The development of efficient strategies for managing high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV)-positive women is a major challenge when human papillomavirus-based primary screening is being performed. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of HR-HPV testing based on self-collection (SC) and HR-HPV testing based on collection by a health professional (HP) and to assess the potential usefulness of HR-HPV testing combined with testing with the biomarkers p16/Ki-67, α-mannosidase, and superoxide dismutase 2 (SOD2).
This was a cross-sectional study of 232 women admitted for colposcopy because of an abnormal Papanicolaou smear. The collected material underwent liquid-based cytology, HR-HPV detection, and immunocytochemical testing (p16/Ki-67, α-mannosidase, and SOD2). The gold standard was the histopathological result; the positive reference was CIN2+.
The overall accuracy of HR-HPV testing was 76.6%; the results for the SC group (78.1%) and the HP group (75.2%) were similar. The positive predictive values (HP, 76.5%; SC, 80.0%), the negative predictive values (HP, 66.7%; SC, 64.3%), the positive likelihood values (HP, 1.35; SC, 1.36), and the negative likelihood values (HP, 0.21; SC, 0.19) were also similar. p16/Ki-67 showed higher sensitivity than the other 2 biomarkers: 78.1% versus 45.8% for α-mannosidase and 44.5% for SOD2. The specificities of the biomarkers were equivalent: 71.4% for p16/Ki-67, 77.8% for α-mannosidase, and 71.2% for SOD2. In the HP group, accuracy also leaned more heavily toward the final score (using α-mannosidase and SOD2) without statistical significance (80.8% vs 77.9%). The contrast with the SC group yielded the same level of accuracy.
SC, when associated with testing with biomarkers, is as accurate as collection by HPs in the detection of women at risk for cervical cancer.

© 2021 American Cancer Society.