Systematic reviews have concluded that hrHPV DNA testing using target-amplification tests is as accurate on vaginal self-samples as on clinician-taken specimens for the detection of cervical precancer. However, insufficient evidence is available for specific HPV assay/self-sample device combinations. The VALHUDES protocol is designed as a diagnostic test accuracy study that aims to compare the clinical sensitivity and specificity of particular hrHPV assay(s) on vaginal self-samples and first-void-urine, collected in agreement with standardized protocols, with hrHPV testing on matched clinician-taken samples. Five hundred enrolled women referred to a colposcopy clinic are invited to collect a first-void urine sample and one or more vaginal self-samples with particular devices before collection of a cervical sample by a clinician. Sample sets are subsequently analysed in a laboratory accredited for HPV testing. Disease verification for all enrolled patients is provided by colposcopy combined with histological assessment of biopsies. A first VALHUDES study has started in Belgium in December 2017 with enrolment from four colposcopy centres. The following assays are foreseen to be evaluated: RealTime High Risk HPV assay (Abbott), cobas-4800 and -6800 (Roche), Onclarity (BD), Xpert HPV (Cepheid) and Anyplex II HPV HR (Seegene). Given empirical evidence that the relative accuracy of HPV-testing on self- vs clinician-samples is robust across clinical settings, the VALHUDES protocol offers a framework for validation of HPV assay/self-sample device combinations that can be translated to a primary screening setting.

The aim of this review was to explore the status of urine sampling as a liquid biopsy for noninvasive cancer research by reviewing used preanalytical parameters and protocols. We searched two main health sciences databases, PubMed and Web of Science. From all eligible publications (2010‐2022), information was extracted regarding: (a) study population characteristics, (b) cancer type, (c) urine preanalytics, (d) analyte class, (e) isolation method, (f) detection method, (g) comparator used, (h) biomarker type, (i) conclusion and (j) sensitivity and specificity. The search query identified 7835 records, of which 924 unique publications remained after screening the title, abstract and full text. Our analysis demonstrated that many publications did not report information about the preanalytical parameters of their urine samples, even though several other studies have shown the importance of standardization of sample handling. Interestingly, it was noted that urine is used for many cancer types and not just cancers originating from the urogenital tract. Many different types of relevant analytes have been shown to be found in urine. Additionally, future considerations and recommendations are discussed: (a) the heterogeneous nature of urine, (b) the need for standardized practice protocols and (c) the road toward the clinic. Urine is an emerging liquid biopsy with broad applicability in different analytes and several cancer types. However, standard practice protocols for sample handling and processing would help to elaborate the clinical utility of urine in cancer research, detection and disease monitoring.