Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42347973›Full record

Trial reportArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2026

Comparison of three different hpv self-sampling tools - a subanalysis of the prospective, randomized hannover self-collection study.

Stephanie Hempel, Sophia Groß, Lena Steinkasserer, Leonie Theis, Yvonne Ziert, Armin Koch, Peter Hillemanns, Matthias Jentschke

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Stephanie HempelDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center Ulm, Prittwitzstraße 43, 89081, Ulm, Germany. stephanie.hempel@uniklinik-ulm.de.
Sophia GroßDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Lena SteinkassererDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Leonie TheisInstitute for Biometry, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Yvonne ZiertInstitute for Biometry, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Armin KochInstitute for Biometry, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Peter HillemannsDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Matthias JentschkeDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.

Funding

Deutsche Krebshilfe No. 70113664
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveCervical cancer and its precursor lesions are treatable if detected early; however, screening participation for high-risk human papillomavirus infections (hr-HPV) remains low. In 2021, Germany recorded 4,544 new cervical cancer cases and 2,071 related deaths. The HaSCo study evaluates the feasibility of HPV self-testing to improve screening participation. This sub-study evaluates performance and acceptability of three self-testing tools.

methodsThis prospective, randomized sub-study examined Evalyn-Brush, FLOQSwabs, and first-void urine Colli-Pee among women aged 30-65 in Hannover, Germany. Addresses from the residents´ registration office were randomized into seven age groups and an 80/20 city-region distribution. A total of 19,995 women were assigned to opt-in (request a self-test) or opt-out (receive a test directly). Participation was requested from women without regular screening in the past two years.

results1,860 samples were returned (9.3%). Colli-Pee (10.4%) and FLOQSwabs (10.1%) had similar return rates, while Evalyn showed significantly lower rates (7.4%). Screening frequency didn´t significantly affect return rates (p = 0.1825), although FLOQSwabs showed higher return rates among underscreened women. Invalid sample rates were low, highest for FLOQSwabs (1.67%). A total of 145 samples tested positive for hr-HPV (7.9%). Evalyn collected highest DNA content (p < 0.0001). Colli-Pee was most preferred, and 66.7% of participants favored self-testing.

conclusionHPV self-tests were highly accepted and effective for collecting sufficient DNA material. Direct provision of user-friendly self-tests may support screening participation, particularly among underscreened women. All three devices performed strongly and appear suitable for integration into cervical cancer screening programs.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerHuman Papillomavirus VirusesPapillomavirus InfectionsSelf-TestingSpecimen HandlingUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAdultAgedFemaleGermanyHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedProspective StudiesVaginal SmearsCervical cancer screeningCervixFemalePapillomaviridaeUrine specimen collectionVaginal smear

Identifiers

PMID42347973
PMCPMC13303669

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.