Objective: Human papillomavirus (HPV) assays are likely to be used with inc
reasing frequency in clinical management of women with abnormal Papanicolao
u smears and in cervical cancer screening. Our objective was to simplify th
e method of collection of female genital tract specimens. The utility of va
ginal dry swabs for HPV diagnosis was evaluated.
Methods: Specimens for cytology and for HPV identification were collected b
y a clinician from 189 female soldiers. attending a military clinic. Three
methods of specimen collection for HPV identification were compared: a vagi
nal dry swab (v-DRY), and vaginal and cervical swabs placed into specimen t
ransport medium (v-STM and c-STM). Swabs were shipped to a STD laboratory f
or processing. Specific HPV types were identified by a consensus primer bas
ed PCR based method. Results from 165 women were evaluable.
Results: HPV prevalence by the three methods was similar and ranged from 44
.8% to 50.9%. 53 (32.1%) women were HPV positive and 60 (36.4%) women were
HPV negative by all three collection methods. With respect to the risk cate
gories of specific HPV types, there was greater agreement between the resul
ts from the two vaginal (v-DRY and v-STM) samples (kappa values of 0.69-0.8
1) than between the cervical (c-STM) and either of the vaginal samples (kap
pa values of 0.37-0.55). The HPV yield from c-STM was somewhat greater than
that from the vaginal specimens but the correlation between cytological ab
normalities and HPV was high for all three methods.
Conclusion. A dry vaginal swab may be an acceptable method of specimen coll
ection for HPV diagnosis.