Abstract A34: Reactions to plans for a human papillomavirus self-sampling study in Chicago, Illinois: Findings from two community advisory boards

Background: Infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) has been linked to nearly all cervical cancer. Although cervical cancer is preventable with regular screening, many women, especially in rural and low-resource areas, do not receive screening. In Cook County, which includes the city of Chicago, more than 10% of women report never having a Pap smear in their lifetime, which is notably higher than the 6.6% statewide. It is possible that the percentage of women not receiving regular pap screening is one reason why Illinois has rates of invasive cervical cancer (ICC) that are higher than the rest of the United States (9.5 vs. 8.6 persons per 100,000). In Cook County the rates are even higher 10.7/100,000 for all races and 15.8/100,000 for African Americans, with death rates following the same trend. ICC is a cancer of disparities, with a higher risk among poor, ruraldwelling, and African American, Hispanic and Native American women. For women disenfranchised from the medical community and who refuse traditional Pap smear screening, a self-administered cervico-vaginal sample (self-sampling) for HPV may aid in the identification of women at high-risk for cervical cancer. Objective: We are conducting a study of a cervico-vaginal self-sampling screening for high-risk women living in a medically underserved community of Chicago. The first step toward achieving this goal was to collect input from the African American women living in the target community. We queried women on appropriate methods for recruitment and plans for implementing this community based HPV self-sampling study. Methods: African American women who were between the ages of 30–50 years and lived in the Austin community of Chicago were recruited for two community advisory board meetings. The first group included women affiliated with the clergy and the second comprised lay community women. The advisory boards met for 2 hours, in separate closed door sessions, where they were asked to review recruitment materials, introduced to the study design and provide both oral and written comments on each. Sessions were taped as board members engaged in conversation and answered directed questions from a facilitator who works in the Austin community. Results: Advisory board members expressed several key themes. Women in the community must feel empowered by the programs slogan for it to be effective. All recruitment materials must be eye catching, women must be able to relate to its contents, and photos need to reflect images of typical community women. Recruitment should include strategies aimed at enrolling a group of women simultaneously. Community women need to feel as if this program is specifically targeting them, “that they belong”. Researchers must be accessible to the community as historical trauma impedes collaborations between the community and Universities, and should employ community members for key outreach roles. Researchers must provide a tangible service to the community and report all findings back to the community in a timely manner. Conclusions: Community advisory board members presented key concerns, and gave community perspectives that otherwise may have been overlooked in the development and implementation of this study. Advisory boards can make important contributions to research seeking to engage and enroll community members.