Cervical cancer screening rates in the USA fall behind national targets, requiring innovation to circumvent screening barriers. Cervical cancer screening where human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is performed on vaginal samples collected by the patients themselves (self-sampling) are effective and acceptable, and patient-operated rapid HPV tests (self-testing) are currently under development. It is unclear why there is ambivalence toward HPV self-sampling and self-testing among clinicians, an important stakeholder group. We conducted a mixed convergent quantitative and qualitative study to identify the factors influencing clinicians’ attitudes toward self-sampling and self-testing.

A survey of Midwest clinicians distributed by professional group media and a market research firm between May and November 2021 was analyzed (n = 248) alongside in-depth interviews with Midwest clinicians from professional groups (n = 23). Logistic regression models examined willingness to support self-sampling and self-testing across respondent characteristics.

We report that family practice physicians and those in rural areas were more willing to adopt HPV self-sampling (adjusted OR (aOR) = 3.16 [1.43–6.99]; aOR = 2.17 [1.01–4.68]). Clinician willingness to support self-testing was positively associated with current use of self-testing for other conditions and negatively associated with performing 10 or more monthly cervical cancer screenings (aOR = 2.02 [1.03–3.95], aOR = 0.42 [0.23–0.78]). Qualitative data contextualize how clinical specialty and experience with self-sampling and self-testing for other conditions inform clinician perspectives.

These data suggest clinician populations most accepting of initiatives to implement self-sampling and self-testing for cervical cancer screening and highlight that experience with other forms of self-testing could facilitate more widespread adoption for cervical cancer.

The normal tissue objective (NTO) is a tool used in inverse-planned intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to minimize dose dispersion to surrounding tissues. The current study focuses on the NTO’s impact on RapidArc treatment plans for cervical cancer patients or its role in reducing doses to healthy surrounding tissues.

This study included 11 cervical cancer patients who underwent RapidArc treatment. We assessed plans both with and without the NTO objective by evaluating parameters such as homogeneity, conformity, gradient index (GI), IMRT factor, integral dose and the volume of normal tissues receiving low doses of 40, 30, 20 and 10 Gy. Further, differences between automatic NTO and manual NTO were evaluated using Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

There were no significant differences in the conformity index, homogeneity index, IMRT factor and integral dose between plans with automatic NTO and those with manual NTO RapidArc plans. However, we did observe a clear advantage in using manual NTO for controlling low-dose exposure to normal tissues. The comparisons between automatic and manual NTO resulted in a GI of 3·1 ± 0·3 versus 2·7 ± 0·68 (p = 0·008). Furthermore, we noticed a significant reduction in the volumes receiving low doses (V10, V20, V30 and V40) with the manual NTO settings.

The NTO plays a crucial role in optimizing RapidArc plans for treating cervical cancer. Based on the findings of this study, manual NTO settings of distance from PTV border xstart = 0·5 mm, start dose f0 = 105%, end dose f∞ = an average of 40%, dose fall-off 0·2 mm–1 were optimal. Further research involving a larger sample size and exploration of various NTO parameters is necessary to validate our results.

Intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) is essential in managing locally advanced cervical cancer. Brachytherapy as a modality has the advantage of a higher dose to the tumour with a dose fall off at the periphery as per the inverse square law. The dose per fraction is much higher than external beam radiotherapy. So proper application and dosimetry are of paramount importance to reduce late toxicity.

A retrospective analysis of 69 patients who underwent three ICBT applications of 7 Gray in each fraction was done. The factors under consideration were the type of pain management (spinal anaesthesia (SA) versus conscious sedation (CS)), the initial size of the disease (bulky and non-bulky) and subsequent fractions (first fraction versus third fraction). The dosimetric parameters analysed were the doses received by points A, B and P and that of the critical organs (bladder, rectum and sigmoid colon).

The dose received by critical organs was comparable concerning all the factors under consideration. The dose to point P on the left side was significantly lower in the CS group than in the SA group (p-value = 0·031). Also, the dose to point P on the right side was significantly lower in the third fraction compared with the first fraction (p-value = 0·016).

ICBT under spinal anaesthesia resulted in a higher dose to the pelvic wall. The initial size of the tumour or the subsequent fractions does not significantly affect the dose received by critical organs.

Nodal boost is being increasingly employed to escalate the dose to involved nodes in node-positive cervical cancer. The study aimed to compare the dosimetric differences between sequential boost intensity-modulated radiation therapy (SeB-IMRT) and simultaneous integrated boost IMRT (SIB-IMRT) in terms of target coverage and organs-at-risk (OARs) with special emphasis on the effect of nodal shrinkage and anatomical change of normal tissues during radiotherapy.

Two computed tomography (CT) datasets (of phase I and phase II) of 40 patients of node-positive cervical cancer treated with SeB-IMRT [planning target volume (PTV) 45/25] followed by SeB to residual nodes (PTV 12·6/7) were utilised. SIB-IMRT1 plan consisted of PTV pelvis and para-aortic nodal region (PTV 45/25) and SIB to gross nodes (PTV 55/25). In order to account for the change in nodal and normal tissue topography during treatment, a third plan (SIB-IMRT2) was generated by utilising the SIB-IMRT1 plan for 44 Gy in 20 fractions and reproducing the plan on the second CT dataset for 11 Gy in 5 fractions. Dosimetric parameters of the three plans were compared using the Friedman test with Bonferroni correction.

We observed that the doses to OARs (bowel, rectum and bladder) were significantly higher in SeB-IMRT plan as compared to the SIB-IMRT plans. V40 Gy of bowel for SeB-IMRT, SIB-IMRT1 and SIB-IMRT2 plans were 354·8 cc, 271 cc and 321·8 cc, respectively (p = 0·001), whereas V30 Gy were 687·8 cc, 635·5 cc and 680 cc, respectively (p = 0·001). The target coverage was marginally better in SeB-IMRT plan as compared to SIB-IMRT1 and SIB-IMRT2 plans (V95% = 99·2 versus 97·7 versus 97·9, respectively, p = 0·000)

SIB-IMRT led to better sparing of OARs, especially bowel. However, the magnitude of benefit decreases if the change in nodal and normal tissue topography during radiotherapy is not considered implying the need for frequent image guidance when SIB-IMRT is planned for node-positive cervical cancer.

Self-collection for cervical screening has been available in the Australian National Cervical Screening Program since 2017 and is now available to all people as an option for cervical screening through a practitioner-supported model. Documenting early adopting practitioner experiences with self-collection as a mechanism to engage people in cervical screening is crucial to informing its continuing roll-out and implementation in other health systems.

This study aimed to describe the experiences of practitioners in Victoria, Australia, who used human papillomavirus (HPV)-based self-collection cervical screening during the first 17 months of its availability.

Interviews (n = 18) with practitioners from Victoria, who offered self-collection to their patients between December 2017 and April 2019, analysed using template analysis.

Practitioners were overwhelmingly supportive of self-collection cervical screening because it was acceptable to their patients and addressed patients’ barriers to screening. Practitioners perceived that knowledge and awareness of self-collection were variable among the primary care workforce, with some viewing self-collection to be inferior to clinician-collected screening. Practitioners championed self-collection at an individual level, with the extent of practice-level implementation depending on resourcing. Concerns regarding supporting the follow-up of self-collected HPV positive patients were noted. Other practical barriers included gaining timely, accurate screening histories from the National Cancer Screening Register to assess eligibility. Practitioners’ role surrounded facilitating the choice between screening tests through a patient-centred approach.

Cervical cancer affects survivors’ overall coping. Yet, specifically emotional and behavioral expression patterns among cervical cancer survivors have barely been examined. In addition, no study has focused on survivors’ experiences of sequences related to coping. Understanding these perceptions can help provide a tailored response and improve psycho-social interventions. The aim of this study was to gain a better understanding of the emotional and behavioral motives involved in coping with cervical cancer recovery.

Qualitative interviews were conducted with 15 survivors of cervical cancer (stages I and II), using a semi-structured in-depth questionnaire. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed by three researchers using thematic analysis.

Six main themes emerged: (i) Reasons and benefits for keeping the disease a secret or sharing it with others; (ii) “When you get used to despair, there's also room for hope”: Despair alongside hope; (iii) Self-guilt following the disease, but also knowing how to forgive yourself; (iv) Deep loneliness alongside a significant need for support; (v) Finding the way from passivity to activity; and (vi) When meaning in life is missing, and the importance of meaning when it is present. There was a balance between negative emotions and behaviors (despair, confidentiality, guilt, loneliness, passivity, lack of meaning) and positive emotions and behaviors (hope, openness, forgiveness, significant support, activity, meaning).

The study revealed that in some cases cervical cancer coping during the recovery period moves across sequences. The women's narratives portray past difficulties as the reason for present psychological health, and their experience of a healthy present is intensified by their past difficulties. Implications for practice are discussed.

Cervical cancer is known to affect survivors’ intimate relationships, as well as their communication and coping. Yet little is known about the perspectives of these survivors on their intimate relationships in the context of their needs during and after medical treatment. Additionally, only a few studies have focused on survivors’ perceived needs or on existing psychosexual support. Understanding these perceptions can help provide a tailored response and improve dyadic interventions. The aim of this study was to examine cervical cancer survivors’ perspectives on their intimate relationships during and after their treatment.

The present study adopted a qualitative-phenomenological approach. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 survivors of cervical cancer between the ages of 38 and 44 who were diagnosed at stages I–II and were treated with radiotherapy or chemo-radiotherapy and surgery. Data collection continued until saturation of concepts was reached. The results underwent thematic analysis.

Analysis of the findings revealed two key themes: (1) Together and apart in the shadow of cervical cancer. This theme focuses on the recovery period as a potential opportunity for changing and improving the couple relationship, such that men no longer withdraw but rather provide their partners with needed support and encouragement. (2) Changes in sexual life and couple intimacy. This theme focuses on changes in sexual relations, which have become a burden, painful, and something to avoid.

The study provides a comprehensive picture of intimate relationships during and after cervical cancer treatment and highlights the women's needs and desires for support from their intimate partners. The discussion notes that oncology providers can better facilitate supportiveness on the part of cervical cancer partners by offering better couple-oriented education and interventions to promote couple communication.