Abstract
Background Anal cancer disproportionately affects men who have sex with men (MSM) living with HIV. High-resolution anoscopy (HRA) is an in-clinic procedure to detect precancerous anal lesions and cancer, yet prospective data on factors associated with HRA attendance are lacking. We examined whether anal HPV sampling at home versus in a clinic impacts HRA uptake and assessed HRA acceptability.
Method MSM and trans persons 25 years and older were randomized to home-based self-sampling or clinical sampling. All were asked to attend in-clinic HRA one year later. We regressed HRA attendance on study arm using multivariable Poisson regression and assessed HRA acceptability using χ2 tests.
Results 62.8% of 196 participants who engaged in screening attended HRA. Although not significant (p=0.13), a higher proportion of participants who engaged in clinic-based screening attended HRA (68.5%) compared to home-based participants (57.9%). Overall, HRA uptake was higher among participants with anal cytology history (aRR 1.44, 95% CI 1.11 – 1.87) and lower among participants preferring versatile anal sex position versus insertive (aRR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53 – 0.91), but did not differ by race or HIV serostatus. In the clinic arm, persons living with HIV had lower HRA attendance (42.9%) versus HIV-negative participants (73.3%) (p=0.02) and Black non-Hispanic participants had lower HRA attendance (41.7%) than White non-Hispanic participants (73.1%), (p=0.04); however, no differences in attendance by race or HIV status were observed in the home arm.
Conclusions HRA uptake differed significantly by race and HIV status in the clinic arm but not the home arm.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
NCT03489707
Funding Statement
This work was supported by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health [R01CA215403 to AGN] and Clinical and Translational Science Institute grant support [2UL1TR001436]. These funding entities had no involvement in the design, collection, analysis, or interpretation of data, writing of this report, or decision to submit this research for publication. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. COPAN Italia S.p.A. donated some of the swabs used in this study.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Informed consent was obtained from all study participants and study activities were approved by the Medical College of Wisconsin Human Research Protections Committee (protocol #PRO00032999).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
