Hubei, China — February 6, 2026 — A remarkably simple test—using menstrual blood collected on a sanitary pad—shows promise as a highly accurate and convenient way to screen for cervical cancer, according to new research. Could this be the key to boosting screening rates and saving lives?
Period Power: New Test Offers Non-Invasive Cancer Screening
Table of Contents
Researchers have developed a method to detect cervical cancer indicators in menstrual blood, potentially offering a more accessible alternative to traditional screening.
- A sanitary pad with a special strip can detect human papillomavirus (HPV), a major cause of cervical cancer.
- The test showed 94.7% sensitivity in detecting CIN2, a precursor to cancer, comparable to clinician-collected samples.
- This method could overcome barriers to traditional screening, like discomfort or lack of access.
- The study involved over 3,000 women in China between 2021 and 2025.
Currently, cervical cancer screening typically involves a clinician collecting a sample with a brush inserted into the vagina. While effective, participation rates remain stubbornly low, leaving millions vulnerable. This new approach aims to change that by bringing the screening to people, in a way that feels less intrusive.
How Does It Work?
Researchers in Hubei, China, compared the accuracy of menstrual blood samples—collected using a standard sanitary pad with an integrated sample strip—to samples collected by clinicians for detecting cervical cell abnormalities, known as CIN2 and CIN3, which often require treatment. The findings, published in the BMJ medical journal, were based on data from 3,068 women aged 20 to 54 with regular menstrual cycles, enrolled between 2021 and 2025.
Each participant provided three samples: one from menstrual blood collected on a pad, one collected by a clinician, and a third processed in a lab by a health worker. Researchers then evaluated the test’s sensitivity—its ability to correctly identify those with the disease—and specificity—its ability to correctly identify those without.
A: The menstrual blood test demonstrated a sensitivity of 94.7% for detecting CIN2, nearly matching the 92.1% sensitivity of samples collected by a clinician. Specificity was also comparable, and referrals for further testing were consistent between the two methods.
The pad-collected samples showed a sensitivity of 94.7% for detecting CIN2, a result comparable to the 92.1% sensitivity of clinician-collected samples. While the pad’s specificity was slightly lower, the probability of a true negative result was identical for both collection methods. Importantly, the need for follow-up tests was also similar.
“The results of this large-scale, community-based study show the utility of using minipad-collected menstrual blood for HPV testing as a standardised, non-invasive alternative or replacement for cervical cancer screening,” the study authors concluded.
What Do Experts Say?
Sophie Brooks, a health information manager, said it was encouraging to see research exploring new ways to make cervical screening more accessible. “Testing menstrual blood for HPV is an interesting, non-invasive approach, and could potentially offer another option in the future.”
However, Brooks cautioned that it’s still early days. Larger and more diverse trials are needed to determine how well the test performs across different populations and whether it can seamlessly integrate into existing screening programs.
Xavier Bosch, a researcher not involved in the study, described the work as “very pioneering” but emphasized that it remains in the research phase. “At the moment, its clinical applications are unclear.”
Athena Lamnisos, the chief executive of a gynaecological cancer charity, welcomed the findings, stating, “It’s exciting to see new, more acceptable and potentially gentler ways of offering what could be a life-saving test to prevent cervical cancer from developing.”
Lamnisos also noted that the test wouldn’t be suitable for everyone, particularly women who have gone through menopause.
“People have different barriers and concerns about screening, so being able to offer a choice of different methods could be very positive for some who are eligible for screening but don’t currently attend,” she said.
