ArticleBritish journal of cancer2018
High-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in human papillomavirus self-sampling of screening non-attenders.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Participation and relative cost of attendance by direct-mail compared to opt-in invitation strategy for HPV self-sampling targeting cervical screening non-attenders: A large-scale, randomized, pragmatic study.International journal of cancer · 2025Trial
- Clinical Performance of a Dedicated Urine-Based Assay for the Detection of Human Papillomavirus and Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia.International journal of women's health · 2023Trial
- Human papillomavirus self-sampling with mRNA testing benefits routine screening.International journal of cancer · 2022Trial
- Evidence from Europe on implementation, participation and performance of self-collection for cervical cancer screening.Future oncology (London, England) · 2026Review
- "I just assumed that was the same as colon cancer." Lack of knowledge about anal HPV infection, anal cancer, and anal cancer screening in older MSM: a qualitative study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Serum levels of stearic and dihomo-γ-linolenic acids can be used to diagnose cervical cancer and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Variables that impact HPV test accuracy during vaginal self collection workflow for cervical cancer screening.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2024Review
- Article
- Performance of BD Onclarity HPV assay on FLOQSwabs vaginal self-samples.Microbiology spectrum · 2024Article
- Rates of Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cervical Cancer: A Study in a Province in the South of Italy.Vaccines · 2023Article
- Evaluation of BD Onclarity™ HPV Assay on Self-Collected Vaginal and First-Void Urine Samples as Compared to Clinician-Collected Cervical Samples: A Pilot Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Self-sampling for cervical screening offered at the point of invitation: A cross-sectional study of preferences in England.Journal of medical screening · 2022Article
- Article
- Time and temperature dependent analytical stability of dry-collected Evalyn HPV self-sampling brush for cervical cancer screening.Papillomavirus research (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2018Article
- Self-sampling for cervical cancer screening: Empowering women to lead a paradigm change in cancer control.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2018Article
- Cervical dysplasia in elderly women performing repeated self-sampling for HPV testing.PloS one · 2018Article
- Self-Sampling for Human Papillomavirus Testing: Increased Cervical Cancer Screening Participation and Incorporation in International Screening Programs.Frontiers in public health · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSelf-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) offered to women who do not participate in cervical cancer screening is an increasingly popular method to increase screening coverage. The rationale behind self-sampling is that unscreened women harbour a high proportion of undetected precancer lesions. Here, we compare the cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (⩾CIN2) detection rate between non-attenders who participated in self-sampling and women attending routine screening.
methodsA total of 23 632 women who were qualified as non-attenders in the Copenhagen Region were invited for HPV-based self-sampling. Of these, 4824 women returned a self-sample, and HPV-positive women were referred for cytology and HPV co-testing as follow-up. The entire cohort and a reference cohort (3347 routinely screened women) were followed for histopathology confirmed ⩾CIN2. Odds ratio (OR) and the relative positive predictive value of ⩾CIN2 detection between the two populations were estimated.
resultsWomen participating in self-sampling had a higher ⩾CIN2 detection than women undergoing routine cytology-based screening (OR=1.83, 95% CI: 1.21-2.77) and a similar detection as routinely screened women tested with cytology and HPV testing (OR=1.03, 95% CI: 0.75-1.40). The positive predictive value for ⩾CIN2 was higher in screening non-attenders than in routinely HPV- and cytology-screened screened women (36.5% vs 25.6%, respectively).
conclusionsSelf-sampling offered to non-attenders showed higher detection rates for ⩾CIN2 than routine cytology-based screening, and similar detection rates as HPV and cytology co-testing. This reinforces the importance of self-sampling for screening non-attenders in organised cervical cancer screening.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.