuracy of the applicator-tampon-based self-collected samples in detecting hrHPV DNA and hrHPV mRNA. Methods A total of 527 women aged 18 years and older and seeking gynecology services at a tertiary hospital in Pretoria, South Africa, were enrolled. Vaginal samples were self-collected using SelfCerv applicator tampon, followed by cervical samples collected by a healthcare worker using a Cervex Brush® Combi. Both samples were tested with the Abbott m2000 analyzer for 14-hrHPV types and 285 paired samples were tested for hrHPV E6/E7 mRNA using the Aptima HR-HPV mRNA assay. The prevalence of hrHPV DNA and hrHPV E6/E7 mRNA was estimated and the positivity between the two collection methods was compared for the total group as well as per age group. Results HrHPV prevalence was 48.0% (95% CI 43.7–52.4) among healthcare worker collected samples and 47.6% (95% CI 43.3–52.0) among self-collected samples. There was no difference in positivity between healthcare worker collection (48.0%) and applicator-tampon-based self-collection, 47.6% (p-value = 0.90). The proportions of hrHPV were equal between the age groups as shown by the McNemar test (p = 0.9036) results for correlated proportions. The prevalence of hrHPV mRNA was 78.6% (95% CI 73.4–83.2) and 58.6% (95% CI 52.6–64.4) for healthcare worker- and self-collection, respectively. The McNemar test for correlated proportions was highly significant (p < 0.0001), indicating that the hrHPV mRNA proportions are not comparable, although this differed between age groups. Conclusions Applicator-tampon-based self-collection has a comparable hrHPV DNA positivity rate as healthcare worker collection but different positivity rates for hrHPV mRNA. Self-sampling showed high concordance with healthcare worker-collected sampling for hrHPV DNA detection, especially regarding HPV 16/18 detection. HrHPV DNA was equally detected between the total group as well as per age group. Implementation of self-sampling using an applicator tampon as a primary screening tool may be considered.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High-risk human papillomavirus detection in self-collected vaginal samples compared with healthcare worker collected cervical samples among women attending gynecology clinics at a tertiary hospital in Pretoria, South Africa

Tiiti

Mashishi

Nkwinika

et al. 2021

Virol J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mnisi et al evaluated HPV DNA testing of tampons by comparing molecular test results to those of conventional cytology. 3 They found a high prevalence of cytological abnormalities in this population, with a high-risk HPV prevalence of 58%. The important conclusion is that HPV testing on self-collected tampon samples is feasible, highly sensitive and has a high negative predictive value for current cytological abnormalities.…”

mentioning

confidence: 73%

About this supplement…

Snyman

2013

Southern African Journal of Gynaecological Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2009, The Cancer Association of South Africa (CANSA) awarded its biggest research grant to date to the HPV Cervical Cancer Research Fund, under the auspices of Prof Greta Dreyer. This grant enabled a group of researchers from different disciplines to conduct a project to investigate large-scale cervical cancer screening of peri-urban women using cytology and molecular testing. The main findings of this study, performed in the Tshwane Health District, are reported in this supplement which is introduced by Dr Carl Albrecht, Head of Research, CANSA.

show abstract

“…One study collecting self-samples using tampons from women infected with HIV in South Africa found that the HPV DNA results from tampons are in good agreement with clinician performed cytology test results, where the sensitivity and specificity are 77.4 % and 77.8 % (Adamson et al, 2015). Another study in South Africa which studies normal women population found that tampon self-sampling HPV DNA results have high negative predictive value, where it accurately predicts negative HPV for normal cytology results, and has comparable sensitivity as cytology (Mnisi et al, 2013). However, another self-sampling study in Bolivia that compared between cotton swab and tampon found that cotton swab has a higher HPV DNA detection rate than tampons (Surriabre et al, 2017).…”

Section: Self-sampling Devicesmentioning

confidence: 86%

A Comprehensive Review of Cervical Cancer Screening Devices: The Pros and the Cons

Hon

Chong

Choo

et al. 2023

Asian Pac J Cancer Prev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to World Health Organization, cervical cancer is ranked as the fourth most common cancer among women, where there were approximately 570,000 diagnosed cases and 311,000 deaths in 2018 (World Health Organization, 2020). Majority of the diagnosed cases and deaths are from developing countries, where there are lack of screening programs and treatment plans for cervical cancer. In developed countries, early intervention such as early-stage screening and treatment programs has successfully reduced cervical cancer incidence and death rate. The difference in incidence rate between developed and developing country is huge, whereby the highest age standardized incidence rate is seen in Swaziland at 75.3 per 100,000 women whereas the incidence rate for European regions is between 6.8 to 9 per 100,000 only in 2018 (World Cancer Research Fund, 2018). In Southeast Asia, cervical cancer incidence rate is 17.2 per 100,000.The main cause of cervical cancer is HPV, which is

show abstract

Human papillomavirus DNA testing on self-collected vaginal tampon samples as a cervical cancer screening test in a Gauteng population

Cited by 4 publications

References 17 publications

High-risk human papillomavirus detection in self-collected vaginal samples compared with healthcare worker collected cervical samples among women attending gynecology clinics at a tertiary hospital in Pretoria, South Africa

High-risk human papillomavirus detection in self-collected vaginal samples compared with healthcare worker collected cervical samples among women attending gynecology clinics at a tertiary hospital in Pretoria, South Africa

About this supplement…

A Comprehensive Review of Cervical Cancer Screening Devices: The Pros and the Cons

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About