Rae Duff, National Council of Para 17, Table 1 (p3) Women of NZ Ailsa Stewart Health Standing Committee Howard Clentworth CCDHB The transition to primary HPV screening should be reviewed within 5 years. The present tests use HPV DNA Gynaecology Dept. which is not a particularly good surrogate for viral activity. The program should encourage and participate into research to interrogate whether HPV RNA is a better surrogate marker of disease and to trials of other markers of HPV activity. I see no vision in these guidelines about the obvious refining of what is measured. The final comment about AIS as the only Australasian terminology is simply inaccurate and relies on a single reference which is seriously flawed. Mary Webster CHL Definitely look at a study of self-sampling HPV prior to transition to Primary HPV. Dr Margaret Sage presentation at Scientific Day for cervical disease’ Starting slide 26 - HPV ‘Screening testing and cytology for women with invasive cancer and slide 27 - Selective co-testing will be used for women who is an improvement on earlier guidelines …’ From the same event Dr Gary Fentiman regarding Safety of change slide 10 Safety monitoring will be – ongoing during transition. evidence/info to consider: The risks of HPV screening Pap + HPV Together –Alone Evidence from the Study publication 6.0% CIN 3+ missed by 8.7% CIN3+ missed by Pap-alone 1.2% CIN3+ missed by Pap+HPV together Lynda Williams AWHC The AWHC supports co-testing as an initial transition pathway step. For recommendations 15.01 and 15.02 and 15.07 we want to see co-testing on all samples until the evidence from real world screening programmes confirms that HPV testing is both safe and is the better test.
Rae Duff, Ailsa Stewart National Council of Women of NZ Health Standing Committee Para 17, Table 1 (p3) Howard Clentworth CCDHB Gynaecology Dept. The transition to primary HPV screening should be reviewed within 5 years. The present tests use HPV DNA which is not a particularly good surrogate for viral activity. The program should encourage and participate into research to interrogate whether HPV RNA is a better surrogate marker of disease and to trials of other markers of HPV activity. I see no vision in these guidelines about the obvious refining of what is measured. The final comment about AIS as the only Australasian terminology is simply inaccurate and relies on a single reference which is seriously flawed. Mary Webster CHL Definitely look at a study of self-sampling HPV prior to transition to Primary HPV. Dr Margaret Sage presentation at Scientific Day ‘Screening for cervical disease’ Starting slide 26 - HPV testing and cytology for women with invasive cancer and slide 27 - Selective co-testing will be used for women who …’ is an improvement on earlier guidelines From the same event Dr Gary Fentiman regarding Safety of change slide – 10 Safety monitoring will be ongoing during transition. evidence/info to consider: The risks of HPV –Alone screening Pap + HPV Together Evidence from the Study publication 6.0% CIN 3+ missed by 8.7% CIN3+ missed by Pap-alone 1.2% CIN3+ missed by Pap+HPV together Lynda Williams AWHC The AWHC supports co-testing as an initial transition pathway step. For recommendations 15.01 and 15.02 and 15.07 we want to see co-testing on all samples until the evidence from real world screening programmes confirms that HPV testing is both safe and is the better test.
consultation-feedback-uupdated-clinical-practice-guidelines-cervical-screening-nz-aug17.docx