Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2015 Feb 17;112(4):667-75.
doi: 10.1038/bjc.2015.11. Epub 2015 Jan 29.

Self-sampling to increase participation in cervical cancer screening: an RCT comparing home mailing, distribution in pharmacies, and recall letter

P Giorgi Rossi  1 , C Fortunato  2 , P Barbarino  3 , S Boveri  4 , S Caroli  1 , A Del Mistro  5 , A Ferro  6 , C Giammaria  7 , M Manfredi  8 , T Moretto  9 , A Pasquini  8 , M Sideri  4 , M C Tufi  3 , C Cogo  10 , E Altobelli  2 ; HPV Self-sampling Italian Working Group
Collaborators, Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Self-sampling to increase participation in cervical cancer screening: an RCT comparing home mailing, distribution in pharmacies, and recall letter

P Giorgi Rossi et al. Br J Cancer. .

Abstract

Background: We performed a multicentre randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effect on participation in organised screening programmes of a self-sampling device mailed home or picked up at a pharmacy compared with the standard recall letter.

Methods: Women aged 30-64 non-responding to screening invitation were eligible. Response rate to first invitation ranged from 30% to 60% between centres. The control was the standard reminder letter to undergo the test used by the programme (Pap test in three centres and HPV DNA test in three other centres). Home mailing of the self-sampler was preceded by a letter with a leaflet about HPV. The analysis was intention-to-treat.

Results: In all, 14 041 women were randomised and recruited: 5012 in the control arm, 4516 to receive the self-sampler at home, and 4513 to pick up the self-sampler at a pharmacy. Participation was 11.9% in the control, 21.6% (relative participation: 1.75; 95% CI 1.60-1.93) in home, and 12.0% (relative participation: 0.96; 95% CI 0.86-1.07) in the pharmacy arms, respectively. The heterogeneity between centres was high (excess heterogeneity of that expected due to chance, i.e., I(2), 94.9% and 94.1% for home and pharmacy arm, respectively). The estimated impact on the overall coverage was +4.3% for home mail self-sampling compared with +2.2% for standard reminder.

Conclusions: Home mailing of self-sampler proved to be an effective way to increase participation in screening programmes, even in those with HPV as primary testing. Picking up at pharmacies showed effects varying from centre to centre.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01647724.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study flowchart.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Results: (A) self-samplers mailed home; (B) self-sampler from pharmacy, random effects.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Anttila A. Cervical cancer screening is effective - the Finnish experience. Entre Nous (WHO Regional Office, Copenhagen) 2007;64:26–28.
    1. Arbyn M, Castellsagué X, de Sanjosé S, Bruni L, Saraiya M, Bray F, Ferlay J. Worldwide burden of cervical cancer in 2008. Ann Oncol. 2011;22:2675–2686. - PubMed
    1. Arbyn M, Rebolj M, de Kok IM, Becker N, O'Reilly M, Andrae B. The challenges for organising cervical screening programmes in the 15 old member states of the European Union. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:2671–2678. - PubMed
    1. Arbyn M, Ronco G, Anttila A, CJLM Meijer, Poljak M, Ogilvie G, Koliopoulos G, Naucler P, Sankaranarayanan R, Peto J. Evidence regarding HPV testing in secondary prevention of cervical cancer. Vaccine. 2012;30 (Suppl 5:F88–F99. - PubMed
    1. Arbyn M, Verdoodt F, Snijders PJ, Verhoef VM, Suonio E, Dillner L, Minozzi S, Bellisario C, Banzi R, Zhao FH, Hillemanns P, Anttila A. Accuracy of human papillomavirus testing on self-collected versus clinician-collected samples: a meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:172–183. - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data