Cervical CancerCASSISNCT02397252
Cervical And Self-Sample In Screening Study
A study testing Eve Medical self-collection system©, cobas® PCR Female swab self-sampling and Physician-collected sampling in people with Cervical Cancer and Intraepithelial Neoplasia, run by McGill University at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
The proposed study seeks to compare the diagnostic performance of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) testing in self-collected samples via the Eve Medical self-collection system© (Eve) with standard physician-collected samples for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 or worse (CIN1+) and cervical cancer… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age, women onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Cervical Cancer, Intraepithelial Neoplasia
- What is being tested?
- Eve Medical self-collection system©, cobas® PCR Female swab self-sampling and Physician-collected sampling
- Type of treatment
- Medical device, Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 1,225 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- Jun 2015to Apr 2016
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- Women only
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Women of all ages are eligible to the study if they have been referred to the participating colposcopy clinic because of an abnormal Pap test at the level of an atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse squamous or glandular abnormality (i.e., ASCUS+) or an abnormal co-test (ASCUS+ and HPV-positive) result.
Who cannot join
- none
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Canada1 site
McGill University - Division of Cancer Epidemiology
Montreal, Quebec, H2W 1S6
About this study
Official title: Cervical And Self-Sample In Screening (CASSIS) Study: Diagnostic Performance of Molecular HPV Testing With the Eve Medical Self-collection System© for Detecting Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia
The proposed study seeks to compare the diagnostic performance of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) testing in self-collected samples via the Eve Medical self-collection system© (Eve) with standard physician-collected samples for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 or worse (CIN1+) and cervical cancer among women referred for colposcopy. The performance of the Eve sample will also be compared with that of a second self-sample via a cobas® PCR Female swab.
Approximately 1000 adult women with an abnormal Pap test at the level of an atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse squamous or glandular abnormality (i.e., ASCUS+) or an abnormal co-test (ASCUS+ and HPV-positive) result will be recruited over a period of 12 months via colposcopy clinics located at the Jewish General Hospital, St-Mary's Hospital, and the McGill University Health Centers (Royal Victoria Hospital).
Read more
Participating women will undergo three cervical or cervicovaginal sampling techniques: 1) self-sampling using the Eve Medical self-collection system©; 2) self-sampling using a cobas® PCR Female swab; and 3) physician-collected sampling. The participants will also fill in a questionnaire on their experience with the convenience and acceptability of the Eve system, relative to the other two sampling approaches. The decision as to which self-sample is to be collected first will be dependent on randomization
HPV testing will be done using the cobas® 4800 HPV Test. The liquid medium of within the cobas® PCR CELL Collection Media with the provider collected sample and the cobas® PCR media with the two self-collected samples will be used to suspend the cellular material prior to HPV testing. We have made collaborative arrangements with Dr. Marcel Behr, Chief of the Department of Clinical Microbiology at the McGill University Health Centre for the HPV genotyping work.
Histology-confirmed CIN1+ will form the study outcome or case definition. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values (along with their respective 95% confidence intervals) will be calculated for each sample type to evaluate the clinical performance of the various sampling techniques. We will use CIN1+ as definition of disease but analyses will also be performed for more stringent definitions, e.g. CIN2+ or CIN3/cancer.
Read the detailed description
After the discovery that Human Papillomavirus (HPV) infection is the necessary cause of cervical cancer there have been much interest in the introduction of novel screening strategies involving HPV DNA testing [1]. HPV DNA testing was shown to have higher sensitivity in detecting cervical cancer and its precursors and greater reproducibility than Papanicolaou (Pap) cytology screening and has been therefore proposed as the primary screening method for the future. In high-income countries, cases of cervical cancer continue to develop among unscreened and under-screened women [2]. Factors discouraging women from attending routine screening include fear of pain or discomfort, lack of time or perceived inconvenience, cultural or religious concerns, and poor socioeconomic status [3]. For a screening program to be effective high coverage is essential and thus attendance is a critical requirement.
Because of the high sensitivity of molecular HPV testing to detect cervical cancer precursors there is great potential for screening coverage to be increased by inviting non-attendant to provide self-collected vaginal samples. Providing these women with a simple, convenient, and inexpensive means of self-testing may improve cervical screening participation [3]. Self-sampling is also an attractive approach to assist screening in poor countries, which typically do not have structured cervical cancer screening programs while having to bear the greatest burden of cervical cancer morbidity and mortality [4]. Self-sampling can also enhance the value of post-HPV vaccination surveillance by allowing a more efficient monitoring of HPV type distribution in populations. Finally, self-sampling represents a good research tool to assist prospective studies of genital HPV infection and natural history of cervical neoplasia.
Specifically for cervical cancer screening, it has been shown that self-collected cervicovaginal specimens from women who received proper instruction for collecting them yield HPV test results that are comparable to those in specimens collected by physicians [5-8]. Women also prefer self-sampling relative to clinician-provided samples, provided that they can be assured that they are told how to properly collect the sample [8, 9]. Although there is conceivably some loss of sensitivity and specificity in screening for cervical cancer in a specimen that is not directly collected from the ecto- and endo-cervix the overall accuracy of the HPV testing results (to identify presence of cervical precancerous lesions) is still superior to that of physician-collected Pap smears. Therefore, replacing a more anatomically-correct specimen (the one collected with direct visualization of the cervix by a primary healthcare provider) with one collected from the vagina (and thus diluted with exfoliated cells from a wider epithelial surface area) is compensated by the high sensitivity of the molecular screening approach [6, 10, 11]. Performance of screening seems also to be unaffected by storage and transport of the self-sample swabs, irrespective of whether they have been kept dry or transferred and resuspended into a liquid transport medium [10, 12].
A critical feature in enhancing women's acceptance and adherence with the self-sampling approach for cervical cancer screening and HPV surveillance studies is the convenience of the device used for collection. Dacron and polyester swabs are simple, common, and inexpensive. However, they are inconvenient and not isolated within a sheath that prevents contact of the sampling area with mucosal surfaces in the labia and vaginal opening. Ideally, sampling devices should be anatomically correct to facilitate insertion and the sampling surface that will retain the exfoliated cells should be protected from contact with the labia and lower vaginal mucosa while the device is inserted, with the objective of sampling cells that are mostly from the cervix and upper vaginal area.
HPV DNA testing using self-collected cervicovaginal specimens represents a promising strategy to increase cervical screening participation and thus reduce rates of cervical cancer in countries with established cervical screening programs. Furthermore, this approach can also greatly improve the coverage and quality of cervical cancer screening in developing countries, as well as in remote regions in developed countries, e.g., aboriginal populations in Northern Quebec and in First Nations territories. Facilitating and improving uptake of cervical cancer screening would save lives, reduce costs of treating invasive cancer and potentially reduce inequalities in avoidable mortality caused from cervical cancer.
(full protocol available upon request)
- Conditions
- Cervical Cancer, Intraepithelial Neoplasia
- Being tested
- Eve Medical self-collection system©, cobas® PCR Female swab self-sampling, Physician-collected sampling
- Keywords
- Human Papillomavirus, Screening, Self-collection test, Pap test
- Medical subject headings
- Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Carcinoma in Situ
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Eve Medical self-collection system©Device
Also called HerSwabTM
The Eve collection system is a plastic device not much bigger than a tampon that is inserted in the vaginal cavity. A silicone brush is then swiped around the vagina to scrape a few vaginal cells for cervical cancer screening.
cobas® PCR Female swab self-samplingDevice
Also called Long swab
Regular polyester swab for collection of vaginal cells.
Physician-collected samplingProcedure or surgery
Routine colposcopy sample collected by a physician.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Eve Medical self-collection system© | Experimental | Device: Self-sampling swab from Eve Medical for collection of vaginal cells. Receives: Device: Eve Medical self-collection system© |
| cobas® PCR Female swab self-sampling | Placebo comparator | Device: Regular polyester swab for collection of vaginal cells. Receives: Device: cobas® PCR Female swab self-sampling |
| Physician-collected sampling | Placebo comparator | Routine colposcopy sample collected by a physician. Receives: Procedure: Physician-collected sampling |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Differences by comparison groups in detection of histologically confirmed Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia grade 1 or worse (CIN1+)
Diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals, and predictive values will be determined for each sample type to evaluate the clinical performance of the various sampling techniques. The investigators hypothesize that the Eve sample will yield sensitivity and specificity results that are no worse than those with the physician-collected sample, while providing better or equivalent results than those with the self-sample based on the Cobas® PCR Female swab.
Measured: Cross-Sectional (1 year-period to accrue patients)
Secondary outcomes (1)
Patient satisfaction and experience using the self-sampling devices
Participants will be asked to fill out a questionnaire consisting of 10 questions on ease of use, comfort, embarrassment, and clarity of instructions when using self-sampled cervicovaginal sampling such as the HerSwabTM and the female polyester swab as compared to the physician-collected sample. The investigators hypothesize similar patient satisfaction with the three sampling approaches.
Measured: Cross-Sectional (1 year-period)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted24 Mar 2015 (estimated)
- Study startJun 2015
- Primary completionApr 2016
- Study completionApr 2016
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Cervical CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Screening
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Care provider, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 1,225 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- McGill University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Dr. Eduardo Franco, McGill University
- Investigators
- Eduardo Franco, DrPH, Principal investigator, McGill UniversityMariam El-Zein, PhD, Study director, McGill University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02397252
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- A11-M103-14B
- Acronym
- CASSIS
- Status last verified
- Aug 2016
- First submitted
- 24 Feb 2015
- Last updated
- 17 Aug 2016
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 17 Aug 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Cervical And Self-Sample In Screening (CASSIS) Study: Diagnostic Performance of Molecular HPV Testing With the Eve Medical Self-collection System© for Detecting Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02397252
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CASSIS / A11-M103-14B
- Conditions
- Cervical Cancer, Intraepithelial Neoplasia
- Keywords
- Human Papillomavirus, Screening, Self-collection test, Pap test
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 1,225 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- McGill UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jun 2015
- Primary completion
- Apr 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- Apr 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 24 Mar 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The proposed study seeks to compare the diagnostic performance of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) testing in self-collected samples via the Eve Medical self-collection system© (Eve) with standard physician-collected samples for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 or worse (CIN1+) and cervical cancer among women referred for colposcopy. The performance of the Eve sample will also be compared with that of a second self-sample via a cobas® PCR Female swab.
Approximately 1000 adult women with an abnormal Pap test at the level of an atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse squamous or glandular abnormality (i.e., ASCUS+) or an abnormal co-test (ASCUS+ and HPV-positive) result will be recruited over a period of 12 months via colposcopy clinics located at the Jewish General Hospital, St-Mary's Hospital, and the McGill University Health Centers (Royal Victoria Hospital).
Participating women will undergo three cervical or cervicovaginal sampling techniques: 1) self-sampling using the Eve Medical self-collection system©; 2) self-sampling using a cobas® PCR Female swab; and 3) physician-collected sampling. The participants will also fill in a questionnaire on their experience with the convenience and acceptability of the Eve system, relative to the other two sampling approaches. The decision as to which self-sample is to be collected first will be dependent on randomization
HPV testing will be done using the cobas® 4800 HPV Test. The liquid medium of within the cobas® PCR CELL Collection Media with the provider collected sample and the cobas® PCR media with the two self-collected samples will be used to suspend the cellular material prior to HPV testing. We have made collaborative arrangements with Dr. Marcel Behr, Chief of the Department of Clinical Microbiology at the McGill University Health Centre for the HPV genotyping work.
Histology-confirmed CIN1+ will form the study outcome or case definition. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values (along with their respective 95% confidence intervals) will be calculated for each sample type to evaluate the clinical performance of the various sampling techniques. We will use CIN1+ as definition of disease but analyses will also be performed for more stringent definitions, e.g. CIN2+ or CIN3/cancer.
Detailed description
After the discovery that Human Papillomavirus (HPV) infection is the necessary cause of cervical cancer there have been much interest in the introduction of novel screening strategies involving HPV DNA testing [1]. HPV DNA testing was shown to have higher sensitivity in detecting cervical cancer and its precursors and greater reproducibility than Papanicolaou (Pap) cytology screening and has been therefore proposed as the primary screening method for the future. In high-income countries, cases of cervical cancer continue to develop among unscreened and under-screened women [2]. Factors discouraging women from attending routine screening include fear of pain or discomfort, lack of time or perceived inconvenience, cultural or religious concerns, and poor socioeconomic status [3]. For a screening program to be effective high coverage is essential and thus attendance is a critical requirement.
Because of the high sensitivity of molecular HPV testing to detect cervical cancer precursors there is great potential for screening coverage to be increased by inviting non-attendant to provide self-collected vaginal samples. Providing these women with a simple, convenient, and inexpensive means of self-testing may improve cervical screening participation [3]. Self-sampling is also an attractive approach to assist screening in poor countries, which typically do not have structured cervical cancer screening programs while having to bear the greatest burden of cervical cancer morbidity and mortality [4]. Self-sampling can also enhance the value of post-HPV vaccination surveillance by allowing a more efficient monitoring of HPV type distribution in populations. Finally, self-sampling represents a good research tool to assist prospective studies of genital HPV infection and natural history of cervical neoplasia.
Specifically for cervical cancer screening, it has been shown that self-collected cervicovaginal specimens from women who received proper instruction for collecting them yield HPV test results that are comparable to those in specimens collected by physicians [5-8]. Women also prefer self-sampling relative to clinician-provided samples, provided that they can be assured that they are told how to properly collect the sample [8, 9]. Although there is conceivably some loss of sensitivity and specificity in screening for cervical cancer in a specimen that is not directly collected from the ecto- and endo-cervix the overall accuracy of the HPV testing results (to identify presence of cervical precancerous lesions) is still superior to that of physician-collected Pap smears. Therefore, replacing a more anatomically-correct specimen (the one collected with direct visualization of the cervix by a primary healthcare provider) with one collected from the vagina (and thus diluted with exfoliated cells from a wider epithelial surface area) is compensated by the high sensitivity of the molecular screening approach [6, 10, 11]. Performance of screening seems also to be unaffected by storage and transport of the self-sample swabs, irrespective of whether they have been kept dry or transferred and resuspended into a liquid transport medium [10, 12].
A critical feature in enhancing women's acceptance and adherence with the self-sampling approach for cervical cancer screening and HPV surveillance studies is the convenience of the device used for collection. Dacron and polyester swabs are simple, common, and inexpensive. However, they are inconvenient and not isolated within a sheath that prevents contact of the sampling area with mucosal surfaces in the labia and vaginal opening. Ideally, sampling devices should be anatomically correct to facilitate insertion and the sampling surface that will retain the exfoliated cells should be protected from contact with the labia and lower vaginal mucosa while the device is inserted, with the objective of sampling cells that are mostly from the cervix and upper vaginal area.
HPV DNA testing using self-collected cervicovaginal specimens represents a promising strategy to increase cervical screening participation and thus reduce rates of cervical cancer in countries with established cervical screening programs. Furthermore, this approach can also greatly improve the coverage and quality of cervical cancer screening in developing countries, as well as in remote regions in developed countries, e.g., aboriginal populations in Northern Quebec and in First Nations territories. Facilitating and improving uptake of cervical cancer screening would save lives, reduce costs of treating invasive cancer and potentially reduce inequalities in avoidable mortality caused from cervical cancer.
(full protocol available upon request)
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Screening
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Double blind (care provider, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Eve Medical self-collection system© | Experimental | Device: Eve Medical self-collection system©Device: Self-sampling swab from Eve Medical for collection of vaginal cells. |
| cobas® PCR Female swab self-sampling | Placebo comparator | Device: cobas® PCR Female swab self-samplingDevice: Regular polyester swab for collection of vaginal cells. |
| Physician-collected sampling | Placebo comparator | Procedure: Physician-collected samplingRoutine colposcopy sample collected by a physician. |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Women of all ages are eligible to the study if they have been referred to the participating colposcopy clinic because of an abnormal Pap test at the level of an atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse squamous or glandular abnormality (i.e., ASCUS+) or an abnormal co-test (ASCUS+ and HPV-positive) result.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- none
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Eve Medical self-collection system©Also: HerSwabTMThe Eve collection system is a plastic device not much bigger than a tampon that is inserted in the vaginal cavity. A silicone brush is then swiped around the vagina to scrape a few vaginal cells for cervical cancer screening. | Device | Eve Medical self-collection system© |
| cobas® PCR Female swab self-samplingAlso: Long swabRegular polyester swab for collection of vaginal cells. | Device | cobas® PCR Female swab self-sampling |
| Physician-collected samplingRoutine colposcopy sample collected by a physician. | Procedure or surgery | Physician-collected sampling |
Primary outcome
Differences by comparison groups in detection of histologically confirmed Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia grade 1 or worse (CIN1+)
Time frame: Cross-Sectional (1 year-period to accrue patients)
Diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals, and predictive values will be determined for each sample type to evaluate the clinical performance of the various sampling techniques. The investigators hypothesize that the Eve sample will yield sensitivity and specificity results that are no worse than those with the physician-collected sample, while providing better or equivalent results than those with the self-sample based on the Cobas® PCR Female swab.
1 secondary outcome
Patient satisfaction and experience using the self-sampling devices
Time frame: Cross-Sectional (1 year-period)
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 17 Aug 2016.
Related trials for Cervical Cancer
Not yet recruiting
Remote Robotic Surgery for Gynecologic Cancer: A Safety and Effectiveness Study
Endometrial Cancer, Cervical Cancer (Early Detection)
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Clinical Audit of Cervical Cytology Services in an Early Cancer Detection Unit
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
Active, not recruiting
Addressing Stigma in Screening and Diagnostic Delay for Cervical Cancer
Cervical Cancer Screening
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
Targeted Therapy Directed by Genetic Testing in Treating Patients With Advanced Refractory Solid Tumors, Lymphomas, or Multiple Myeloma (The MATCH Screening Trial)
Advanced Lymphoma, Advanced Malignant Solid Neoplasm
RecruitingPhase 2
A Study of HER3-DXd in Subjects With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Solid Tumors
Advanced Solid Tumor, Melanoma
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Eduardo Franco, DrPH principal investigator
McGill University
Mariam El-Zein, PhD study director
McGill University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Eve Medical self-collection system©, cobas® PCR Female swab self-sampling and Physician-collected sampling in people with Cervical Cancer and Intraepithelial Neoplasia, run by McGill University at 1 site in Canada.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 17 Aug 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Differences by comparison groups in detection of histologically confirmed Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia grade 1 or worse (CIN1+) (time frame: Cross-Sectional (1 year-period to accrue patients)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 17 Aug 2016; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 28 Oct 2026.