Skip to main content Accessibility help
Hostname: page-component-568f69f84b-ftpnm Total loading time: 0.466 Render date: 2021-09-21T06:44:06.061Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Development of novel home-based tampon sampling for endometrial cancer: findings from community-based focus groups with Black and White women

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2021

Jennifer L. Ridgeway*
Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
Monica L. Albertie
Center for Health Equity and Community Engagement Research, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA
Shantel Williams
Center for Health Equity and Community Engagement Research, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA
Elizabeth Pantoja
Center for Health Equity and Community Engagement Research, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA
Noreen Stephenson
Center for Health Equity and Community Engagement Research, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA
Laura Pacheco-Spann
Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA
Colleen T. Ball
Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA
Carmen Radecki Breitkopf
Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
Jamie N. Bakkum-Gamez
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
Lori Chase
Research Integrator Program, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA
Christopher C. DeStephano
Department of Medical and Surgical Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA
Mark E. Sherman
Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA
Address for correspondence: J. L. Ridgeway, PhD, Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. Email:
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]


Novel endometrial cancer (EC) early-detection approaches may reduce racial disparities in mortality. We conducted six community-based focus groups with White and Black women (N = 57 participants) in February-March 2020 to explore acceptability of a home-based tampon sampling approach for EC. Participants also completed a survey. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Awareness of EC and risk factors was low. Acceptability regarding home sampling was high, but participants expressed concerns about instruction complexity and potential risks. Black women reported lower comfort with tampons. Increasing EC awareness, self-efficacy, and familiarization with tampons would advance prospects for at-home sample collection for EC testing.

Brief Report
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (, which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
© Mayo Clinic, 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Association for Clinical and Translational Science


Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynecologic cancer in the USA [Reference Doll and Winn1]. Among women over 50 with intact uteri, the incidence of EC among non-Hispanic Black women has surpassed that among non-Hispanic White women [Reference Doll and Winn1,Reference Jamison, Noone, Ries, Lee and Edwards2] and their mortality rate is nearly double that of non-Hispanic White women [Reference DeSantis, Miller, Goding Sauer, Jemal and Siegel3]. The prevalence of obesity and diabetes, among the strongest risk factors for EC, is higher for Black women [Reference Hales, Carroll, Fryar and Ogden4,5]. Delays in care seeking, disparities in access, and potential differences in tumor biology are also implicated as causes of racial disparities in mortality [Reference Collins, Holcomb, Chapman-Davis, Khabele and Farley6,Reference Doll, Khor and Odem-Davis7].

Symptom recognition is central to early diagnosis. Natural menopause occurs on average at age 51 years in the USA, but frequent occurrence of episodic bleeding after menopause likely contributes to uncertainties about the definition of post-menopausal bleeding (PMB) associated with EC risk [Reference Astrup and Olivarius Nde8], especially given that 90% of women with PMB do not have EC, with potentially higher frequencies among Black women [Reference Ghoubara, Sundar and Ewies9]. Patients and caregivers may dismiss PMB as a normal variant and delay care seeking [Reference Clarke, Long, Del Mar Morillo, Arbyn, Bakkum-Gamez and Wentzensen10,Reference Doll, Hempstead, Alson, Sage and Lavallee11]. Cost, discomfort, and medical expertise required for diagnostic evaluation may also pose barriers to work-up of PMB [Reference DeStephano, Bakkum-Gamez, Kaunitz, Ridgeway and Sherman12]. Transvaginal sonography, endometrial biopsy, and hysteroscopy produce discomfort and risk of complications, especially among women with severe obesity. Less invasive self-sampling has shown promise for improving cervical cancer screening [Reference Sanner, Wikström, Strand, Lindell and Wilander13,Reference Winer, Lin and Tiro14]. However, acceptability of self-sampling in the context of triaging women with PMB for diagnostic work-up is unknown. Acceptability of tampon collection is also unknown; HPV sampling for cervical cancer is done using other types of self-sampling devices for fluid collection. The success of in-clinic “proof-of-principle” studies using vaginal tampon collection, combined with sensitive and specific molecular testing for EC, suggests that home-based self-collection may have utility in diagnostic work-up of PMB [Reference Bakkum-Gamez, Wentzensen and Maurer15] and it may increase access and early detection [Reference Doll, Hempstead, Alson, Sage and Lavallee11]. However, most new testing approaches for early cancer detection fail when deployed in real-world settings, in part because researchers did not engage potential users to understand feasibility and acceptability [Reference Walter, Thompson and Wellwood16]. We conducted community-based focus groups to explore perceptions of White and Black women, as well as gather formative feedback on a sampling kit designed for use in a pilot study.

Methods and Materials

Setting and Participants

Participants were recruited near Jacksonville, Florida, via flyers in the local academic medical center and through distribution by a local community research advisory group. Eligibility was age 40 years or older and self-report Black or White race. Participants were offered $50 remuneration. This study was reviewed by a community research advisory board and approved by the affiliated Institutional Review Board (IRB# 19-001140).

Data Collection

Members of the study team with experience in qualitative research and community engagement designed and conducted the focus groups. Black and White women were included in separate focus groups in community locations. Women provided oral consent and completed a brief survey about tampon use and attitudes prior to the discussion (Appendix A). Results on questions related to participant characteristics and attitudes are presented here, to provide context for the focus group findings. The semi-structured moderator guide had three parts: awareness of EC and EC risk factors; experience and impressions of tampon use; and feedback on the proposed tampon collection kit. Participants were provided testing kits and instruction sheets for the third part of the discussion. Focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim for analysis. Moderators answered questions but did not present formal education on EC, as the intent of the groups was to understand the experiences and impressions of women without educational intervention.

Data Analysis

We tabulated the frequency and percentage of participants by categorical and ordered survey responses. The sample median and interquartile range were used to describe continuous survey responses. Comparisons between Black and White participants were made using Fisher’s exact test (categorical responses) and Wilcoxon rank sum test (continuous and ordered responses). We used methods of qualitative content analysis, completed by study team members with relevant and complementary social science and medical research backgrounds. Transcripts were reviewed independently, and then researchers met to discuss impressions and develop a coding framework of a priori topics from the interview guide (e.g., knowledge of EC) and inductively derived topics. Transcripts were independently coded by two researchers, and coding differences were discussed and reconciled. Transcripts were entered into qualitative software (NVivo 12.6; QSR International) to facilitate queries for analysis, including exploration of differences between groups.


Six focus groups were held in February and March 2020, three with Black women (N = 31) and three with White women (N = 26). Participant characteristics are presented in Table 1. Compared to White participants, Black participants were younger and reported a lower frequency of ever having used a tampon. More White participants reported being post-menopausal. No participants in either group reported Hispanic ethnicity.

Table 1. Participant characteristics

a Information was not available for 1 participant.

b Wilcoxon rank sum test.

c Fisher exact test.

Participant survey responses on tampon use are summarized in Table 2. Nearly a quarter of all Black participants reported that they had no opinion on tampon attitude questions. Among White participants, 96% agreed or strongly agreed with the statement “Tampons are generally safe to use,” whereas only 60% of Black participants gave these responses. Black participants were also more likely to say that tampons were uncomfortable (26% vs 15% agreed or strongly agreed), and significantly fewer said that they were confident that they could insert a tampon correctly, although a majority in both groups agreed that they could do so.

Table 2. Views on tampon use

a Information was not available for 1 participant.

b Wilcoxon rank sum test.

Qualitative Findings

Qualitative findings are organized in two themes, which are displayed in Table 3 with supporting quotations. Themes represent data from all six focus groups. Potential differences between participants in the Black and White focus groups are highlighted below when the study team agreed that differences were notable.

Table 3. Qualitative findings by theme

EC, endometrial cancer.

Awareness of EC and Perceived Risk

Low awareness of EC and symptoms

Awareness of EC was low in all focus groups, with most women saying they had never heard of EC, although two women reported knowing someone with EC. Participants expected that symptoms would include bloating, heavy bleeding or discharge, and pain with intercourse. In terms of menstruation, women spoke about abnormal cycles most frequently, especially more frequent bleeding than expected for a pre-menopausal woman.

Expected risks related to health history and lifestyle

Reported knowledge of EC risk factors was also low. Suspected risk factors included personal or family history of cancer, heavy bleeding at young age, and history of pregnancy or hormone therapy. Participants in all groups discussed endometriosis when asked about EC familiarly. Several Black participants stated that either they or a contact had the condition, and the similarity of the terms led participants to assume they were somehow related. Women also mentioned behavioral risk factors including smoking and drug use, obesity, having multiple sexual partners, having a “stressed” lifestyle, and not attending regular health care visits. Race and ethnicity were mentioned in two groups as potentially being related to EC, including risk related to delays in seeking care among Black women.

Perspectives on EC Testing Using Tampons

Tampon test acceptability was high but tampon use and perceived risks were considerations

The idea of using a tampon for testing had high acceptability (e.g., minimally invasive and convenient), but personal tampon experience was a primary consideration. Older age was reported as potentially associated with lower acceptability because older or post-menopausal women might experience dryness-related discomfort. Noted risks of tampon use included those related to forgetting about tampon placement. In terms of a tampon-based testing procedure, perceived risks included any chemicals that might be used on the tampon. Some women also noted concern related to DNA-based research, which may carry risks related to confidentiality. Discussion of risk perception was especially prevalent among Black participants, who reported that they talked with other women, including family members, about tampons. These conversations were occasionally a source of myths, including association of tampons and sexual activity.

Self-efficacy was high but instructions need to be simple and procedures clear

Especially among women with experience using tampons, reported self-efficacy (i.e., confidence in ability to complete home testing) was high. Participant review of the pilot kit highlighted opportunities to make the instructions clearer, simpler, and easier to follow, but some women thought the instructions were overwhelming enough that they expressed a preference for in-clinic tampon collection instead, especially in response to instructions dictating a clean environment, a time range of tampon placement (30 min to 2 h), and the need to store the sample at a specified temperature. Participants expressed concern that mistakes would impact the usefulness of the sample or the accuracy of the results.


Risk perception is an important motivator of behaviors [Reference Maddux and Rogers17]. Knowledge of EC risk factors was minimal in this study, including the link with obesity, which is the strongest and most prevalent risk [Reference Hales, Carroll, Fryar and Ogden4]. Although women linked abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) to EC, concerns focused primarily on frequent or heavier bleeding among pre-menopausal women. High prevalence of irregular bleed secondary to leiomyomata among Black women in particular may lead some patients to “normalize PMB,” which, along with stigma discussing bleeding and inadequate efforts to elicit histories of PMB, may delay care seeking [Reference Doll, Khor and Odem-Davis7,Reference Clarke, Long, Del Mar Morillo, Arbyn, Bakkum-Gamez and Wentzensen10]. Furthermore, despite low awareness of EC, this study found relatively high familiarity with endometriosis. Presumed connection between these conditions could serve as a barrier to early detection if women associate lack of an endometriosis diagnosis as indicating lower EC risk. These data strongly suggest the need for education to increase awareness of PMB specifically and EC risk factors more broadly.

Currently, work-up for EC diagnosis involves clinical procedures that may be costly, inconvenient, and, in some cases, risky. The science of home-based testing, combined with sensitive and specific molecular testing for EC, makes home-based testing to triage potential cases with pre-menopausal AUB and PMB a compelling strategy to increase access to care if women find it acceptable. Participants in this study said home-testing might be convenient, but acceptability was associated with personal tampon experience and perceived risk. Tampon use has been found to be lower among Black women than among White women, but the research is limited and has been focused primarily on younger women [Reference Finkelstein and von Eye18,Reference Romo and Berenson19]. Further research is needed on perceptions of tampons and tampon use among a broader population, including women closer to post-menopausal ages, especially considering our finding that women were concerned about vaginal dryness common with older age. Future research could also explore whether women view one-time, short-duration tampon use for sample collection differently than regular, repeated use.

Participants also raised concerns about the complexity of testing instructions and procedures. Improved formatting and visuals may alleviate these concerns, as might videos that demonstrate testing procedures or smartphone apps that monitor tampon insertion time. However, it is notable that the participants—most with high educational attainment—reported that in-clinic tampon testing might be preferable if instructions or procedures were too complex. Instructions may also need to detail benefits and demands of all options and safeguards in place for home sampling accuracy. Our pilot study is currently deploying a test kit, refined based on the findings reported here, to further assess feasibility, including sample stability. Further, this study team has pilot-tested markers for benign endometrial DNA, which can provide information about the quality of samples that tested negative for EC-specific markers.

The strengths of this study include community health advisory board review of study procedures and data collection instruments. Analysis by the multidisciplinary study team enriched interpretation and bolsters credibility of the findings. This study also has limitations. The number of focus groups and participants was suitable for qualitative research on personal experiences. Survey responses provide context for the focus group findings and generate hypotheses for further exploration, but the small number of participants is not suitable for statistical generalizability. Likewise, the use of focus groups with both Black and White women was intended to ensure representation of Black voices and to explore potential differences in attitudes, experiences, and information needs, but findings should not be generalized broadly. These differences should be studied further with larger-scale quantitative methods appropriate for hypothesis testing. Women in this study also had high levels of education and were insured, and none of the participants reported Hispanic ethnicity. Future research is needed to understand the views of women with different levels of education or lack of insurance coverage, as well as to further explore issues of race, ethnicity, and culture. We did not administer a post-focus group survey, so it is not known whether attitudes changed because of the group discussions. Finally, it is important to acknowledge that EC disparities are multi-level and include racial disparities related to factors like clinician bias [Reference Doll20]. Future research should include exploration of health-system barriers that compound EC disparities. This study team is currently establishing a local women’s health advisory board to advance this work.


Education about EC and risk factors, especially PMB, is needed to motivate action related to early detection. Using the tampon as a self-collection testing device may be acceptable, but further effort is needed to address the concerns of Black women.

Supplementary Material

To view supplementary material for this article, please visit


The study team would like to thank the focus group participants and the members of the community advisory board for their contributions to this study.

This research was funded by a grant from Mayo Clinic Office of Women’s Health (M.E.S).


The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.




These authors are co-senior authors.


Doll, KM, Winn, AN. Assessing endometrial cancer risk among US women: long-term trends using hysterectomy-adjusted analysis. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 2019; 221: 318.e311318.e319.10.1016/j.ajog.2019.05.024CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jamison, PM, Noone, AM, Ries, LAG, Lee, NC, Edwards, BK. Trends in endometrial cancer incidence by race and histology with a correction for the prevalence of hysterectomy, SEER 1992 to 2008. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention 2013; 22: 233241.10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-12-0996CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeSantis, CE, Miller, KD, Goding Sauer, A, Jemal, A, Siegel, RL. Cancer statistics for African Americans, 2019. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 2019; 69: 211233.Google ScholarPubMed
Hales, CM, Carroll, MD, Fryar, CD, Ogden, CL. Prevalence of Obesity and Severe Obesity among Adults: United States, 2017–2018. NCHS Data Brief, no 360. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, 2020.Google Scholar
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Diabetes Statistics Report, 2020. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Dept of Health and Human Services. 2020 [refd Mar 29, 2021]. ( Scholar
Collins, Y, Holcomb, K, Chapman-Davis, E, Khabele, D, Farley, JH. Gynecologic cancer disparities: A report from the Health Disparities Taskforce of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology. Gynecologic Oncology 2014; 133: 353361.10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.12.039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doll, KM, Khor, S, Odem-Davis, K, et al. Role of bleeding recognition and evaluation in Black-white disparities in endometrial cancer. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 2018; 219: 593.e591593.e514.10.1016/j.ajog.2018.09.040CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Astrup, K, Olivarius Nde, F. Frequency of spontaneously occurring postmenopausal bleeding in the general population. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2004; 83: 203207.10.1111/j.0001-6349.2004.00400.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ghoubara, A, Sundar, S, Ewies, AAA. Black women with postmenopausal bleeding have lower prevalence of endometrial cancer than other ethnic groups. Climacteric 2019; 22: 632636.10.1080/13697137.2019.1606794CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clarke, MA, Long, BJ, Del Mar Morillo, A, Arbyn, M, Bakkum-Gamez, JN, Wentzensen, N. Association of Endometrial cancer risk with postmenopausal bleeding in women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Internal Medicine 2018; 178: 12101222.10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.2820CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Doll, KM, Hempstead, B, Alson, J, Sage, L, Lavallee, D. Assessment of prediagnostic experiences of Black women with endometrial cancer in the United States. JAMA Network Open 2020; 3: e204954.10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.4954CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeStephano, CC, Bakkum-Gamez, JN, Kaunitz, AM, Ridgeway, JL, Sherman, ME. Intercepting endometrial cancer: Opportunities to expand access using new technology. Cancer Prevention Research 2020; 13: 563568.10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-19-0556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanner, K, Wikström, I, Strand, A, Lindell, M, Wilander, E. Self-sampling of the vaginal fluid at home combined with high-risk HPV testing. British Journal of Cancer 2009; 101: 871874.10.1038/sj.bjc.6605194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winer, RL, Lin, J, Tiro, JA, et al. Effect of mailed human papillomavirus test kits vs usual care reminders on cervical cancer screening uptake, precancer detection, and treatment: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Network Open 2019; 2: e1914729.10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.14729CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bakkum-Gamez, JN, Wentzensen, N, Maurer, MJ, et al. Detection of endometrial cancer via molecular analysis of DNA collected with vaginal tampons. Gynecologic Oncology 2015; 137: 1422.10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.01.552CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walter, FM, Thompson, MJ, Wellwood, I, et al. Evaluating diagnostic strategies for early detection of cancer: the CanTest framework. BMC Cancer 2019; 19: 586.10.1186/s12885-019-5746-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maddux, JE, Rogers, RW. Protection motivation and self-efficacy: a revised theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 1983; 19: 469479.10.1016/0022-1031(83)90023-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkelstein, JW, von Eye, A. Sanitary product use by white, black, and Mexican American women. Public Health Reports 1990; 105: 491496.Google ScholarPubMed
Romo, LF, Berenson, AB. Tampon use in adolescence: differences among European American, African American and Latina women in practices, concerns, and barriers. Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology 2012; 25: 328333.10.1016/j.jpag.2012.06.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Doll, KM. Investigating Black-White disparities in gynecologic oncology: theories, conceptual models, and applications. Gynecologic Oncology 2018; 149: 7883.10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.10.002CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Table 1. Participant characteristics

Figure 1

Table 2. Views on tampon use

Figure 2

Table 3. Qualitative findings by theme

Supplementary material: File

Ridgeway et al. supplementary material

Appendix A
Download Ridgeway et al. supplementary material(File)
File 83 KB
You have Access
Open access

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Development of novel home-based tampon sampling for endometrial cancer: findings from community-based focus groups with Black and White women
Available formats

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Development of novel home-based tampon sampling for endometrial cancer: findings from community-based focus groups with Black and White women
Available formats

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Development of novel home-based tampon sampling for endometrial cancer: findings from community-based focus groups with Black and White women
Available formats

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *