Diagnostic accuracy of menstrual blood for human papillomavirus detection in cervical cancer screening: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Paudel & Sah
The finding, in our words
A systematic review of seven studies showed that high-risk HPV testing using self-collected menstrual blood achieved a pooled sensitivity of 0.86 and specificity of 0.90 compared with clinician-collected cervical samples. The results demonstrate that menstrual blood self-collection provides high diagnostic performance as a non-invasive screening alternative.
A paraphrase to the Library’s standard, never the abstract. The source is one link away and is always the authority.
This review summarises how emerging HPV detection methods including CRISPR/Cas systems, droplet digital PCR and isothermal amplification, combined with self-collected vaginal swabs and liquid biopsy from urine or blood, could improve screening acceptability and enable point-of-care testing compared with conventional approaches that require invasive sampling and centralised laboratory infrastructure.
Shi et al., Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · source ↗
This review found saliva comparable to blood and urine for detecting viral genetic material and antibodies, supporting patient-centric monitoring and decentralised surveillance. The authors state that standardised protocols and further validation are required for routine clinical use.
First-void urine is established as a reliable self-collected specimen for human papillomavirus screening, triage, and post-vaccination surveillance. The use of specialised collection devices and advanced molecular assays supports the integration of non-invasive sampling into routine cervical cancer prevention strategies.
Poljak et al., Journal of clinical microbiology · source ↗
In AML and CLL, 91% of VAMS venetoclax results fell within 20% of plasma after individualised haematocrit correction; in home sampling, 18 of 21 patients self-sampled independently and 76% of returned samples were analysable, which shows home microsampling is workable, though the authors ask for multicentre validation.
Levens et al., Clinical Pharmacokinetics (paywalled) · source ↗
This meta-analysis found that HPV testing using self-collected vaginal and urine samples showed sensitivities of 88.6% and 81% for detecting cervical precancer. Using a standardised device for first-void urine increased sensitivity to 86.6%, supporting decentralised patient-centric screening, though data on specificity and specific commercial devices were not consistently reported.
Hsiao et al., The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research (paywalled) · source ↗