Introduction: To overcome obstacles for screening attendance within the Slovenian organised cervical cancer screening programme ZORA, a randomised pilot study of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling among non-attenders was performed, aiming to assess three different screening approaches. We were interested whether a choice between HPV self-sampling and cytological screening at gynaecologist as well as self-sampling device are significant prognostic factors for response. Choice of test was available in opt-in (study group I1) and opt-out (study group I2) HPV self-sampling approach, but not in the control group (study group P), where women could perform only cytology screening at personal gynaecologist.
Participants and methods: All together 26,556 non-attenders aged 30‒64 years from two Slovenian regions were enrolled into a randomised controlled traial and randomised to two HPV self-sampling groups ( opt-in I1; n = 14,400 and opt-out I2; n = 9,556), with a control group (P; n = 2,600). Women in I2 were randomly allocated to three different self-sampling devices: I2-Q (Qvintip; n = 3,284), I2-H (HerSwab; n = 3,248) and I2-D (Delphi Screener; n = 2988). In I1 only Qvintip was used. Self-collected samples were mailed to the laboratory where they were analysed using the Qiagen Hybrid Capture 2 assay. HPV-positive women were invited to a colposcopy. The main outcomes were overall and type-specific intention-to-screen response rates. We used multiple logistic regression to assess the following possible prognostic factors for the response: the women’s age, the screening approach, the screening history and the region of residence.
Results: Of the 26,556 women enrolled, 8,972 (33.8%) responded with self-sample for HPV testing and/or traditional cytology within one year of enrolment. Response rates were 37.7%, 34.0% and 18.4% (p <0.001) for opt-out I2, opt-in I1 and control P groups, respectively. In the opt-out I2 group the response rates were 33.4 % for I2-D, 39.1 % for I2-Q and 40.1 % for I2-H (p < 0.001). Age of women, screening history, region of residence were also significant predictor for a response.
Conclusion: The results of our study show that non-attenders to regular cervical screening programmes respond significantly better if they have a choice to perform HPV-self sampling at home or cytology screening at personal gynaecologist, the response was significantly higher in opt-in and opt-out HPV self sampling approach compared to the control group. Self-sampling device can be a significant prognostic factor for a response in opt-out approach.
|