Trial reportInternational journal of cancer2023
Home-based self-sampling vs clinician sampling for anal precancer screening: The Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study.
Trial report in International journal of cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Barriers and facilitators to anal cancer screening among men who have sex with men: a systematic review with narrative synthesis.BMC cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Cost-Effectiveness of Home-Based Self-Sampling vs Clinician Sampling for Anal Precancer Screening.JAMA network open · 2026Trial
- Engagement and Factors Associated With Annual Anal Human Papillomavirus Screening Among Sexual and Gender Minority Individuals.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2025Trial
- Trial
- The influence of home versus clinic anal human papillomavirus sampling on high-resolution anoscopy uptake in the Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study.Sexual health · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Impact of anal precancer screening on patient-reported outcomes among men-who-have-sex-with-men living with HIV: a scoping review.European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP) · 2026Article
- 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
- Specimen adequacy assay controls in nucleic acid amplification tests do not correlate with nasopharyngeal swab collection method.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2024Article
- Screening of Anal HPV Precancerous Lesions: A Review after Last Recommendations.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Article
- Factors associated with decreased anal sphincter tone and the accuracy of forced anal examinations to detect individuals having receptive anal intercourse: an observational study.BMJ public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sexual minority men are at increased risk for anal squamous cell carcinoma. Our objective was to compare screening engagement among individuals randomized to self-collect an anal canal specimen at home or to attend a clinic appointment. Specimen adequacy was then assessed for human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA genotyping. A randomized trial recruited cisgendered sexual minority men and transgender people in the community and assigned them to use a home-based self-collection swabbing kit or attend a clinic-based swabbing. Swabs were sent for HPV genotyping. The proportions of participants completing screening in each study arm and the adequacy of their specimens for HPV genotyping were assessed. Relative risks were estimated for factors associated with screening. A total of 240 individuals were randomized. Age (median, 46 years) and HIV status (27.1% living with HIV) did not differ by study arm. A total of 89.2% and 74.2% of home-arm and clinic-arm individuals returned the swab, respectively (P = .003), difference between groups, 15.0% (95% CI 5.4%-24.6%). Among black individuals, 96.2% and 63.2% in the home and clinic arms screened (P = .006). Among individuals with HIV, 89.5% and 51.9% in the home and clinic arms screened (P < .001). Self-collected swabs and clinician-collected swabs were comparable in adequacy for HPV genotyping (96.3% and 93.3%, respectively). People at highest risk for anal cancer may be more likely to screen if they are able to self-collect swabs at home rather than attend a clinic.
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.