Cervical Cancer Screening: Comparison of conventional Pap smear test, liquid-based cytology and human papillomavirus testing as stand-alone or co-testing strategies

Supplementary Data

• Supplementary Data (Tables 1-8, Figures 1-3) - Supplementary table 1 shows the sociodemographic characteristics of the 2,627 screened women recruited via population registries including information on previous screening attendance. Supplementary table 2 shows the histopathology result breakdown for each screening test strategy compared. Supplementary table 3 shows cytology, HPV testing and genotyping results of all 19 CIN2+ cases detected in the study. Genotyping results are based on GP5+/6+ PCR-EIA. Supplementary table 4 shows crude estimates of accuracy based on ASC-US+ cytology results (equivalent: Pap IIw+ Munich Nomenclature). Supplementary table 5 shows crude estimates of accuracy based on LSIL+ cytology results (equivalent: Pap IIID+ Munich Nomenclature). Supplementary table 6 shows adjusted estimates of accuracy among women aged {greater than or equal to}35 years for comparison to table 1 in the manuscript. Supplementary table 7 shows adjusted estimates of accuracy when considering only internally conducted colposcopies (study colposcopy). Supplementary table 8 shows adjusted estimates of accuracy when increasing the threshold for positivity (RLU>1) in HC2 HPV testing. Supplementary figure 1 shows relative sensitivity and specificity of screen strategy results when considering CIN3+ as the reference test cut-off. Supplementary figure 2 shows the comparison of false positives in the study population aged {greater than or equal to}30 years to false positives considering women {greater than or equal to}35 years of age for CIN2+ lesions. Supplementary figure 3 shows the comparison of false positives in the study population aged {greater than or equal to}30 years to false positives considering women {greater than or equal to}35 years of age for CIN3+ lesions.