{"entity": "researcher", "timestamp": "2026-08-26T22:48:09.425Z", "family": "Aarnio", "given": "Riina", "initials": "R", "orcid": "0000-0001-6752-531X", "affiliations": ["Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden."], "links": {"self": {"href": "https://publications-affiliated.scilifelab.se/researcher/60c29c4a11e24b9b9263d5f50ff658be.json"}, "display": {"href": "https://publications-affiliated.scilifelab.se/researcher/60c29c4a11e24b9b9263d5f50ff658be"}}, "publications": [{"entity": "publication", "iuid": "1cc2bb0a25f14bbeae35f48381add2f5", "links": {"self": {"href": "https://publications-affiliated.scilifelab.se/publication/1cc2bb0a25f14bbeae35f48381add2f5.json"}, "display": {"href": "https://publications-affiliated.scilifelab.se/publication/1cc2bb0a25f14bbeae35f48381add2f5"}}, "title": "Comparison of vaginal self-sampling and cervical sampling by medical professionals for the detection of HPV and CIN2+: A randomized study.", "authors": [{"family": "Aarnio", "given": "Riina", "initials": "R", "orcid": "0000-0001-6752-531X", "researcher": {"href": "https://publications-affiliated.scilifelab.se/researcher/60c29c4a11e24b9b9263d5f50ff658be.json"}}, {"family": "Isacson", "given": "Isabella", "initials": "I"}, {"family": "Sanner", "given": "Karin", "initials": "K"}, {"family": "Gustavsson", "given": "Inger", "initials": "I"}, {"family": "Gyllensten", "given": "Ulf", "initials": "U", "orcid": "0000-0002-6316-3355", "researcher": {"href": "https://publications-affiliated.scilifelab.se/researcher/eacfdf2095e947e99ac45fe994261b72.json"}}, {"family": "Olovsson", "given": "Matts", "initials": "M"}], "type": "clinical study", "published": "2021-06-15", "journal": {"title": "Int. J. Cancer", "issn": "1097-0215", "volume": "148", "issue": "12", "pages": "3051-3059", "issn-l": "0020-7136"}, "abstract": "Primary screening with human papillomavirus (HPV) test is more effective in reducing cervical cancer incidence than cytology and it also offers the opportunity to self-sample. We conducted a randomized study to compare vaginal self-sampling with cervical sampling by medical professionals for HPV testing concerning prevalence of HPV and detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) or grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) in primary screening. In total, 11 951 women aged 30-60 years were randomized into two groups, 5961 for self-sampling (SS arm) and 5990 for sampling by medical professionals (SMP arm). Sampling was performed with a RoversViba-brush in the SS arm and a cytobrush in the SMP arm. All samples were applied to an indicating FTA elute card and analyzed for HPV using a clinically validated real-time PCR test (hpVIR). All HPV-positive women performed repeated sampling about 6 months later using the same procedure as used initially. All HPV-positive women in the second sampling were referred to colposcopy. The prevalence of HPV in the first test did not differ between the SS arm (6.8%, 167/2466) and the SMP arm (7.8%, 118/1519) (P = .255). The prevalence of CIN2+ per 1000 screened women was 17 (43/2466 \u00d7 1000) (95%CI 13-24) in the SS arm and 21 (32/1519 \u00d7 1000) (95%CI 15-30) in the SMP arm. For CIN3+, the prevalence per 1000 screened women was 14 (35/2466 \u00d7 1000) (95%CI 10-20) in the SS arm and 15 (23/1519 \u00d7 1000) (95%CI 10-23) in the SMP arm. In conclusion, self-sampling and sampling by medical professionals showed the same prevalence of HPV and detection rate of CIN2+ and CIN3+ in histology.", "doi": "10.1002/ijc.33482", "pmid": "33497465", "labels": [], "xrefs": [], "notes": [], "created": "2026-08-21T11:02:37.145Z", "modified": "2026-08-21T11:02:37.211Z"}, {"entity": "publication", "iuid": "62d23441b06c420ca6c7ec12e9055f95", "links": {"self": {"href": "https://publications-affiliated.scilifelab.se/publication/62d23441b06c420ca6c7ec12e9055f95.json"}, "display": {"href": "https://publications-affiliated.scilifelab.se/publication/62d23441b06c420ca6c7ec12e9055f95"}}, "title": "Cost-effectiveness analysis of repeated self-sampling for HPV testing in primary cervical screening: a randomized study.", "authors": [{"family": "Aarnio", "given": "Riina", "initials": "R", "orcid": "0000-0001-6752-531X", "researcher": {"href": "https://publications-affiliated.scilifelab.se/researcher/60c29c4a11e24b9b9263d5f50ff658be.json"}}, {"family": "\u00d6stensson", "given": "Ellinor", "initials": "E"}, {"family": "Olovsson", "given": "Matts", "initials": "M"}, {"family": "Gustavsson", "given": "Inger", "initials": "I"}, {"family": "Gyllensten", "given": "Ulf", "initials": "U"}], "type": "journal article", "published": "2020-07-13", "journal": {"title": "BMC Cancer", "issn": "1471-2407", "volume": "20", "issue": "1", "pages": "645", "issn-l": "1471-2407"}, "abstract": "Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is recommended in primary cervical screening to improve cancer prevention. An advantage of HPV testing is that it can be performed on self-samples, which could increase population coverage and result in a more efficient strategy to identify women at risk of developing cervical cancer. Our objective was to assess whether repeated self-sampling for HPV testing is cost-effective in comparison with Pap smear cytology for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more (CIN2+) in increasing participation rate in primary cervical screening.\n\nA cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was performed on data from a previously published randomized clinical study including 36,390 women aged 30-49 years. Participants were randomized either to perform repeated self-sampling of vaginal fluid for HPV testing (n = 17,997, HPV self-sampling arm) or to midwife-collected Pap smears for cytological analysis (n = 18,393, Pap smear arm).\n\nSelf-sampling for HPV testing led to 1633 more screened women and 107 more histologically diagnosed CIN2+ at a lower cost vs. midwife-collected Pap smears (\u20ac 229,446 vs. \u20ac 782,772).\n\nThis study resulted in that repeated self-sampling for HPV testing increased participation and detection of CIN2+ at a lower cost than midwife-collected Pap smears in primary cervical screening. Offering women a home-based self-sampling may therefore be a more cost-effective alternative than clinic-based screening.\n\nNot registered since this trial is a secondary analysis of an earlier published study (Gustavsson et al., British journal of cancer. 118:896-904, 2018).", "doi": "10.1186/s12885-020-07085-9", "pmid": "32660432", "labels": [], "xrefs": [{"db": "pmc", "key": "PMC7359275"}, {"db": "pii", "key": "10.1186/s12885-020-07085-9"}], "notes": [], "created": "2026-08-21T12:38:49.140Z", "modified": "2026-08-21T12:38:49.182Z"}]}