Abstract:Recent studies have revealed the impact of human papillomavirus (HPV) infections on the cervicovaginal microbiome; however, few have explored the utility of self-collected specimens (SCS) for microbiome detection, obtained using standardised methods for HPV testing. Here, we present a proof-of-concept analysis utilising Oxford Nanopore sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene in paired samples collected either by the patient using an Evalyn Brush or collected by a physician using liquid-based cytology (LBC). We found no significant differences in the α-diversity estimates between the SCS and LBC samples. Similarly, when analysing β-diversity, we observed a close grouping of paired samples, indicating that both collection methods detected the same microbiome features. The identification of genera and Lactobacillus species in each sample allowed for their classification into community state types (CSTs). Notably, paired samples had the same CST, while HPV-positive and -negative samples belonged to distinct CSTs. As previously described in other studies, HPV-positive samples exhibited heightened bacterial diversity, reduced Lactobacillus abundance, and an increase in genera like Sneathia or Dialister. Altogether, this study showed comparable results between the SCS and LBC samples, underscoring the potential of self-sampling for analysing the microbiome composition in cervicovaginal samples initially collected for HPV testing in the context of cervical cancer screening.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The main problem that this paper attempts to solve is to evaluate the comparability between self - collected specimens (SCS) and physician - collected specimens (LBC) in detecting the cervicovaginal microbiome. Specifically, the study aims to verify whether self - collected specimens can be used to analyze the composition of the cervicovaginal microbiome, especially in cervical cancer screening in the context of HPV testing, by comparing the microbial diversity (α - diversity and β - diversity) in the samples obtained by these two collection methods and their performance in distinguishing HPV - positive and - negative samples. ### Research Background - **High - risk human papillomavirus (HR - HPV) infection**: This is the main cause of the development of cervical cancer. Although most infections will resolve spontaneously, a small number of infections will progress to cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) or cancer. - **Cervical cancer screening**: In recent years, the promotion of organized screening programs and HPV vaccines has significantly reduced the incidence of cervical cancer in high - income countries. HPV testing, as the main method for cervical cancer screening, is more accurate and cost - effective than traditional cervical cytology (Pap smear). - **Self - sampling**: The safety and accessibility of self - sampling methods have increased women's enthusiasm for participating in screening, especially those women who may avoid having samples collected by physicians. ### Research Objectives - **Verify the effectiveness of the self - sampling method**: The study aims to compare the performance of self - sampling and physician - collected samples in detecting the cervicovaginal microbiome through 16S rRNA gene sequencing technology. - **Explore the impact of HPV infection on the microbiome**: The study also explores the differences in the microbiome between HPV - positive and - negative samples, especially the changes in the abundance of Lactobacillus bacteria and the increase in other specific genera. ### Main Findings - **α - diversity and β - diversity analysis**: The study found that there were no significant differences in α - diversity and β - diversity between self - sampling and physician - collected samples, indicating that the two methods are comparable in detecting microbiome characteristics. - **Differences between HPV - positive and - negative samples**: HPV - positive samples showed higher bacterial diversity, a decrease in the abundance of Lactobacillus bacteria, and an increase in the abundance of other genera such as Sneathia and Dialister. - **Community state types (CSTs) classification**: HPV - positive samples mainly belong to CST - III and CST - IV, while HPV - negative samples mainly belong to CST - I and CST - II. ### Conclusions - **Feasibility of self - sampling**: The study shows that the self - sampling method can be effectively used to detect the composition of the cervicovaginal microbiome, and its results are comparable to those of physician - collected samples. - **Future applications**: This finding provides a theoretical basis for using the self - sampling method for microbiome analysis in cervical cancer screening, which helps to improve the convenience and participation of screening. ### Methods - **Sample collection**: A total of 22 pairs of cervicovaginal samples were collected in the study, and each pair of samples included a self - sampling and a physician - collected sample. - **DNA extraction and sequencing**: DNA was extracted using the Maxwell® 16 LEV Blood DNA Kit, and the 16S rRNA gene was sequenced by Oxford Nanopore sequencing technology. - **Data analysis**: Classification was carried out using Kraken2, α - diversity and β - diversity analysis was carried out through Phyloseq, and CST classification was carried out using a random forest model. ### Significance - **Clinical applications**: The successful verification of the self - sampling method means that self - sampling samples can be used for microbiome analysis in cervical cancer screening, thereby reducing the need for repeated sampling and improving the efficiency and acceptability of screening. - **Further research**: Future research can expand the sample size and optimize the sequencing protocol to explore in more detail the relationship between specific microbiome compositions and cancer progression.

Comparability of Microbiome Diversity in Self- and Physician-Collected HPV-Positive and HPV-Negative Cervicovaginal Samples

Clinical Significance of Genotyping for Human Papillomavirus (HPV) 16 18/45 Combined with Cytology in Cervical Exfoliated Cells in HPV Oncogenic Mrna-Positive Women

Microbiome markers in HPV-positive and HPV-negative women of reproductive age with ASCUS and SIL determined by V4 region of 16S rRNA gene sequencing

A comparative study of self-collected versus clinician-collected specimens in detecting high-risk HPV infection: a prospective cross-sectional study

Cervical cancer microbiome analysis: comparing HPV 16 and 18 with other HPV types

Simultaneous Detection and Comprehensive Analysis of HPV and Microbiome Status of a Cervical Liquid-Based Cytology Sample Using Nanopore MinION Sequencing

Comparison of two self-sampling methods for human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing among women with high prevalence rates

Evaluation of vaginal self-sampling in combination with MALDI-TOF and SEQ HPV test for cervical cancer screening

Analyzing Cervical Microbiome Composition in HIV-Infected Women with Different HPV Infection Profiles: A Pilot Study in Thailand

An Evaluation of Solid Versus Liquid Transport Media for High-Risk HPV Detection and Cervical Cancer Screening on Self-Collected Specimens

The interplay between HPV, other Sexually Transmissible Infections and genital microbiome on cervical microenvironment (MicroCervixHPV study)

Distinction Between Vaginal and Cervical Microbiota in High-risk Human Papilloma Virus Infected Women in China

Human papillomavirus molecular prevalence in south China and the impact on vaginal microbiome of unvaccinated women

A novel sequencing-based vaginal health assay combining self-sampling, HPV detection and genotyping, STI detection, and vaginal microbiome analysis

Consistency in human papillomavirus type detection between self‐collected vaginal specimens and physician‐sampled cervical specimens

Comparison of the Vaginal Microbiota Diversity of Women with and Without Human Papillomavirus Infection: a Cross-Sectional Study

Leveraging existing 16S rRNA gene surveys to decipher microbial signatures and dysbiosis in cervical carcinogenesis

Improved Sensitivity of Vaginal Self-Collection and High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Testing.

Comparing the Diagnostic Performance of qPCR, ddPCR, and NGS Liquid Biopsies for HPV-Associated Cancers

Good concordance of HPV detection between cervico-vaginal self-samples and general practitioner-collected samples using the Cobas 4800 HPV DNA test

Self-collected and clinician-collected anal swabs show modest agreement for HPV genotyping