Urine high‐risk human papillomavirus testing as an alternative to routine cervical screening: A comparative diagnostic accuracy study of two urine collection devices using a randomised study design trial.

Autor: Davies, Jennifer C., Sargent, Alexandra, Pinggera, Elisabeth, Carter, Suzanne, Gilham, Clare, Sasieni, Peter, Crosbie, Emma J.
Předmět:
Zdroj: BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology; Oct2024, Vol. 131 Issue 11, p1456-1464, 9p
Abstrakt: Objective: To evaluate the sensitivity of human papillomavirus (HPV) tested urine to detect high‐grade cervical precancer (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ [CIN2+]) using two urine collection devices. Design: Randomised controlled trial. Setting: St Mary's Hospital, Manchester, UK. Population: Colposcopy attendees with abnormal cervical screening; a total of 480 participants were randomised. Matched urine and cervical samples were available for 235 and 230 participants using a first‐void urine (FVU)‐collection device and standard pot, respectively. Methods: Urine was self‐collected and mixed with preservative – randomised 1:1 to FVU‐collection device (Novosanis Colli‐pee® 10 mL with urine conservation medium [UCM]) or standard pot. Matched clinician‐collected cervical samples were taken before colposcopy. HPV testing used Roche cobas® 8800. A questionnaire evaluated urine self‐sampling acceptability. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome measured sensitivity of HPV‐tested urine (FVU‐collection device and standard pot) for CIN2+ detection. Secondary outcomes compared HPV‐tested cervical and urine samples for CIN2+ and evaluated the acceptability of urine self‐sampling. Results: Urine HPV test sensitivity for CIN2+ was higher with the FVU‐collection device (90.3%, 95% CI 83.7%–94.9%, 112/124) than the standard pot (73.4%, 95% CI 64.7%–80.9%, 91/124, p = 0.0005). The relative sensitivity of FVU‐device‐collected urine was 0.92 (95% CI 0.87–0.97, pMcN = 0.004) compared with cervical, considering that all women were referred after a positive cervical HPV test. Urine‐based sampling was acceptable to colposcopy attendees. Conclusions: Testing of FVU‐device‐collected urine for HPV was superior to standard‐pot‐collected urine in colposcopy attendees and has promising sensitivity for CIN2+ detection. General population HPV testing of FVU‐device‐collected urine will establish its clinical performance and acceptability as an alternative to routine cervical screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Databáze: Complementary Index