The purpose of this trial is to determine whether mailing in-home human papillomavirus (HPV) screening kits is effective in increasing uptake of cervical cancer screening and early detection and treatment of cervical neoplasia in underscreened women.
Over half of all cervical cancers in the U.S. are diagnosed in unscreened or underscreened women. New national guidelines identify increasing screening uptake as the number one priority for reducing cervical cancer-related morbidity and mortality. Innovative screening strategies that eliminate the need for clinic-based screening could be highly effective in improving screening compliance while maintaining high-quality care. We propose a large, pragmatic randomized controlled trial within Group Health (a large integrated health care delivery system in Washington State) to compare effectiveness of two programmatic approaches to increasing cervical cancer screening among overdue women. The first approach (control arm) is usual care at Group Health, which consists of patient- and provider-level services to promote adherence to Pap screening, and the second approach (intervention arm) includes usual care plus a mailed in-home high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) screening kit. We will randomize eligible women to the in-home hrHPV screening arm or the usual care arm. Compared to usual care, we hypothesize that in-home hrHPV screening will enhance early detection and treatment of cervical neoplasia and improve compliance with screening. The trial will provide definitive evidence-based data on the impact of an in-home hrHPV screening program in a real-world clinical setting.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
SCREENING
Masking
SINGLE
Enrollment
19,851
Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute
Seattle, Washington, United States
Number of Participants Diagnosed With Cervical Epithelial Neoplasia Grade 2 or Worse
Histologic diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse
Time frame: Assessed for up to 12 months post-randomization
Number of Participants That Received Treatment for Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade 2 or Worse
Receipt of treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse
Time frame: Assessed for up to 18 months post-randomization
Number of Participants That Completed Uptake of Cervical Cancer Screening
Uptake of cervical cancer screening is defined as either: \[1\] receipt of a Pap or co-test; \[2\] self-sample hrHPV-positive (16/18-negative) OR unsatisfactory AND receipt of follow-up diagnostic testing (Pap or co-test or colposcopy); \[3\] self-sample HPV16/18-positive; or \[4\] self-sample hrHPV-negative) Using an intent-to-treat approach, we will use log-binomial regression to estimate the relative risk for cervical cancer screening uptake for the in-home HPV screening arm versus the usual care arm. We will also use log-binomial regression to estimate the effects of EMR-derived patient characteristics (e.g. age, race/ethnicity, geocoded socioeconomic status, geocoded distance form primary care clinic, insurance type, time since last Pap test, tobacco use, obesity, and Charlson comorbidity score) on cervical cancer screening uptake, stratified subdivided by randomization arm.
Time frame: Assessed for up to 6 months post-randomization
Number of Participants With an Abnormal Screening Result
Screening result that warrants repeat testing, surveillance, or immediate colposcopy (per current guidelines) before returning to a routine screening schedule Using an intent-to-treat approach, we will use log-binomial regression to estimate the relative risk for an abnormal screening result for the in-home HPV screening arm versus the usual care arm.
Time frame: Assessed for up to 6 months post-randomization
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Experiences and Attitudes Associated With In-home HPV Testing Uptake
Experiences and attitudes will be measured with online surveys. A subset of intervention arm participants who do and do not return the in-home HPV kit will be invited to complete a survey (target n=200). We will examine psychosocial factors (e.g., cervical cancer/HPV knowledge, attitudes toward screening), experiences, and reactions to kits. We will compare responses in women who do versus do not return a mailed HPV kit.
Time frame: Survey invitation mailed 6 months post-randomization
Experiences and Attitudes Associated With Follow-up of Positive In-home HPV Testing Results
Intervention arm participants who return in-home HPV kits and test positive for HPV will be invited to complete an in-depth semi-structured interview (target n=50). We will explore patient perspectives following a positive human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling result to describe experiences and information needs for this home-based screening modality.
Time frame: Interview invitation mailed after all recommended clinical follow-up complete OR study follow-up window complete, up to 12 months post-randomization