The effect of self-sampled HPV testing on participation to cervical cancer screening in Italy: a randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN96071600)
- PMID: 21179038
- PMCID: PMC3031894
- DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6606040
The effect of self-sampled HPV testing on participation to cervical cancer screening in Italy: a randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN96071600)
Abstract
Background: In Italy, cervical cancer screening programmes actively invite women aged 25-64 years. Programmes are hindered by low participation.
Methods: A sample of non-responder women aged 35-64 years, belonging to three different programmes (in Rome, Florence and Teramo), was randomly split into four arms: two control groups received standard recall letters to perform either Pap-test (first group) or human papillomavirus (HPV) test (second group) at the clinic. A third arm was sent letters offering a self-sampler for HPV testing, to be requested by phone, whereas a fourth group was directly sent the self-samplers home.
Results: Compliance with standard recall was 13.9% (N619). Offering HPV test at the clinic had a nonsignificant effect on compliance (N616, relative risk (RR)=1.08; 95% CI=0.82-1.41). Self-sampler at request had the poorest performance, 8.7% (N622, RR=0.62; 95% CI=0.45-0.86), whereas direct mailing of the self-sampler registered the highest compliance: 19.6% (N616, RR=1.41; 95% CI=1.10-1.82). This effect on compliance was observed only in urban areas, Florence and Rome (N438, RR=1.69; 95% CI=1.24-2.30), but not in Abruzzo (N178, RR=0.95; 95% CI=0.61-1.50), a prevalently rural area.
Conclusions: Mailing self-samplers to non-responders may increase compliance as compared with delivering standard recall letters. Nevertheless, effectiveness is context specific and the strategy costs should be carefully considered.
Figures
References
-
- Anhang R, Nelson JA, Telerant R, Chiasson MA, Wright Jr TC (2005) Acceptability of self-collection of specimens for HPV DNA testing in an urban population. Womens Health (Larchmt) 14: 721–728 - PubMed
-
- Arbyn M, Anttila A, Jordan J, Ronco G, Schenck U, Segnan N, Wiener H, Herbert A, von Karsa L (2008) European Guidelines for Quality Assurance on Cervical Cancer Screening 2nd edn. European Community: Brussels; Office for Official Publications of the European Communities: Luxembourg
-
- Bauer HM, Greer CE, Manos MM (1992) Determination of genital human papillomavirus infection by consensus polymerase chain reaction amplification. In Diagnostic Molecular Pathology, A Practical Approach, Herrington CS, McGee JOD (eds), pp 131–152. IRL Press: Oxford, UK
-
- Belinson JL, Qiao YL, Pretorius RG, Zhang WH, Rong SD, Huang MN, Zhao FH, Wu LY, Ren SD, Huang RD, Washington MF, Pan QJ, Li L, Fife D (2003) Shanxi Province cervical cancer screening study II: self-sampling for high-risk human papillomavirus compared to direct sampling for human papillomavirus and liquid based cervical cytology. Int J Gynecol Cancer 13: 819–826 - PubMed
-
- Bos AB, Rebolj M, Habbema JD, van Ballegooijen M (2006) Non-attendance is still the main limitation for the effectiveness of screening for cervical cancer in the Netherlands. Int J Cancer 119: 2372–2375 - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials