Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37158105›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of cancer2023

Home-based self-sampling vs clinician sampling for anal precancer screening: The Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study.

Alan G Nyitray, Jenna Nitkowski, Timothy L McAuliffe, Bridgett Brzezinski, Michael D Swartz, María E Fernandez, Ashish A Deshmukh, Timothy J Ridolfi, Sarah J Lundeen, Leslie Cockerham and 8 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. 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) · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Alan G NyitrayClinical Cancer Center, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2020-9904
Jenna NitkowskiCenter for AIDS Intervention Research, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Timothy L McAuliffeCenter for AIDS Intervention Research, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Bridgett BrzezinskiCenter for AIDS Intervention Research, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Michael D SwartzDepartment of Biostatistics and Data Science, The University of Texas Health Sciences Center at Houston School of Public Health, Houston, Texas, USA.
María E FernandezDepartment of Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences, The University of Texas Health Sciences Center at Houston School of Public Health, Houston, Texas, USA.
Ashish A DeshmukhDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8936-8108
Timothy J RidolfiDepartment of Surgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Sarah J LundeenDepartment of Surgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Leslie CockerhamVivent Health, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Dave WentenHolton Street Clinic, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Andrew PetrollCenter for AIDS Intervention Research, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Brian HilgemanDepartment of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Jennifer S SmithGillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1256-0422
Elizabeth Y ChiaoMD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Anna R GiulianoCenter for Immunization and Infection Research in Cancer, Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Tampa, Florida, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5440-8859
Vanessa SchickDepartment of Management, Policy, and Community Health, The University of Texas Health Sciences Center at Houston School of Public Health, Houston, Texas, USA.
Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study Team

Funding

Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR001436 · NCATS · MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN · PI FREED, JULIE K · 2015 to 2025
$47.5M
Annual anal sampling using DNA screening to identify men who have sex with men at increased risk for anal cancerR01CA215403 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI NYITRAY, ALAN GASPAR · 2017 to 2021
$2.8M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001436NCI NIH HHS R01 CA215403
6 · The paper itself

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

Anus NeoplasmsHIV InfectionsPapillomavirus InfectionsAnal CanalEarly Detection of CancerHomosexuality, MaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPapillomaviridaeanal neoplasmsHIVhuman papillomavirus DNA testsself-testingsexual and gender minorities

Identifiers

PMID37158105
PMCPMC10330574

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.