TY - JOUR T1 - High-risk HPV testing on self-sampled versus clinician-collected specimens: A review on the clinical accuracy and impact on population attendance in cervical cancer screening JF - Int.J.Cancer Y1 - 2013 A1 - Snijders,P.J. A1 - Verhoef,V.M. A1 - M. Arbyn A1 - Ogilvie,G. A1 - Minozzi,S. A1 - Banzi,R. A1 - van Kemenade,F.J. A1 - Heideman,D.A. A1 - C.J. Meijer KW - 2012 KW - access KW - accuracy KW - additional KW - an KW - Area KW - Areas KW - AS KW - at KW - cancer KW - cancer screening KW - Cervical KW - cervical cancer KW - cervical cancer screening KW - Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia KW - CERVICAL-CANCER KW - Clinical KW - Combination KW - comparing KW - Countries KW - cytology KW - Database KW - detection KW - developed countries KW - electronic KW - HPV KW - Human KW - identify KW - im KW - Impact KW - improve KW - IS KW - IT KW - journal KW - Laboratories KW - Less KW - Literature KW - medical KW - Netherlands KW - ON KW - pathology KW - performance KW - POPULATION KW - PROGRAM KW - Programs KW - Recall KW - response KW - REVIEW KW - risk KW - Sample KW - Samples KW - SCREENING KW - SCREENING PROGRAM KW - Search KW - self-sampling KW - specific KW - Strategies KW - Strategy KW - study KW - Test KW - tests KW - The Netherlands KW - Universities KW - university KW - use KW - variation KW - variations KW - WOMEN AB - This review elaborates on the accuracy and feasibility of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling, i.e., offering self-sampling of (cervico-)vaginal cell material by women themselves in nonclinical settings for high-risk HPV (hrHPV) detection in the laboratory, for cervical screening. To that end a bibliographic database search (PubMed) was performed to identify studies (published between January 1992 and January 2012) that compared clinical accuracy of HPV testing on self-sampled material with that of cytology or HPV testing on clinician-taken samples, and studies comparing response to offering HPV self-sampling with a recall invitation. Overall, hrHPV testing on self-samples appeared to be at least as, if not more, sensitive for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) as cytology on clinician-obtained cervical samples, though often less specific. In most studies, hrHPV testing on self- and clinician-sampled specimens is similarly accurate with respect to CIN2+ detection. Variations in clinical performance likely reflect the use of different combinations of collection devices and HPV tests. Because it is known that underscreened women are at increased risk of cervical cancer, targeting non-attendees of the screening program could improve the effectiveness of cervical screening. In developed countries offering self-sampling has shown to be superior to a recall invitation for cytology in re-attracting original non-attendees into the screening program. Additionally, self-testing has shown to facilitate access to cervical screening for women in low resource areas. This updated review of the literature suggests that HPV self-sampling could be an additional strategy that can improve screening performance compared to current cytology-based call-recall programs VL - 132 CP - 10 U1 - 35602 M3 - http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ijc.27790 ER -