In:
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science (PLoS), Vol. 16, No. 7 ( 2021-7-21), p. e0254946-
Abstract:
Urine self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening is a non-invasive method that offers several logistical advantages and high acceptability, reducing barriers related to low screening coverage. This study developed and evaluated the performance of a low-cost urine self-sampling method for HPV-testing and explored the acceptability and feasibility of potential implementation of this alternative in routine screening. Methods A series of sequential laboratory assays examined the impact of several pre-analytical conditions for obtaining DNA from urine and subsequent HPV detection. Initially, we assessed the effect of ethylaminediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) as a DNA preservative examining several variables including EDTA concentration, specimen storage temperature, time between urine collection and DNA extraction, and first-morning micturition versus convenience sample collection. We further evaluated the agreement of HPV-testing between urine and clinician-collected cervical samples among 95 women. Finally, we explored the costs of self-sampling supplies as well as the acceptability and feasibility of urine self-sampling among women and healthcare workers. Results Our results revealed higher DNA concentrations were obtained when using a 40mM EDTA solution, storing specimens at 25°C and extracting DNA within 72 hrs. of urine collection, regardless of using first-morning micturition or a convenience sampling. We observed good agreement (Kappa = 0.72) between urine and clinician-collected cervical samples for HPV detection. Furthermore, urine self-sampling was an affordable method (USD 1.10), well accepted among cervical cancer screening users, healthcare workers, and decision-makers. Conclusion These results suggest urine self-sampling is feasible and appropriate alternative for HPV-testing in HPV-based screening programs in lower-resource contexts.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
1932-6203
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0254946
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0254946.g001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0254946.g002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0254946.g003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0254946.g004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0254946.g005
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0254946.t001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0254946.t002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0254946.s001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0254946.s002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0254946.s003
Language:
English
Publisher:
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Publication Date:
2021
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2267670-3