British journal of cancer · 2011
Self-sampling and HPV testing or ordinary Pap-smear in women not regularly attending screening: a randomised study.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Wikström I, Lindell M, Sanner K, Wilander E
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Most women with cervical cancer have not participated in Pap-smear screening. Self-sampling of vaginal fluid in combination with high-risk HPV testing may be a method to increase the attendance rate.
METHODS: A total of 4060 women, 39-60 years old, who had not attended the organised Pap-smear screening for 6 years or more were randomised into two equal groups. A study group was offered to self-sample vaginal fluid (Qvintip) at home and/or recommended to attend the Pap-smear screening. The collected fluid after self-sampling was examined for the presence of high-risk HPV (Hybrid Capture 2 method). Controls were only recommended to attend the Pap-smear screening. The end point was a histological identification of CIN2-3.
RESULTS: The participation rate was 39% (771 out of 2000) in the self-sampling group and 9% (188 out of 2060) in the conventional cytology (P<0.001). The number of histological CIN2-3 alterations detected was 0.4% (8 out of 2000) among women offered self-sampling of vaginal fluid and 0.07% (3 out of 4060) in women offered Pap-smears. The odds ratio (OR) for offering self-sampling and HPV testing instead of Pap-smear screening for detection of CIN2-3 was OR=5.42 (95% CI: 1.30-31.8).
CONCLUSION: Offering self-sampling of vaginal fluid followed by a high-risk HPV test was considerably more effective for detection of histological CIN2-3 lesions in comparison with offering Pap-test in a midwife reception in women not regularly attending organised screening.
METHODS: A total of 4060 women, 39-60 years old, who had not attended the organised Pap-smear screening for 6 years or more were randomised into two equal groups. A study group was offered to self-sample vaginal fluid (Qvintip) at home and/or recommended to attend the Pap-smear screening. The collected fluid after self-sampling was examined for the presence of high-risk HPV (Hybrid Capture 2 method). Controls were only recommended to attend the Pap-smear screening. The end point was a histological identification of CIN2-3.
RESULTS: The participation rate was 39% (771 out of 2000) in the self-sampling group and 9% (188 out of 2060) in the conventional cytology (P<0.001). The number of histological CIN2-3 alterations detected was 0.4% (8 out of 2000) among women offered self-sampling of vaginal fluid and 0.07% (3 out of 4060) in women offered Pap-smears. The odds ratio (OR) for offering self-sampling and HPV testing instead of Pap-smear screening for detection of CIN2-3 was OR=5.42 (95% CI: 1.30-31.8).
CONCLUSION: Offering self-sampling of vaginal fluid followed by a high-risk HPV test was considerably more effective for detection of histological CIN2-3 lesions in comparison with offering Pap-test in a midwife reception in women not regularly attending organised screening.