European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology · 2014
Human papillomavirus viral load on careHPV testing of self-collected vaginal samples vs. clinician-collected cervical samples.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Labani S, Asthana S
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare viral load on careHPV DNA testing in self-collected vaginal (VHPC) and clinician-collected cervical (CHPC) samples for the detection of high-grade cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia (CIN).
STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. Ever-married women aged 30-59 years were targeted for cervical screening. On attendance for screening, vaginal self-sampling was performed by the woman, and an auxiliary nurse midwife subsequently performed a per-speculum examination, collected a CHPV sample and a Pap smear, and made a visual inspection of the cervix with acetic acid. The ratio of viral load expressed in relative light units to positive controls set at a cut-off of 1pg/ml was used for careHPV quantitative assessment. The median viral load was compared using non-parametric tests. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed for the detection of CINII+ and CINIII+ in CHPV and VHPV samples.
RESULTS: Overall, the median viral load in the 4658 women screened was higher in CHPV samples compared with VHPV samples (9.8-fold higher in cases of high-grade CIN). The median viral load was significantly higher among Pap-positive women compared with Pap-negative women in both CHPV and VHPV samples (p<0.01). Assessment by ROC analysis for the detection of high-grade CIN did not differ significantly between CHPV and VHPV samples.
CONCLUSION: Viral load on careHPV testing was comparable between self- and clinician-collected samples for the detection of high-grade CIN. The self-sampling approach may be an option for screening in low-resource countries.
STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. Ever-married women aged 30-59 years were targeted for cervical screening. On attendance for screening, vaginal self-sampling was performed by the woman, and an auxiliary nurse midwife subsequently performed a per-speculum examination, collected a CHPV sample and a Pap smear, and made a visual inspection of the cervix with acetic acid. The ratio of viral load expressed in relative light units to positive controls set at a cut-off of 1pg/ml was used for careHPV quantitative assessment. The median viral load was compared using non-parametric tests. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed for the detection of CINII+ and CINIII+ in CHPV and VHPV samples.
RESULTS: Overall, the median viral load in the 4658 women screened was higher in CHPV samples compared with VHPV samples (9.8-fold higher in cases of high-grade CIN). The median viral load was significantly higher among Pap-positive women compared with Pap-negative women in both CHPV and VHPV samples (p<0.01). Assessment by ROC analysis for the detection of high-grade CIN did not differ significantly between CHPV and VHPV samples.
CONCLUSION: Viral load on careHPV testing was comparable between self- and clinician-collected samples for the detection of high-grade CIN. The self-sampling approach may be an option for screening in low-resource countries.