High‐risk HPV testing on self‐sampled versus clinician‐collected specimens: A review on the clinical accuracy and impact on population attendance in cervical cancer screening
Abstract
This review elaborates on the accuracy and feasibility of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling, i.e., offering self-sampling of (cervico-)vaginal cell material by women themselves in nonclinical settings for high-risk HPV (hrHPV) detection in the laboratory, for cervical screening. To that end a bibliographic database search (PubMed) was performed to identify studies (published between January 1992 and January 2012) that compared clinical accuracy of HPV testing on self-sampled material with that of cytology or HPV testing on clinician-taken samples, and studies comparing response to offering HPV self-sampling with a recall invitation. Overall, hrHPV testing on self-samples appeared to be at least as, if not more, sensitive for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) as cytology on clinician-obtained cervical samples, though often less specific. In most studies, hrHPV testing on self- and clinician-sampled specimens is similarly accurate with respect to CIN2+ detection. Variations in clinical performance likely reflect the use of different combinations of collection devices and HPV tests. Because it is known that underscreened women are at increased risk of cervical cancer, targeting non-attendees of the screening program could improve the effectiveness of cervical screening. In developed countries offering self-sampling has shown to be superior to a recall invitation for cytology in re-attracting original non-attendees into the screening program. Addi…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
hrHPV testing can be done on vaginal samples collected by the patient (self samples), whereas cytology on self samples shows poor accuracy.
“hrHPV testing provides another advantage: it can be done on vaginal samples collected by the patient (self samples), whereas cytology on self samples shows poor accuracy.21”
From Detecting cervical precancer and reaching underscreened women by using HPV testing on self samples: updated meta-analyses (2018) · cites this paper as [21]
Screening with the HPV test offers a unique opportunity for HPV self-sampling.
“Screening with the HPV test offers a unique opportunity for HPV-self sampling [7].”
From Performance of HPV Self-Sample Collected by a Novel Kit in Comparison with Clinician Collected Sample for Cervical Cancer Screening (2024) · cites this paper as [7]
Cervicovaginal HPV DNA specimens can also be reliably collected by end users themselves, a process known as self-sampling.
“However, cervicovaginal HPV DNA specimens can also be reliably collected by end users themselves—a process known as self-sampling.10–12”
From HPV self-sampling for cervical cancer screening: a systematic review of values and preferences (2021) · cites this paper as [10]
Cites
the Self-Sampling Study Working Group, Giorgi Rossi, P., Marsili, L. M., Camilloni, L., Iossa, A., Lattanzi, A., Sani, C., Di Pierro, C., Grazzini, G., Angeloni, C., et al. (2011) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6606040 · Cited by 125 · see citing works
Bhatla, N., Dar, L., Patro, A. R., Kumar, P., Kriplani, A., Gulati, A., Iyer, V. K., Mathur, S. R., Sreenivas, V., Shah, K. V., et al. (2009) · Cancer Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.canep.2009.10.013 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Arbyn, M., Smith, S. B., Temin, S., Sultana, F., & Castle, P. (2018) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.k4823 · Cited by 851 · see citing works
Self-citationHPV self-sampling for cervical cancer screening: a systematic review of values and preferences
Nishimura, H., Yeh, P. T., Oguntade, H., Kennedy, C. E., & Narasimhan, M. (2021) · BMJ Global Health · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003743 · Cited by 222 · see citing works
Reisner, S. L., Deutsch, M. B., Peitzmeier, S. M., White Hughto, J. M., Cavanaugh, T. P., Pardee, D. J., McLean, S. A., Panther, L. A., Gelman, M., Mimiaga, M. J., et al. (2018) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0190172 · Cited by 126 · see citing works
Haguenoer, K., Sengchanh, S., Gaudy-Graffin, C., Boyard, J., Fontenay, R., Marret, H., Goudeau, A., Pigneaux de Laroche, N., Rusch, E., & Giraudeau, B. (2014) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/bjc.2014.510 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
Cadman, L., Wilkes, S., Mansour, D., Austin, J., Ashdown-Barr, L., Edwards, R., Kleeman, M., & Szarewski, A. (2015) · Journal of Medical Screening · doi:10.1177/0969141314558785 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Madhivanan, P., Nishimura, H., Ravi, K., Pope, B., Coudray, M., Arun, A., Krupp, K., Jayakrishna, P., & Srinivas, V. (2021) · Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention · doi:10.31557/apjcp.2021.22.3.971 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Joshi, S., Kumar, B. K., Ramshankar, V., Maitra, N., Palit, S., Ravindran, S., & Shyam, T. (2024) · Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention · doi:10.31557/apjcp.2024.25.12.4211 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- Snijders, P. J. F., Verhoef, V. M. J., Arbyn, M., Ogilvie, G., Minozzi, S., Banzi, R., van Kemenade, F. J., Heideman, D. A. M., & Meijer, C. J. L. M.
- Affiliations
- Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
- Institut Scientifique de Santé Publique (BE)
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- University of Turin (IT)
- Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Snijders, Peter J.F.
- ORCID
- Venue
- International Journal of Cancer
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-09-14
- Volume
- 132
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2223-2236
- ISSN
- 0020-7136 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0215
- OpenAlex
- W1988540981
- Cited by
- 265
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 40 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 3.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Cancer (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion)
- Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
- Keywords
- HPV self-sampling, high-risk HPV testing, cervical cancer screening, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, cytology, screening accuracy, screening uptake, underscreened women, resource-limited settings, self-testing
- MeSH terms
- Uterine Cervical Dysplasia, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Feasibility Studies, Female, Humans, Therapeutic Irrigation, Mass Screening, Specimen Handling, Vaginal Smears, Papillomavirus Infections, Alphapapillomavirus, Early Detection of Cancer
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
