The absolute risk of cervical abnormalities in high-risk human papillomavirus-positive, cytologically normal women over a 10-year period

In spite of the success of cervical cytology as a cancer-screening tool, it has important limitations, and human papillomavirus (HPV) testing may be valuable in future screening. The majority of women in screened populations, who test HPV positive, will have a concurrent normal smear, and we need more information about the risk for subsequent high-grade cervical lesions in these women. We examined 8,656 younger women (22-32 years old) and 1,578 older women (40-50 years old) who were followed for development of cervical neoplasia (cytology and/or histology) through the Danish Pathology Data Bank. We estimated the proportion of women developing cervical lesions of different types before a given time point as a function of time. Among women with normal cytology and positive high-risk Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) test, 17.7% and 24.5% of younger and older women, respectively, had a subsequent abnormal Pap smear within 5 years. The risk of CIN3 or cancer within 10 years among younger women with positive HC2 test was 13.6% (10.9-16.2) and 21.2% (2.7-36.1) among older women. An analysis among younger women also being HC2-positive 2 years before baseline showed a subsequent 10-year risk of > or =CIN3 of 18% (14.6-21.5). Among older women where HPV may be added to general screening, the estimated absolute risk of > or =CIN3 in HC2-positive women was more than 20% within 10 years. These results indicate that even a single positive HPV test in cytologically negative women is substantially predictive of high-grade CIN and suggest that HC2 testing can help stratify women into different risk categories.     

Human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervical cancer screening in low-resource settings

BACKGROUND: In many low-resource settings, there are barriers to cytologic screening for cervical cancer. This study evaluates human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing as an alternative screening method. METHODS: Cervical samples from 2944 previously unscreened South African women aged 35-65 years were tested for high-risk types of HPV with the use of the Hybrid Capture I (HCI) assay. Women also had a Pap smear, direct visual inspection of the cervix, and Cervicography(TM). Women positive on any screening test were referred for colposcopy. Samples from women with biopsy-confirmed, low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (SILs) (n = 95), high-grade SILs (n = 74), or invasive cervical cancer (n = 12) and a random sample of women with no cervical disease (n = 243) were retested for HPV DNA with the use of the more sensitive Hybrid Capture II (HCII) assay. All P values are two-sided. RESULTS: High-risk HPV DNA was detected in 73.3% and 88.4% of 86 women with high-grade SIL or invasive cancer and in 12.2% of 2680 and 18.1% of 243 women without evidence of cervical disease, with the use of the HCI and HCII assays, respectively. HPV DNA testing with the HCII assay was more sensitive than cytology for detecting high-grade SIL and invasive cancer (McNemar's test, P =.04), and testing with the HCI assay was of equivalent sensitivity (P =.61). Cytology had a statistically significantly better specificity (96.8%) than either the HCI assay (87.8%) or the HCII assay (81.9%) (P<.01). Receiver operating characteristic curves identified test cutoff values that allow HPV DNA testing to identify 57% of women with high-grade SIL or cancer, while classifying less than 5% of women with no cervical disease as HPV DNA positive. CONCLUSIONS: HPV DNA testing has a sensitivity equivalent to, or better than, that of cytology. Since HPV DNA testing programs may be easier to implement than cytologic screening, HPV testing should be considered for primary cervical cancer screening in low-resource settings.     

Human papillomavirus type-specific 18-month risk of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in women with a normal or borderline/mildly dyskaryotic smear.

INTRODUCTION: High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) DNA testing is an increasingly used instrument in cervical cancer prevention along cervical cytology. The inclusion of hrHPV testing in cervical screening requires efficient management as many hrHPV infections are transient. We investigated the potential value of hrHPV genotyping in normal and borderline/mildly dyskaryotic (BMD) smears. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From a screening population of 44,102 women in the Netherlands, we included hrHPV-positive women with a normal or BMD smear. We assessed the type-specific 18-month risk of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). RESULTS: In hrHPV-positive women, 18-month risk of CIN grade 3 or invasive cancer (> or =CIN3) was 6% [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 4-9] after normal cytology and 20% (95% CI, 16-25) after BMD. If positive for HPV16, > or =CIN3 risks were 14% (95% CI, 9-21) and 37% (95% CI, 28-48), respectively. In the subset of hrHPV-positive women without HPV16, HPV18 was associated with an increased risk of high-grade CIN after normal cytology and HPV31 and HPV33 were associated with an increased risk, particularly after BMD. HPV16 and HPV18 were also associated with an increased risk of high-grade CIN in women with an hrHPV-positive normal baseline smear and a repeat normal smear at 6 months. DISCUSSION: HrHPV-positive women without type 16, 18, 31, or 33 had a relatively low risk of high-grade CIN. Among women with baseline normal cytology and among women with a baseline and repeat normal smear, HPV16/18-positive women showed an increased risk of high-grade CIN. This warrants more aggressive management of HPV16/18-positive women compared with other hrHPV-positive women.     

Risk of high-grade cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia based on cytology and high-risk HPV testing at baseline and at 6-months

Adding a test for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) to cytological screening enhances the detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (>or=CIN2), but data are required that enable long-term evaluation of screening. We investigated the >or=CIN2 risk for women participating in population-based screening as a function of hrHPV and cytology testing results at baseline and at 6 months. We included 2,193 women aged 30-60 years participating in a population-based screening trial who received colposcopy or a repeat testing advice at baseline. The main endpoint was histologically confirmed >or=CIN2 diagnosed within 36 months. hrHPV testing was more sensitive than cytology for >or=CIN2 (relative sensitivity 1.4, 95%CI: 1.3-1.5; absolute sensitivity 94.1 and 68.0%, respectively). The 18-month >or=CIN2 risks in women with a hrHPV-positive smear and in women with abnormal cytology were similar (relative risk 0.9, 95%CI: 0.8-1.1). Women with HPV16 and/or HPV18 had a higher >or=CIN2 risk than other hrHPV-positive women irrespective of the cytological grade. Repeat testing showed that both cytological regression and viral clearance were strongly associated with a decrease in >or=CIN2 risk. Notably, women who had a double negative repeat test at 6 months had a >or=CIN2 risk of only 0.2% (95%CI: 0.0-1.1) and hrHPV-negative women with baseline borderline or mild dyskaryosis and normal cytology at 6 months had a >or=CIN2 risk of 0% (95%CI: 0.0-0.8). Using hrHPV and/or cytology testing, risk of >or=CIN2 can be assessed more accurately by repeat testing than single visit testing. Hence, when hrHPV testing is implemented, patient management with repeat testing is a promising strategy to control the number of referrals for colposcopy.     

Long-term follow-up of cervical abnormalities among women screened by HPV testing and cytology-Results from the Hammersmith study

Several studies have shown that HPV testing is substantially more sensitive than cytology for primary cervical screening. However, less data exist concerning the duration of protection afforded by a negative HPV test compared to a normal cytological outcome. Here we report the long-term findings from the Hammersmith study in women aged 35 or more. HPV testing by Hybrid Capture II was performed on all available samples from the baseline screening visit. Passive surveillance of subsequent cytology screening results for the 2,982 women in the study was undertaken using a national registry. Histological outcomes were sought for all women with abnormal smears. The primary outcome was duration of protection against histologically confirmed CIN2+ afforded by a negative HPV test compared to normal cytology. 2,516 women had at least one further smear at least 1 year after entry and 20 new cases of CIN2+ were identified during a median follow-up of 6.4 years. Including disease identified at baseline, the risk of developing CIN2+ at 1, 5 and 9 years after a normal cytology was 0.33%, 0.83% and 2.20% respectively whereas it was 0.19%, 0.42% and 1.88% after a negative HPV test. HPV testing offered excellent protection from CIN2+ for at least 6 years after a negative test, whereas the protection from cytology began to wane after about 3 years. Substantially more CIN2+ lesions were found in the follow-up period in those initially HPV positive compared to those HPV negative (HR = 6.52, p = 0.001), whereas there was little difference according to initial cytology (HR = 1.64, p = 0.51).     

Inclusion of HPV testing in routine cervical cancer screening for women above 29 years in Germany: results for 8466 patients

In a prospective cohort study 8466 women attending routine cervical cancer screening were recruited. Colposcopy was performed on women with any degree of atypia on cytology and/or a positive high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV)-DNA test (HC2; Hybrid Capture 2((c))), and for a randomly selected sample of 3.4% women with negative findings on both. Quality control included reviews of cytology, histology, colposcopy images and retesting of samples with polymerase chain reaction. Test diagnostic performances were based on 7908 women who had complete baseline and follow-up results. Routine histology identified 86 women with high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+), which was confirmed by review histology in only 46 cases. Sensitivity of routine cytology for the detection of CIN2+ was 43.5%, with a specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) of 98.0, 11.4 and 99.7%, respectively. Sensitivity of the HC2 test for the detection of CIN2+ was 97.8%, with a specificity, PPV and NPV, of 95.3, 10.9 and 100%, respectively. No high-grade neoplasia was detected in the randomly selected control group. A negative HPV-test result, even in combination with a positive Papanicolaou (Pap) result, virtually excluded any risk of underlying high-grade disease, but this was not the case for a negative Pap result. These data show that HPV testing is of value for the detection or exclusion of prevalent CIN in a routine cervical cancer-screening setting and could be used for further risk classification of women for follow-up management.     

Test positivity cutoff level of a high risk human papillomavirus test could be increased in routine cervical cancer screening

We present data on test positivity, relative sensitivity, rates of detection and relative specificity for primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing with different cutoff levels for test positivity, in comparison to conventional cytology. In 2003-2004, 18,438 women were screened primarily with Hybrid Capture 2 (HC 2) assay, a test for oncogenic HPV DNA, and 21,446 with conventional cytology within the organised screening programme in Finland. A cytological triage test was performed for the HPV positives. Women with cytology equal to low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) or worse were referred for colposcopy. The relative sensitivity measured as relative risk (RR) of any cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) or cancer was 1.58 for the HPV test at the relative light units (rlu) ratio cutoff 1.00, in comparison to cytology. With the cutoff 3.00, all CIN 2+ lesions were detected. With cutoff 10.00, 2 of the 22 CIN 3+ lesions were missed. Relative specificity for HPV screening for any CIN was 92.6% at cutoff 1.00, 94.6% at cutoff 3.00 and 96.3% at cutoff 10.00. For CIN 3+ specificity estimates for these cutoffs were 92.1%, 94.1% and 95.8%, respectively. Used for routine screening as the sole test, the HPV test cutoff can be increased from the level recommended for clinical use. With HC 2, the detection rate at rlu ratio cutoff 10.00 is still at the level of high-quality conventional screening. At that level, the false positive rate is reduced by about half and the specificity of the HPV test becomes equal to the average specificity of conventional cytology.     

Triage using HPV-testing in persistent borderline and mildly dyskaryotic smears: proposal for new guidelines

In the Netherlands 2% of cervical smears in the cervical cancer screening program are read as borderline or mildly dyskaryotic cytology (BMD smear). Only in about 10% of these women a high-grade CIN lesion (CIN II-III) is present; therefore referral is for the majority unnecessary. In our study triage with high-risk HPV (hrHPV) testing was used to identify women at risk for development of high-grade CIN lesions after a repeat BMD smear. A "wait-and-see" period was incorporated allowing clearance of HPV and regression of the lesion. Women with a low-grade lesion, irrespective of their HPV status, were monitored at 12 months; women with a high-grade lesion were monitored at 6 and 12 months. Fifty-one of the 105 women (49%) were hrHPV negative at baseline; none of them showed progression of the lesion within the first year of follow-up (NPV 100%). High-grade CIN was present in 1 patient who was HPV negative at baseline (2%); she demonstrated regression after 12 months. Nineteen of the hrHPV positive women (35%) demonstrated a high-grade CIN lesion at baseline and 3 cleared hrHPV after 6 months, with a subsequent regression of CIN. Ten women remained hrHPV positive with persistence of high-grade CIN and were eventually treated. At baseline, 35 hrHPV positive women demonstrated a low-grade lesion, 19 remained hrHPV positive after 12 months and 5 developed high-grade CIN. Sixteen out of the 35 cleared the hrHPV infection without progression of the lesion. In conclusion, triage, using hrHPV testing for women with persistent BMD cytology, can select women who are not at risk for development of high-grade CIN. We recommend return to the screening program without referral for colposcopic examination if hrHPV is absent. For hrHPV positive women, a repeat hrHPV test after another 6 months is suggested. Referral is only required if persistence of hrHPV is established.     

Comparison of human papillomavirus testing strategies for triage of women referred with low-grade cytological abnormalities

AimTo compare triage strategies using different human papillomavirus (HPV) consensus and genotyping tests and a p16^INK4a test.Methods1228 women referred with a borderline or single mildly dyskaryotic smear. Samples were taken at colposcopy using PreservCyt. Tests included Hybrid Capture 2, Abbott RealTime PCR, BD HPV, Cobas 4800, PreTect HPV-Proofer, APTIMA and p16^INK4a. Results were based on the worst histology within 9 months.Results97/1228 (7.9%) women had CIN3+ (203/1228 (17%) CIN2+). HPV testing alone using Hybrid Capture 2, Abbott RealTime PCR, BD HPV, Cobas 4800 or APTIMA had a sensitivity for CIN3+ ranging from 99.0% to 100.0% and specificity for <CIN2 from 23.3% to 34.7%. p16^INK4a had a sensitivity of 86.8% and specificity of 50.7%. PreTect HPV-Proofer had a sensitivity of 85.1% and specificity of 73.2%. Testing for HPV type 16 only had sensitivities ranging from 66.0% to 75.5% and specificities from 81.3% to 87.6%. Dual testing with HPV type 16 combined with p16^INK4a gave a high sensitivity for CIN3+ (78.7% to 98.0%) and specificity for <CIN2 of 58.6% to 81.5%.ConclusionsTriage with sensitive HPV testing assays can substantially reduce the number of unnecessary referrals in women with low grade cytology with virtually no loss of sensitivity. Even greater gains can be made if p16 and type 16 are used, but some cases of CIN2 will be missed. In both cases short term surveillance will be needed.     

Hybrid Capture II-based human papillomavirus detection, a sensitive test to detect in routine high-grade cervical lesions: a preliminary study on 1518 women.

Hybrid Capture II (HC-II) is a commercial human papillomavirus (HPV) detection test designed to detect 18 HPV types divided into high-risk and low-risk groups. We have tested 1647 scrapes from 1518 unselected women attending routine cytological screening by this assay for the detection of histologically proven high-grade lesions. The reliability of this test was also evaluated on 117 fresh cone biopsy samples. HPV DNA has been detected in 400 scrapes (24.3%), 296 containing a high-risk HPV (18.0%). All the smears evocative of high-grade lesions were positive for high-risk HPV, and high-risk HPV were detected in all the 34 cases presenting a histologically proven high-grade lesion and in 68 (97.1%) of the 70 cone biopsy samples showing a high-grade lesion or an invasive carcinoma. Thus, the sensitivity was superior to the sensitivity of cytology (85.3%). Nevertheless, the quantitative approach provided by the HC-II assay for the assessment of the viral load could not clearly distinguish among cases with or without high-grade lesions. Thus this assay is recommended for the screening of high-grade lesions on a large scale, in association with classic cytology.     

Comparison of HPV-based assays with Papanicolaou smears for cervical cancer screening in Morelos State,Mexico

Objective: To compare the performance of human papillomavirus (HPV) assays with conventional Pap cytology for cervical cancer (CC) screening in Mexico. Methods: Pap smears, self-collected vaginal specimens (SS) for HPV testing, and clinician-collected cervical specimens (CS) for HPV testing were obtained from 7868 women, aged 15–85 years old, attending CC screening at the Mexican Institute of Social Security (IMSS) between May and October, 1999. SS and CS specimens were screened for oncogenic HPV DNA by Hybrid Capture 2. Women who received cytological interpretations of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS), and/or a positive HPV test were referred for colposcopy and histologic studies. The relative estimates for sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of each test were calculated using histological diagnoses of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grades 2 or 3, or CC histological diagnosis. Results: Oncogenic HPV detection rate was 11.6% for SS, and 9.3% for CS. Pap smear abnormalities were observed in 2.4% of the women. Of 1147 women who had at least one abnormal test result, 88.5% underwent colposcopy, and 101 biopsy-confirmed CIN2/3 or cancer cases were identified. The relative sensitivity estimates for the Pap test, SS and CS were 59.4% (95% CI: 49.2–68.9), 71.3% (95% CI: 61.3–79.6), and 93.1% (95% CI: 85.8–96.9), respectively, while the specificities were 98.3% (95% CI: 98.0–98.6), 89.2% (95% CI: 88.5–89.9), and 91.8% (95% CI: 91.2–92.4), respectively. The positive predictive values of Pap, SS and CS were 36.1, 9.1 and 14.9, the colposcopy referrals needed to detect a case of CIN2/3 or cancer were 2.8, 11.0 and 6.7, respectively. Discussion: Both HPV assays detected more cases of CIN2/3 or CC than Pap cytology alone. However, the HPV assays increased the number of colposcopy referrals. Our study suggests that HPV testing could be an effective way to improve the performance of CC screening.     

多重核酸扩增荧光检测技术在宫颈癌筛查中的效果评价

[目的]评价高危型人乳头瘤病毒（HPV）多重核酸扩增（Multiplex PCR）荧光检测技术在宫颈癌筛查中的作用。[方法]2007年10月至2008年6月,对深圳市30—59岁两社区人群（上梅林社区、紫薇社区）和两医院人群（北京大学深圳医院、深圳市妇幼保健院）中合格妇女进行宫颈癌筛查。对每位妇女同时取3份宫颈脱落细胞标本,分别用于第二代杂交捕获试验（HC-Ⅱ）、高危型HPV Multiplex PCR荧光检测和细胞学检查。对两种HPV检测方法任一阳性或细胞学结果异常的妇女行阴道镜下直接活检。以病理诊断为金标准,评价Multiplex PCR荧光检测筛查宫颈癌及宫颈鳞状上皮内高度病变（CINⅡ／Ⅲ）的准确性,并与HC-Ⅱ结果进行一致性比较。[结果]在1988例有效样本中,CINⅡ／Ⅲ和宫颈癌占4．0％。Multiplex PCR荧光检测和HC-Ⅱ的HPV阳性率分别为19．8％和17．8％。Multiplex PCR荧光检测的灵敏度、特异度、Yonden指数、阳性预测值和阴性预测值分别为92．3％、83．1％、75．4％、18.3％和99．6％,HC-Ⅱ的以上各指标分别为97．4％、85．5％、82．9％、21．5％和99．9％。两种方法的一致率为87．8％,Kappa值为0．60。两种检测方法测定的HPV病毒载量均随病变程度加重而增加（P〈0．0001）。[结论]高危型HPV Multiplex PCR荧光检测技术的灵敏度和特异度高,与HC-Ⅱ相比两者具有较好的一致性,有较好的临床应用价值。     

Human papillomavirus testing in primary screening for the detection of high-grade cervical lesions: a study of 7932 women

High-risk human papillomaviruses (HR-HPV) are the necessary cause of cervical carcinomas. To determine whether HPR-HPV DNA detection in primary routine screening could represent a sensitive and reliable technique for the detection of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HGSIL), laboratory analysis using 2 cytologic techniques (conventional and liquid-based), HPV testing with Hybrid Capture II assay (HC-II), followed by colposcopic examination of women with abnormal cervical finding and/or persistent HR-HPV infection, was conducted in 7932 women who had routine cervical examination. The sensitivity of HPV testing for detecting a histologically proven HGSIL was 100%, higher than that of conventional (68.1%) and liquid-based (87.8%) cytology. The low specificities of 85.6% and 87.3% of HPV testing slightly increased to 88.4% and 90.1% if HPV testing was reserved for woman >30 years old. The quantitative approach provided by the HC-II assay for the assessment of the viral load was not reliable for predicting HGSIL in normal smears. HR-HPV testing could be proposed in primary screening in association with cytology. With conventional cytology it significantly improves the detection of HGSIL. With the use of the same cervical scrape for HPV testing and liquid-based cytology, HR-HPV testing would allow to select positive samples treated in a second time for cytology which gives a good specificity.     

Cumulative 5-year diagnoses of CIN2, CIN3 or cervical cancer after concurrent high-risk HPV and cytology testing in a primary screening setting

The aim of our study was to assess the cumulative 5-year diagnoses of CIN2, CIN3 or invasive cervical cancer (CIN2+) after concurrent screening by high-risk HPV test and Pap smear in a primary screening setting. Four thousand thirty-four women from Eastern Thuringia/Germany were recruited from 1996 to 1998 for baseline screening that included routine cytology, high-risk HPV testing by consensus primer PCR GP5+/6+ and routine colposcopy. After a median of 59 months 3,153 women participated in final screening using identical methods. Women with abnormal cytology or colposcopy or a positive high-risk HPV test at any time during the study period were recalled for expert colposcopy and histologic verification. CIN2+ was detected in 160 women resulting in a cumulative 5-year proportion of 4.4% (95% CI: 3.7-5.0%). Of 3,702 women who were high-risk HPV negative at baseline, 34 (1.1-95% CI: 0.7-1.4%) had either prevalent CIN2+ or developed CIN2+ within the observation period. HPV/cytology double negatives at baseline were at lowest risk for CIN2+ (1.0-95% CI: 0.7-1.4%) compared to screening positives (16.8-100% depending on combined test results). The 5-year negative predictive value in HPV-/Cyto- women was 99.0% (95% CI: 98.6-99.3%). This suggests that a prolongation of the screening intervals in this group is feasible. However, it should be noted that 1 woman developed a microinvasive carcinoma within the observation period. Moreover, 2 women with prevalent cancer were missed by both tests. The prognostic relevance of concurrent high-risk HPV/cytology screening needs to be verified further by randomized trials.     

Evaluation of oncogenic human papillomavirus RNA and DNA tests with liquid-based cytology in primary cervical cancer screening: the FASE study

The APTIMA HPV Assay (AHPV) allows detection of 14 high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) RNA types in cervical specimens. Until present, the assay has been compared to HPV DNA tests only in triage settings. Herein, we compare AHPV with a DNA assay (Hybrid Capture 2; HC2) and liquid-based cytology (LBC; using PreservCyt ThinPrep liquid Pap) in a screening setting (French APTIMA screening evaluation [FASE] study). Women (N = 5,006) aged 20-65 were screened by gynecologists in 17 private practices in Paris, France. One cervical specimen was collected and tested with LBC, AHPV and HC2 assays. Women were referred to colposcopy if they were ASC-US+ in LBC or HPV positive in either HPV assay. To control for verification bias, a random group (14%) with normal LBC and dually HPV negative tests underwent colposcopy. Data from 4,429 women were analyzed. Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values were calculated for the three tests. AHPV and HC2 were highly sensitive for CIN2+ (92.0% and 96.7%) and CIN3+ (95.7% and 95.3%) detection and much more sensitive than LBC (69.1% for CIN2+ and 73.3% for CIN3+). Specificity of AHPV was higher than that of HC2, but similar to that of LBC (p < 0.001). Combining LBC with either HPV test slightly increased sensitivity but compromised specificity. AHPV assay is both specific and sensitive for the detection of high-grade precancerous lesions and may be considered as an option for routine cervical cancer screening for women over 20 years of age.     

Predicting CIN2+ when detecting HPV mRNA and DNA by PreTect HPV-proofer and consensus PCR: A 2-year follow-up of women with ASCUS or LSIL Pap smear

It has been suggested that human papillomavirus (HPV) testing improves follow-up of atypical cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) in cervical cancer screening programs. To evaluate the prognostic value of including HPV testing as an adjunct to cytology, we carried out a 2-year follow-up study of 77 women with ASCUS or LSIL Papanicolaou (Pap) smear in the Norwegian Cervical Cancer Screening Program (NCCSP) for detection of histological cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2+. The study includes a comparison between viral mRNA and DNA detection. PreTect HPV-Proofer was used for HPV E6/E7 mRNA detection from the 5 high-risk types 16, 18, 31, 33 and 45, and Gp5+/6+ consensus PCR was used for HPV DNA detection. Twice as many women were positive for HPV DNA (54.6%) than for HPV mRNA (23.4%). PreTect HPV-Proofer and consensus PCR had a sensitivity of 85.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 42.1-99.6) for detecting CIN2+ during follow-up. The specificity was significantly higher for PreTect HPV-Proofer, 84.9% (95% CI = 73.9-92.5), than for consensus PCR, 50.0% (95% CI = 37.4-62.6). PreTect HPV-Proofer positive women were 69.8 times (95% CI = 4.3-1137.3) more likely to be diagnosed with CIN2+ within 2 years than PreTect HPV-Proofer negative women. Consensus PCR-positive women were 5.7 times (95% CI = 0.6-52.0) more likely to be diagnosed with CIN2+ within 2 years than PCR-negative women. With equal sensitivity and higher specificity than consensus PCR, the PreTect HPV-Proofer might offer an improvement for the triage of women with ASCUS or LSIL Pap smear.     

Addition of high-risk HPV testing improves the current guidelines on follow-up after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

We assessed a possible role for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in the policy after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 or 3 (moderate to severe dysplasia). According to the Dutch guidelines follow-up after treatment consists of cervical cytology at 6, 12 and 24 months. Colposcopy is only performed in case of abnormal cervical cytology. In this observational study 184 women treated for CIN 2 or 3 were prospectively monitored by cervical cytology and high-risk HPV testing 3, 6, 9, 12 and 24 months after treatment. Post-treatment CIN 2/3 was present in 29 women (15.8%). A positive high-risk HPV test 6 months after treatment was more predictive for post-treatment CIN 2/3 than abnormal cervical cytology (sensitivity 90% and 62% respectively, with similar specificity). At 6 months the negative predictive value of a high-risk HPV negative, normal smear, was 99%. Largely overlapping, partly different groups of women with post-treatment CIN 2/3 were identified by HPV testing and cervical cytology. Based on these results we advocate to include high-risk HPV testing in monitoring women initially treated for CIN 2/3. In case of a high-risk HPV positive test or abnormal cervical cytology, colposcopy is indicated. All women should be tested at 6 and 24 months after treatment and only referred to the population-based cervical cancer screening programme when the tests are negative on both visits.     

Overview of the European and North American studies on HPV testing in primary cervical cancer screening

Several studies suggest that HPV testing is more sensitive than cytology in primary cervical screening. These studies had different designs and were reported in different ways. Individual patient data were collected for all European and North American studies in which cytology was routinely performed and HPV testing was included as an additional parallel test. More than 60,000 women were included. The sensitivity and specificity of HPV testing were compared with routine cytology, both overall and for ages <35, 35-49 and 50+. The age-specific prevalence of high risk HPV (hr-HPV) was also analysed. HPV testing was substantially more sensitive in detecting CIN2+ than cytology (96.1% vs. 53.0%) but less specific (90.7% vs. 96.3%). The sensitivity of HPV testing was similar in all studies carried out in different areas of Europe and North America, whereas the sensitivity of cytology was highly variable. HPV sensitivity was uniformly high at all ages, whereas the sensitivity of cytology was substantially better in women over the age of 50 than in younger women (79.3% vs. 59.6%). The specificity of both tests increased with age. Positivity rates for HPV testing in women without high-grade CIN were region dependent. These results support the use of HPV testing as the sole primary screening test, with cytology reserved for women who test HPV positive. Large demonstration projects are needed to fully evaluate this strategy.     

A daunting challenge: Human Papillomavirus assays and cytology in primary cervical screening of women below age 30 years

We compared cytology with Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2), cobas, CLART and APTIMA Human Papillomavirus (HPV) assays in primary cervical screening at age 23–29 years based on data from the Danish Horizon study. SurePath samples were collected from 1278 women undergoing routine cytology-based screening. Abnormal cytology was managed according to the routine recommendations, and women with cytology-normal/HPV-positive samples were invited for repeated cytology and HPV testing in 1.5 years. Loss to follow-up was similar between HPV assays. ⩾CIN3 was detected in 44 women. The sensitivity of HC2 for ⩾CIN3 was 95% (95% confidence interval (CI): 85–99), of cobas 98% (95% CI: 88–100), of CLART 100% (95% CI: 92–100), of APTIMA 82% (95% CI: 67–92), and of cytology 59% (95% CI: 43–74). Specificity for ⩾CIN3 varied between 61% (95% CI: 59–64) for cobas and 75% (95% CI: 73–78) for APTIMA, and was 94% (95% CI: 93–96) for cytology. Similar results were observed for ⩾CIN2 (N = 68). HPV screening with cytological triage doubled the number of colposcopies compared to cytology screening, and increased the frequency of repeated testing by four (APTIMA) to seven (cobas) times. The positive predictive value of a referral for colposcopy was relatively high for all screening tests (⩾30% for ⩾CIN3, and ⩾50% for ⩾CIN2). CIN1 was detected by cytology in ∼1% of women, and in ∼2% by any of the four HPV assays. Although highly sensitive, HPV-based screening of young Danish women should be approached cautiously, as it resulted in large reductions in specificity, and increased the demand for additional testing.     

Human Telomerase Gene and High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Infection are Related to Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia

Our aims were to evaluate the clinical performance of human telomerase RNA gene component (hTERCgene) amplification assay with high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) DNA test of Hybrid Capture 2 DNAtest (HC2), for the detection of high grade cervical precancerous lesions and cancer (CIN 2+). In addition, theassociation shown between hTERC gene amplification and HPV DNA test positive in women with and withoutcervical neoplasia was assessed. There were 92 women who underwent cytology, HR-HPV DNA test, hTERCgene amplification test, colposcopy and biopsy. We compared the clinical performance of hTERC gene testalong with HR-HPV DNA test of women with colposcopy and routine screening. The samples were histologyconfirmedhigh-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 2) or worse (CIN2+) as the positive criterion. Thetest of hTERC gene showed the hTERC gene amplification positivity increased with the severity of histologicalabnormality and cytological abnormality. The test of hTERC gene showed higher specificity than HR-HPV DNAtest for high-grade lesions (84.4% versus 50%) and also higher positive predictive value (90.4% versus 76.5%).Our results predicted that hTERC gene amplification demonstrated more specific performance for predictingthe risk of progression and offer a strong potential as a tool for triage in cervical cancer screening, with thelimited sensitive as HR-HPV DNA test.