Trial reportJournal of virological methods2022
Effect of the environment on home-based self-sampling kits for anal cancer screening.
Trial report in Journal of virological methods, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Home-based self-sampling vs clinician sampling for anal precancer screening: The Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study.International journal of cancer · 2023Trial
- Concordance and Acceptability of Self- Vs. Clinician-Collected Anorectal Swabs for HPV Genotyping in Gay, Bisexual and Other Men Who Have Sex With Men in Metropolitan Barcelona.Journal of medical virology · 2026Article
- Observational
- Article
- An Online HIV Self-Sampling Strategy for Gay, Bisexual and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men and Trans Women in Spain.Journal of community health · 2024Article
- Anal Cancer in High-Risk Women: The Lost Tribe.Cancers · 2022Review
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 at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAnal cancer incidence has increased in Western countries in recent decades and currently there are no consensus screening guidelines. Home-based self-sampling kits might facilitate screening for anal precancer/cancer but could require travel through postal mail where they may experience extreme temperatures or long transport times.
objectiveTo determine the effect of the environment on specimen adequacy for HPV genotyping of a mailed home-based self-sampling anal cancer screening kit. STUDY
designThe Prevent Anal Cancer (PAC) Study in Milwaukee, Wisconsin recruited men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender persons 25 years of age and older. Participants were randomized to receive a mailed self-sampling kit or attend a clinic for screening. Kits were insulated with foam and included a device to record temperature every twenty minutes. Samples were returned via mail and underwent HPV genotyping using the SPF
resultsMost specimens (92.5%) were adequate for HPV genotyping. Specimen inadequacy was not associated with temperature, freeze-thaw cycle, or transit time. Fecal matter was present more often in inadequate (71.4%) compared to adequate specimens (16.3%) (p = .004).
conclusionsThese real-world data from mailed home-based anal self-sampling kits found that environmental conditions did not affect specimen adequacy. While over 90% of specimens were adequate, presence of fecal matter predicted specimen inadequacy.
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.