Atypical Squamous Cell of Undetermined Significance, Cervical Carcinoma, Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade 2/3, Health Status Unknown, Human Papillomavirus Infection, Low Grade Cervical Squamous Intraepithelial Neoplasia, Stage 0 Cervical Cancer
Conditions
Keywords
Cervical cancer, Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance, Stage 0 cervical cancer, Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1, Cervical, intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2, Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3, Human papillomavirus, HPV
Brief summary
This randomized clinical trial studies home-based HPV or clinic-based Pap screening for cervical cancer. It is not yet known whether home-based screening is more effective, cost-effective, and/or acceptable than clinic-based screening for cervical cancer.
Detailed description
PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: I. Compare the sensitivity and specificity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) of two screening approaches: * Novel approach: every 3 years high risk-human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing of (at home) self-collected samples with in-clinic cytology of HR-HPV positive women and referral to colposcopy of women with cytology \> atypical squamous cells of uncertain significance (ASCUS); repeat HPV testing of HR-HPV positive but cytology negative women at one year; * Currently recommended approach: for women \< 30: every 3 years in-clinic cytology screening, with HPV based triage of women with ASCUS and referral to colposcopy of all women with squamous intraepithelial lesion (SIL) and/or HPV+ ASCUS; for women 30+, screening by Papanicolaou (Pap) and HPV, every 2-3 year (depending on previous history) with referral to colposcopy of those who are HPV 16/18+ or with cytology \> ASCUS; retesting of those who are positive for other HR-HPV at one year. II. Compare these two approaches with respect to overall cost-effectiveness and acceptability. III. Determine the performance and cost-effectiveness of each approach in vaccinated and unvaccinated women \< 30. OUTLINE: Participants are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. GROUP I (home-based HPV screening): Participants collect 2 vaginal specimens using polyester swabs. Participants with a positive HPV test result will have a Pap test. Participants with an abnormal Pap test will undergo standard of care as in Group II. GROUP II (clinic-based standard of care screening): Participants undergo Pap testing. Participants with a positive Pap test undergo standard of care, including colposcopy, HPV testing, cervical biopsy and/or endocervical curettage (ECC). Participants with cervical biopsies showing precancerous changes requiring treatment may undergo loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) or are referred to appropriate care.
Interventions
Undergo standard of care Pap test screening
OTHERCytology Specimen Collection Procedure
Undergo home-based HPV screening
OTHERQuestionnaire Administration
Ancillary studies
PROCEDUREScreening Method
Undergo standard of care Pap test screening
Sponsors
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
University of Washington
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
SCREENING
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
21 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Able to provide informed consent in English
Exclusion criteria
* Have had hysterectomy * Currently pregnant * Received treatment of cervical dysplasia with LEEP, cone biopsy, laser procedure or cryotherapy within THREE years * Received colposcopy of cervix within TWO years * Received Pap test within ONE year * Immunocompromised (positive human immunodeficiency virus \[HIV\] test, transplant recipient, received chemotherapy for cancer, or taking immunosuppressant drugs) * Decisionally impaired adults requiring a legally authorized representative
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Cost-effectiveness in the novel approach in vaccinated and unvaccinated women less than 30 years old | Up to 4 years | — |
| Cost-effectiveness in the standard approach in vaccinated and unvaccinated women less than 30 years old | Up to 4 years | — |
| Overall cost-effectiveness and acceptability | Up to 4 years | The results from the trial (sensitivity, specificity, and costs) will be used in conjunction with a Markov model to determine cost per LY and cost per QALY. Model outcomes (per 100,000 screened) will include the expected numbers of false-positive test results, colposcopies, cases of CIN 1+, cases of cancer, cancer deaths, life expectancy and quality adjusted life-expectancy. Strategies will be compared using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Costs and outcomes will be discounted at 3% annually. One, 2-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses conducted for all inputs to the models. |
| Sensitivity and specificity for CIN 1+ of currently recommended in-clinic cytology screening | Up to 4 years | An intention-to-treat analysis, based upon the initial randomization, will be performed to evaluate differences between study arms (screening strategies). Estimates of sensitivity and specificity for detection of CIN 1+ will be calculated for the two screening strategies using standard methodologies. |
| Sensitivity and specificity for CIN 1+ of novel home-based testing | Up to 4 years | An intention-to-treat analysis, based upon the initial randomization, will be performed to evaluate differences between study arms (screening strategies). Estimates of sensitivity and specificity for detection of CIN 1+ will be calculated for the two screening strategies using standard methodologies. |
| Sensitivity and specificity of the novel approach in vaccinated women less than 30 years old | Up to 4 years | Estimates of sensitivity and specificity for detection of CIN 1+ will be calculated for the two screening strategies and the rate of disease in the 10% sample of test negative subjects in each arm will be extrapolated to the entire study group of test negative subjects in that arm when sensitivity and specificity estimates are calculated. Threshold analyses will also be conducted to identify the range for the cost of the home-based test due to inherent uncertainty |
| Sensitivity and specificity of the standard approach in vaccinated women less than 30 years old | Up to 4 years | Estimates of sensitivity and specificity for detection of CIN 1 will be calculated for the two screening strategies and the rate of disease in the 10% sample of test negative subjects in each arm will be extrapolated to the entire study group of test negative subjects in that arm when sensitivity and specificity estimates are calculated. Threshold analyses will also be conducted to identify the range for the cost of the home-based test due to inherent uncertainty |
Countries
United States
Outcome results
None listed