NCT02749110

Brief Summary

This study evaluates the benefit in women aged from 30 to 65 years, who do not participate to the French opportunistic cervical cancer screening program, of an organized screening with the proposition by the family physician of a pap-test (usual care) versus a self-collected vaginal sample (and a HPV-test). 24 family physicians will participate and will be randomized in the usual care arm (12) or in the self-sampling arm (12). Our hypothesis is that organizing the screening for these women involving their family physician will major participation, and that the self-sampling option will amplify this increase.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
308

participants targeted

Target at P75+ for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Aug 2016

Longer than P75 for not_applicable

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

April 20, 2016

Completed
2 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

April 22, 2016

Completed
4 months until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

August 28, 2016

Completed
3 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

August 23, 2019

Completed
1.5 years until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

February 23, 2021

Completed
Last Updated

February 5, 2026

Status Verified

August 1, 2020

Enrollment Period

3 years

First QC Date

April 20, 2016

Last Update Submit

February 2, 2026

Conditions

Keywords

Mass screeningFamily medicineHuman Papillomavirus DNA testsPapanicolaou testEarly detection of cancer/methods*Specimen Handling/methods*Patient complianceAdultFemaleHumansRandomized controlled trial

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Rate of women terminating the whole diagnostic process.

    Women participating in the study but refusing the screening process are considered as "failure

    For screening: 12 months; for follow-up of screened positive subjets: 18 months

Secondary Outcomes (2)

  • Theory of planned behavior (TPB) see Ajzen-Fishbein

    At baseline

  • social determinants of screening (age, level of education, level of resources, vocational situation, matrimonial status…)

    At baseline

Other Outcomes (1)

  • European Deprivation Index (EDI) associated to the dwelling of the study subjects

    At baseline

Study Arms (2)

Self-sampling for HPV test

EXPERIMENTAL

Invitation to participate to the screening process by means of the usual care (pap-test) or the provision of a vaginal self-sampling brush (Evalyn Brush°). Self-collected samples are mailed to a central lab for HPV testing.

Device: Vaginal self-sampling brush

Usual care (Pap test)

NO INTERVENTION

Intervention: invitation to participate to the screening process by means of the usual care (pap-test).

Interventions

Self-collection by unscreened women aged from 30 to 65 of a vaginal sample with the device. After collection, the whole device is mailed in a normalized for biological samples package to the virology lab of the University Hospital of Lille where a HPV test is conducted using a Cobas 4800 technique.

Also known as: Evalyn Brush, European Community (EC) certificate N°: 44232121392
Self-sampling for HPV test

Eligibility Criteria

Age30 Years - 65 Years
Sexfemale
Healthy VolunteersYes
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • To be a woman
  • Aged from 30 to 65 years (30 and 65 years included)
  • Without reimbursement of a pap-test by the health insurance for more than 3 years, despite a reminder mailed by the health insurance on the previous year (list set up by the health insurance).
  • Able to understand and sign voluntarily the consent to participate
  • Warranted by the health insurance
  • Able to understand and answer the questions of the study questionnaire alone or with the help of a self-chosen third party.

You may not qualify if:

  • No vaginal intercourse ever
  • Pap-test quoted on another budget (hospital, mother and child protection…) conducted less than 3 years ago
  • Known cervical lesion or known HPV status
  • History of hysterectomy
  • History of conisation
  • History of laser treatment of the cervix
  • History of cervical cancer
  • Other medical reason to delay cervical cancer screening
  • Abroad for more than one year
  • Moving to another region (done or expected)
  • Pregnant or breastfeeding
  • Screening not relevant from the practitioner's perspective (Emergency situation, comorbidity…)

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Doctor's office 115

Herzeele, France

Location

Related Publications (28)

  • Fishbein M. A reasoned action approach to health promotion. Med Decis Making. 2008 Nov-Dec;28(6):834-44. doi: 10.1177/0272989X08326092. Epub 2008 Nov 17.

    PMID: 19015289BACKGROUND
  • van Baars R, Bosgraaf RP, ter Harmsel BW, Melchers WJ, Quint WG, Bekkers RL. Dry storage and transport of a cervicovaginal self-sample by use of the Evalyn Brush, providing reliable human papillomavirus detection combined with comfort for women. J Clin Microbiol. 2012 Dec;50(12):3937-43. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01506-12. Epub 2012 Sep 26.

    PMID: 23015677BACKGROUND
  • Viguier J, Calazel-Benque A, Eisinger F, Pivot X. Organized colorectal cancer screening programmes: how to optimize efficiency among general practitioners. Eur J Cancer Prev. 2011 Jan;20 Suppl 1:S26-32. doi: 10.1097/01.cej.0000391567.49006.af.

    PMID: 21245677BACKGROUND
  • Verhoef VM, Bosgraaf RP, van Kemenade FJ, Rozendaal L, Heideman DA, Hesselink AT, Bekkers RL, Steenbergen RD, Massuger LF, Melchers WJ, Bulten J, Overbeek LI, Berkhof J, Snijders PJ, Meijer CJ. Triage by methylation-marker testing versus cytology in women who test HPV-positive on self-collected cervicovaginal specimens (PROHTECT-3): a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014 Mar;15(3):315-22. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70019-1. Epub 2014 Feb 13.

    PMID: 24529697BACKGROUND
  • Duport N, Serra D, Goulard H, Bloch J. [Which factors influence screening practices for female cancer in France?]. Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique. 2008 Oct;56(5):303-13. doi: 10.1016/j.respe.2008.07.086. Epub 2008 Oct 31. French.

    PMID: 18951740BACKGROUND
  • Favre J, Rochoy M, Raginel T, Pelletier M, Messaadi N, Deken-Delannoy V, Duhamel A, Berkhout C. The Effect of Cervical Smears Performed by General Practitioners on the Cervical Cancer Screening Rate of their Female Patients: A Claim Database Analysis and Cross-Sectional Survey. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2018 Jul;27(7):933-938. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2017.6656. Epub 2018 Mar 27.

  • Anhang R, Nelson JA, Telerant R, Chiasson MA, Wright TC Jr. Acceptability of self-collection of specimens for HPV DNA testing in an urban population. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2005 Oct;14(8):721-8. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2005.14.721.

  • Haguenoer K, Giraudeau B, Gaudy-Graffin C, de Pinieux I, Dubois F, Trignol-Viguier N, Viguier J, Marret H, Goudeau A. Accuracy of dry vaginal self-sampling for detecting high-risk human papillomavirus infection in cervical cancer screening: a cross-sectional study. Gynecol Oncol. 2014 Aug;134(2):302-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.05.026. Epub 2014 Jun 3.

  • Cadman L, Ashdown-Barr L, Waller J, Szarewski A. Attitudes towards cytology and human papillomavirus self-sample collection for cervical screening among Hindu women in London, UK: a mixed methods study. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2015 Jan;41(1):38-47. doi: 10.1136/jfprhc-2013-100705. Epub 2014 Feb 12.

  • Waller J, Bartoszek M, Marlow L, Wardle J. Barriers to cervical cancer screening attendance in England: a population-based survey. J Med Screen. 2009;16(4):199-204. doi: 10.1258/jms.2009.009073.

  • Cox JT, Castle PE, Behrens CM, Sharma A, Wright TC Jr, Cuzick J; Athena HPV Study Group. Comparison of cervical cancer screening strategies incorporating different combinations of cytology, HPV testing, and genotyping for HPV 16/18: results from the ATHENA HPV study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Mar;208(3):184.e1-184.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2012.11.020. Epub 2012 Nov 19.

  • Park Y, Lee E, Choi J, Jeong S, Kim HS. Comparison of the Abbott RealTime High-Risk Human Papillomavirus (HPV), Roche Cobas HPV, and Hybrid Capture 2 assays to direct sequencing and genotyping of HPV DNA. J Clin Microbiol. 2012 Jul;50(7):2359-65. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00337-12. Epub 2012 Apr 18.

  • TOMBOLA Group. Cytological surveillance compared with immediate referral for colposcopy in management of women with low grade cervical abnormalities: multicentre randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2009 Jul 28;339:b2546. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2546.

  • Rigal L, Saurel-Cubizolles MJ, Falcoff H, Bouyer J, Ringa V. Do social inequalities in cervical cancer screening persist among patients who use primary care? The Paris Prevention in General Practice survey. Prev Med. 2011 Sep;53(3):199-202. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.06.016. Epub 2011 Jun 25.

  • Chan Chee C, Begassat M, Kovess V. [Factors associated with cervical cancer screening in women covered by national health insurance]. Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique. 2005 Feb;53(1):69-75. doi: 10.1016/s0398-7620(05)84573-0. French.

  • Zehbe I, Moeller H, Severini A, Weaver B, Escott N, Bell C, Crawford S, Bannon D, Paavola N. Feasibility of self-sampling and human papillomavirus testing for cervical cancer screening in First Nation women from Northwest Ontario, Canada: a pilot study. BMJ Open. 2011 Feb 26;1(1):e000030. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2010-000030.

  • Goodman A. HPV testing as a screen for cervical cancer. BMJ. 2015 Jun 30;350:h2372. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h2372.

  • Gok M, Heideman DA, van Kemenade FJ, Berkhof J, Rozendaal L, Spruyt JW, Voorhorst F, Belien JA, Babovic M, Snijders PJ, Meijer CJ. HPV testing on self collected cervicovaginal lavage specimens as screening method for women who do not attend cervical screening: cohort study. BMJ. 2010 Mar 11;340:c1040. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c1040.

  • Broberg G, Gyrd-Hansen D, Miao Jonasson J, Ryd ML, Holtenman M, Milsom I, Strander B. Increasing participation in cervical cancer screening: offering a HPV self-test to long-term non-attendees as part of RACOMIP, a Swedish randomized controlled trial. Int J Cancer. 2014 May 1;134(9):2223-30. doi: 10.1002/ijc.28545. Epub 2013 Oct 31.

  • Grillo F, Vallee J, Chauvin P. Inequalities in cervical cancer screening for women with or without a regular consulting in primary care for gynaecological health, in Paris, France. Prev Med. 2012 Mar-Apr;54(3-4):259-65. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2012.01.013. Epub 2012 Jan 24.

  • Elfstrom KM, Smelov V, Johansson AL, Eklund C, Naucler P, Arnheim-Dahlstrom L, Dillner J. Long term duration of protective effect for HPV negative women: follow-up of primary HPV screening randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2014 Jan 16;348:g130. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g130.

  • Gok M, Heideman DA, van Kemenade FJ, de Vries AL, Berkhof J, Rozendaal L, Belien JA, Overbeek L, Babovic M, Snijders PJ, Meijer CJ. Offering self-sampling for human papillomavirus testing to non-attendees of the cervical screening programme: Characteristics of the responders. Eur J Cancer. 2012 Aug;48(12):1799-808. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2011.11.022. Epub 2011 Dec 13.

  • Bulk S, Bulkmans NW, Berkhof J, Rozendaal L, Boeke AJ, Verheijen RH, Snijders PJ, Meijer CJ. Risk of high-grade cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia based on cytology and high-risk HPV testing at baseline and at 6-months. Int J Cancer. 2007 Jul 15;121(2):361-7. doi: 10.1002/ijc.22677.

  • Lazcano-Ponce E, Lorincz AT, Cruz-Valdez A, Salmeron J, Uribe P, Velasco-Mondragon E, Nevarez PH, Acosta RD, Hernandez-Avila M. Self-collection of vaginal specimens for human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer prevention (MARCH): a community-based randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2011 Nov 26;378(9806):1868-73. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61522-5. Epub 2011 Nov 1.

  • Cullen J, Schwartz MD, Lawrence WF, Selby JV, Mandelblatt JS. Short-term impact of cancer prevention and screening activities on quality of life. J Clin Oncol. 2004 Mar 1;22(5):943-52. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.05.191.

  • C Kitchener H, Canfell K, Gilham C, Sargent A, Roberts C, Desai M, Peto J. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of primary human papillomavirus cervical screening in England: extended follow-up of the ARTISTIC randomised trial cohort through three screening rounds. Health Technol Assess. 2014 Apr;18(23):1-196. doi: 10.3310/hta18230.

  • Giorgi Rossi P, Marsili LM, Camilloni L, Iossa A, Lattanzi A, Sani C, Di Pierro C, Grazzini G, Angeloni C, Capparucci P, Pellegrini A, Schiboni ML, Sperati A, Confortini M, Bellanova C, D'Addetta A, Mania E, Visioli CB, Sereno E, Carozzi F; Self-Sampling Study Working Group. The effect of self-sampled HPV testing on participation to cervical cancer screening in Italy: a randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN96071600). Br J Cancer. 2011 Jan 18;104(2):248-54. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6606040. Epub 2010 Dec 21.

  • Rochoy M, Raginel T, Favre J, Soueres E, Messaadi N, Deken V, Duhamel A, Berkhout C. Factors associated with the achievement of cervical smears by general practitioners. BMC Res Notes. 2017 Dec 8;10(1):723. doi: 10.1186/s13104-017-2999-5.

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Uterine Cervical NeoplasmsUterine Cervical DysplasiaPatient Compliance

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Uterine NeoplasmsGenital Neoplasms, FemaleUrogenital NeoplasmsNeoplasms by SiteNeoplasmsUterine Cervical DiseasesUterine DiseasesGenital Diseases, FemaleFemale Urogenital DiseasesFemale Urogenital Diseases and Pregnancy ComplicationsUrogenital DiseasesGenital DiseasesPrecancerous ConditionsPatient Acceptance of Health CareTreatment Adherence and ComplianceHealth BehaviorBehavior

Study Officials

  • Christophe Berkhout, MD

    University Hospital, Lille

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
NONE
Purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

April 20, 2016

First Posted

April 22, 2016

Study Start

August 28, 2016

Primary Completion

August 23, 2019

Study Completion

February 23, 2021

Last Updated

February 5, 2026

Record last verified: 2020-08

Locations