Good performance of p16/ki‐67 dual‐stained cytology for surveillance of women treated for high‐grade CIN

Women treated for high‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) are at risk of recurrent CIN Grade 2 or worse (rCIN2+). Currently, posttreatment monitoring is performed using cytology or cytology/high‐risk (hr)HPV cotesting. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of p16/Ki‐67 dual‐stained cytology (p16/Ki‐67) for posttreatment monitoring. Three hundred and twenty‐three women treated for high‐grade CIN in the SIMONATH study underwent close surveillance by cytology, hrHPV and DNA methylation marker testing up to 12 months posttreatment. Histological endpoints were ascertained by colposcopy with biopsy at 6 and/or 12 months. p16/Ki‐67 dual‐staining was performed on residual liquid‐based cytology samples obtained at, or shortly before biopsy collection. Clinical performance estimates of cytology, hrHPV, p16/Ki‐67 testing and combinations thereof for the detection of rCIN2+ were determined and compared to each other. Sensitivity of p16/Ki‐67 for rCIN2+ (69.2%) was nonsignificantly lower than that of cytology (82.1%; ratio 0.84, 95% CI: 0.71–1.01), but significantly lower than that of hrHPV testing (84.6%; ratio 0.82, 95% CI: 0.68–0.99). Specificity of p16/Ki‐67 for rCIN2+ (90.4%) was significantly higher compared to both cytology (70.8%; ratio 1.28, 95% CI: 1.19–1.37) and hrHPV testing (76.2%; ratio 1.19, 95% CI: 1.12–1.26). Overall, hrHPV testing showed very high sensitivity, along with a good specificity. When considering cotesting, combined p16/Ki‐67/hrHPV testing showed rCIN2+ sensitivity comparable to cytology/hrHPV cotesting (87.2% vs. 89.7%; ratio 0.97, 95% CI: 0.92–1.03), but with significantly increased specificity (74.2% vs. 58.1%; ratio 1.28, 95% CI: 1.19–1.38). Thus, when considered in combination with hrHPV, p16/Ki‐67 might be an attractive approach for surveillance of women treated for high‐grade CIN.     

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.     

Histopathologic follow-up and human papillomavirus DNA test results in 290 patients with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion Papanicolaou test results

BACKGROUND:

The study documents histopathologic outcomes and high‐risk (hr) human papillomavirus (HPV) test results in a large cohort of patients with high‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) liquid‐based cytology (LBC) Pap test results.

METHODS:

A total of 352 patients with HSIL results (338 cervical and 14 vaginal) who had hrHPV testing and 290 patients with biopsy follow‐up were studied. hrHPV detection rates were compared at different ages, with or without an endocervical/transformation zone sample (EC/TZS), and for cervical and vaginal HSIL Pap smears. Histopathologic follow‐up findings were also compared. hrHPV‐negative HSIL slides were re‐evaluated in a blinded manner.

RESULTS:

A total of 325 of 338 (96.2%) cervical HSIL and 12 of 14 (87.5%) vaginal HSIL tested hrHPV‐positive. A total of 271 of 281 (96.4%) EC/TZS‐positive cervical HSIL and 54 of 57 (94.7%) EC/TZS‐negative cervical HSIL tested hrHPV‐positive. The percentage of hrHPV‐positive HSIL declined slightly with increasing age. 197 of 273 (72.3%) hrHPV‐positive cervical HSIL had histopathologic cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2/3+ follow‐up, including 8 squamous carcinomas, compared with 4 of 12 (33.3%) hrHPV‐negative HSIL with CIN2/3 (no carcinomas). 167 of 241 (69.2%) EC/TZS‐positive HSIL had CIN2/3+ follow‐up, compared with 34 of 44 (77.3%) EC/TZS‐negative HSIL. Equivocal HSIL morphology characterized some HPV‐negative HSIL without CIN2/3+ follow‐up.

CONCLUSIONS:

hrHPV was detected in LBC vials from 96.2% of 338 cervical HSIL and 85.7% of 14 vaginal HSIL. CIN2/3+ was significantly more likely with hrHPV‐positive cervical HSIL than with hrHPV‐negative cervical HSIL. Presence or absence of an EC/TZS did not significantly impact HSIL hrHPV or CIN2/3+ rates. Some hrHPV‐negative HSIL cases may represent HSIL cytologic mimics. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2011;. © 2011 American Cancer Society.     

CADM1 and MAL promoter methylation levels in hrHPV‐positive cervical scrapes increase proportional to degree and duration of underlying cervical disease

Combined detection of cell adhesion molecule 1 (CADM1) and T‐lymphocyte maturation‐associated protein (MAL) promoter methylation in cervical scrapes is a promising triage strategy for high‐risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)‐positive women. Here, CADM1 and MAL DNA methylation levels were analysed in cervical scrapes of hrHPV‐positive women with no underlying high‐grade disease, high‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and cervical cancer. CADM1 and MAL methylation levels in scrapes were first related to CIN‐grade of the corresponding biopsy and second to CIN‐grade stratified by the presence of ‘normal’ or ‘abnormal’ cytology as present in the accompanying scrape preceding the cervical biopsy. The scrapes included 167 women with ≤CIN1, 54 with CIN2/3 and 44 with carcinoma. In a separate series of hrHPV‐positive scrapes of women with CIN2/3 (n = 48), methylation levels were related to duration of preceding hrHPV infection (PHI; <5 and ≥5 years). Methylation levels were determined by quantitative methylation‐specific PCR and normal cytology scrapes of hrHPV‐positive women with histologically ≤CIN1 served as reference. CADM1 and MAL methylation levels increased proportional to severity of the underlying lesion, showing an increase of 5.3‐ and 6.2‐fold in CIN2/3, respectively, and 143.5‐ and 454.9‐fold in carcinomas, respectively, compared to the reference. Methylation levels were also elevated in CIN2/3 with a longer duration of PHI (i.e. 11.5‐ and 13.6‐fold, respectively). Moreover, per histological category, methylation levels were higher in accompanying scrapes with abnormal cytology than in scrapes with normal cytology. Concluding, CADM1 and MAL promoter methylation levels in hrHPV‐positive cervical scrapes are related to the degree and duration of underlying cervical disease and markedly increased in cervical cancer.     

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.     

Human papillomavirus testing for triage of women with low‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesions

Low‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) is a common cytologic finding in cervical screening, yet only about 10–20% have significant histologic abnormalities and these are almost always positive for high‐risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV). This analysis aims to clarify the role of hrHPV DNA testing in the triage of women with LSIL cytology. In the ATHENA screening trial, we examined 1,084 cases of LSIL, of which 925 had an evaluable biopsy, to determine the extent to which hrHPV testing can identify those patients who have precursor lesions in need of immediate clinical referral and those who have changes more likely to regress spontaneously. Overall, 71.2% of LSIL cases were hrHPV positive, but the prevalence was age dependent, with only 56.1% in women ≥40 years. Among women with LSIL, 11.6% (107/925) had a cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) histologic diagnosis and, of these, only nine were hrHPV negative. For CIN3+, 91.7% (44/48) of women with LSIL were hrHPV positive. The negative predictive value of hrHPV testing for CIN3+ in LSIL was 100% for women aged ≥40 years. Women who were HPV16 positive had a higher positive predictive value for CIN2+ (25.4%) than those who were positive for 12 other pooled hrHPV types (11.5%). Testing for hrHPV in women with LSIL is effective in identifying high‐grade cervical lesions, thereby avoiding unnecessary referrals to colposcopy and potential over‐treatment of non‐progressive lesions, especially for women aged ≥40 years.     

Comparison of HPV and cytology triage algorithms for women with borderline or mild dyskaryosis in population‐based cervical screening (VUSA‐screen study)

We studied the effectiveness of high‐risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) triage for immediate colposcopy in women with borderline or mild dyskaryosis (BMD). In the Utrecht province of the Netherlands, women aged 30–60 years who participated in the regular cervical screening programme were offered hrHPV testing and cytology (intervention group) or cytology only (control group). In the intervention group (n = 337), women with BMD were immediately referred for colposcopy only if the sample was hrHPV positive. Women with a hrHPV negative test were advised to repeat cytology at 6 and 18 months and were referred for colposcopy if and when the repeat test result was positive (BMD or worse). In the control group (n = 329), referral of women with BMD was delayed until cytology was repeatedly positive at 6 or 18 months. The CIN3 detection rates were 10.7% (36/337) in the intervention group and 6.4% (21/329) in the control group (p = 0.047). Moreover, hrHPV triaging resulted in shorter time to diagnosis (154 vs. 381 days). Although the number of colposcopy referrals was 51.5% higher in the intervention group than in the control group, the medical costs per detected CIN3 were slightly lower ([euro] 4781 vs. [euro] 6235). If, in addition, hrHPV negative women had been referred back to routine screening at baseline, the CIN3 rate would have been 10.1% (34/337) and colposcopy rate would only have been 30.4% higher than in the control group. This study shows that hrHPV triaging of women with BMD is at least as effective for detecting CIN3 as repeat cytology, also when hrHPV negative women are referred back to routine screening.     

Human papillomavirus mRNA and DNA testing in women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: A prospective cohort study

In this prospective cohort study, we compared the performance of human papillomavirus (HPV) mRNA and DNA testing of women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC‐US) during cervical cancer screening. Using a nationwide Danish pathology register, we identified women aged 30–65 years with ASC‐US during 2005–2011 who were tested for HPV16/18/31/33/45 mRNA using PreTect HPV‐Proofer (n = 3,226) or for high‐risk HPV (hrHPV) DNA using Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) (n = 9,405) or Linear Array HPV‐Genotyping test (LA) (n = 1,533). Women with ≥1 subsequent examination in the register (n = 13,729) were followed for up to 9.5 years for high‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) or cancer. After 3 years' follow‐up, mRNA testing had higher specificity for CIN3 or worse (CIN3+) than HC2 testing (88.1% [95% confidence interval (CI): 86.8–89.6%] versus 59.3% [95% CI: 58.1–60.4%]) and higher positive predictive value (PPV) (38.2% [95% CI: 33.8%–43.1%] versus 19.5% [95% CI: 17.8–20.9%]). However, the sensitivity of mRNA testing was lower than that of HC2 testing (66.7% [95% CI: 59.3–74.5%] versus 97.0% [95% CI: 95.5–98.4%]), and women testing mRNA negative had higher 3‐year risk for CIN3+ than those testing HC2 negative (3.2% [95% CI: 2.2–4.2%] versus 0.5% [95% CI: 0.3–0.7%]). Patterns were similar after 18 months and 5 years'; follow‐up; for CIN2+ and cancer as outcomes; across all age groups; and when comparing mRNA testing to hrHPV DNA testing using LA. In conclusion, the HPV16/18/31/33/45 mRNA test is not optimal for ASC‐US triage due to its low sensitivity and the substantial risk for precancer following a negative test.     

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.     

Effectiveness of two strategies to follow-up ASC-US and LSIL screening results in The Netherlands using repeat cytology with or without additional hrHPV testing: a retrospective cohort study

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to assess the effectiveness of repeat cytology with and without additional high-risk human papilloma virus (hrHPV) testing after atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance/low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (ASC-US/LSIL) screening results.

Methods

In the Netherlands, ASC-US/LSIL is triaged by repeat cytology at 6 months or repeat cytology at 6 months with additional hrHPV testing. ASC-US/LSIL results from 13,734 screenees in 2008 were extracted from “Dutch Pathology Registry” including cytology, histology, and/or HPV follow-up results. Proportions of compliance, repeat cytology, referral, and detected cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) were assessed.

Results

With additional hrHPV testing, 46.8 % was send back to regular screening at 6 months, 28.6 % needed second repeat cytology, and 24.6 % was referred for colposcopy. Without additional hrHPV testing, this was 0.0, 76.1, and 23.9 %, respectively. With additional hrHPV testing, significantly higher proportions of persisting ASC-US/LSIL; compliance with repeat/referral advices; and histological detection of CIN0 (no CIN or cancer), CIN1, and CIN2 were found but equal proportions CIN3+.

Conclusions

Additional hrHPV testing shortens follow-up without altering CIN3+ detection. Detection of CIN0, CIN1, and CIN2 was higher, presumably by hrHPV-driven biased cytology and detection bias. Restricting additional hrHPV testing to older women, reading cytology without knowledge of hrHPV status, and addition of more specific triage tests could further improve the effectiveness of additional hrHPV testing.     

HPV DNA testing in population-based cervical screening (VUSA-Screen study): results and implications

Background:

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is more sensitive than cytology for detecting high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). We evaluated the performance of high-risk HPV (hrHPV) testing in routine screening.

Methods:

In all, 25 871 women (29–61) enrolled in our population-based cohort study were offered both cytology and hrHPV testing. High-risk HPV-positive women with normal cytology and an age-matched subcohort of hrHPV-negative women with normal cytology were invited for repeat testing after 1 and/or 2 years and were referred for colposcopy if they presented with abnormal cytology and/or a positive hrHPV test. The hrHPV-positive women with borderline or mild dyskaryosis (BMD) and all women with moderate dyskaryosis or worse (>BMD) were directly referred for colposcopy. Women with BMD and an hrHPV-negative test were advised to repeat cytology at 6 and 18 months and were referred for colposcopy if the repeat cytology test was abnormal. The main outcome measure was CIN grade 3 or worse (CIN3+). Results were adjusted for non-attendance at repeat testing.

Results:

The hrHPV-positive women with abnormal cytology had a CIN3+ risk of 42.2% (95% confidence interval (CI): 36.4–48.2), whereas the hrHPV-positive women with normal cytology had a much lower risk of 5.22% (95% CI: 3.72–7.91). In hrHPV-positive women with normal cytology, an additional cytology step after 1 year reduced the CIN3+ risk to only 1.6% (95% CI: 0.6–4.9) if the repeat test was normal. The CIN3+ risk in women with hrHPV-positive normal cytology was higher among women invited for the first time (29–33 years of age) (9.1% 95% CI: 5.6–14.3) than among older women (3.0% 95% CI: 1.5–5.5).

Conclusion:

Primary hrHPV screening with cytology triage in women aged ⩾30 years is an effective way to stratify women on CIN3+ risk and seems a feasible alternative to cytological screening. Repeat cytology after 1 year for hrHPV-positive women with normal cytology is however necessary before returning women to routine screening.     

Comparing the performance of FAM19A4 methylation analysis,cytology and HPV16/18 genotyping for the detection of cervical (pre)cancer in high‐risk HPV‐positive women of a gynecologic outpatient population (COMETH study)

Recently, DNA methylation analysis of FAM19A4 in cervical scrapes has been shown to adequately detect high‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cervical cancer (≥CIN3) in high‐risk HPV (hrHPV)‐positive women. Here, we compared the clinical performance of FAM19A4 methylation analysis to cytology and HPV16/18 genotyping, separately and in combination, for ≥CIN3 detection in hrHPV‐positive women participating in a prospective observational multi‐center cohort study. The study population comprised hrHPV‐positive women aged 18–66 years, visiting a gynecological outpatient clinic. From these women, cervical scrapes and colposcopy‐directed biopsies (for histological confirmation) were obtained. Cervical scrapes were analyzed for FAM19A4 gene promoter methylation, cytology and HPV16/18 genotyping. Methylation analysis was performed by quantitative methylation‐specific PCR (qMSP). Sensitivities and specificities for ≥CIN3 were compared between tests. Stratified analyses were performed for variables that potentially influence marker performance. Of all 508 hrHPV‐positive women, the sensitivities for ≥CIN3 of cytology, FAM19A4 methylation analysis, and cytology combined with HPV16/18 genotyping were 85.6, 75.6 and 92.2%, respectively, with corresponding specificities of 49.8, 71.1 and 29.4%, respectively. Both sensitivity and specificity of FAM19A4 methylation analysis were associated with age (p ≤ 0.001 each). In women ≥30 years (n = 287), ≥CIN3 sensitivity of FAM19A4 methylation analysis was 88.3% (95%CI: 80.2–96.5) which was noninferior to that of cytology [85.5% (95%CI: 76.0–94.0)], at a significantly higher specificity [62.1% (95%CI: 55.8–68.4) compared to 47.6% (95%CI: 41.1–54.1)]. In conclusion, among hrHPV‐positive women from an outpatient population aged ≥30 years, methylation analysis of FAM19A4 is an attractive marker for the identification of women with ≥CIN3.     

Comparison of human papillomavirus genotyping and cytology triage,COMPACT Study: Design,methods and baseline results in 14 642 women

Although cytology‐based screening programs have significantly reduced mortality and morbidity from cervical cancer, the global consensus is that primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical screening increases detection of high‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and invasive cancer. However, the optimal triage strategy for HPV‐positive women to avoid over‐referral to colposcopy may be setting specific. As Japan requires data that have been generated domestically to modify screening guidelines, we conducted a 3‐year prospective study, COMparison of HPV genotyping And Cytology Triage (COMPACT), to evaluate the potential role of HPV16/18 partial genotyping and cytology for primary HPV screening. In total, 14 642 women aged 20 to 69 years undergoing routine screening at 3 centers in Hokkaido were enrolled. Conventional cytology and HPV testing were carried out. Women with abnormal cytology or HPV16/18 positivity underwent colposcopy. Those with 12 other high‐risk (hr) HPV types underwent repeat cytology after 6 months. Primary study endpoints were detection of high‐grade cervical disease defined as CIN2/CIN3 or greater as determined by consensus pathology. Prevalence of cytological abnormalities was 2.4%. hrHPV, HPV 16, and HPV 18 were detected in 4.6%, 0.9%, and 0.3% of women, respectively. HPV16/18 were detected in all (8/8) invasive cervical cancers and in all (2/2) adenocarcinomas in situ. Both cytological abnormalities and hrHPV positivity declined with increasing age. This is the first Japanese study to investigate the role of partial genotyping and cytology in an HPV‐based screening program. Results should help policy‐makers develop guidelines for future cervical screening programs and management of cervical abnormalities based on HPV genotype.     

Clearance of human papillomavirus infection after successful conization in patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

The natural history of high‐risk human papillomavirus (HRHPV) infection after successful treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) is not well known. This study was performed to evaluate the rate and pattern of HRHPV infection clearance after successful conization for CIN and to analyze factors associated with such clearance. A total of 287 patients who underwent loop electrosurgical excision procedures (LEEP) owing to HRHPV‐associated CIN were included. All patients had negative resection margins on LEEP specimens and underwent HPV testing with the hybrid capture II system at 3‐, 6‐, 9‐, 12‐, 18‐ and 24‐month follow‐up visits after LEEP. Persistent HPV infections were detected in 45.6%, 14.3%, 6.3%, 2.2%, 1.5% and 1.1% of patients at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 months after LEEP, respectively. Clearance rates did not differ by age, parity or severity of cervical lesion. However, clearance rates were significantly slower in patients with HPV DNA loads >500 RLU/PC before LEEP (p = 0.040). During 2 years of follow‐up after LEEP, 24 patients had recurrent disease revealed by biopsy. The odds ratios for recurrent disease in patients with persistent HRHPV infection increased gradually from 5.17 at the 3‐month follow‐up visit to 12.54, 15.69 and 25.90 at 6‐, 9‐, 12‐ and 24‐month follow‐up visits, respectively. We conclude that HRHPV infection cleared gradually in most patients within 6 months of treatment. Clearance rates were significantly slower in patients with HPV DNA loads >500 RLU/PC. Persistent HPV infection was a significant positive predictor of recurrence.     

Interlaboratory variation in the performance of liquid‐based cytology: Insights from the ATHENA trial

Although it is recognized that cervical cytology is highly subjective, and that there is considerable interlaboratory variation in how slides are evaluated, little is known as to how this impacts the performance of cytology. In the ATHENA trial, liquid‐based cytology specimens from 46,887 eligible women ≥21 years of age were evaluated at four large regional US laboratories, providing a unique opportunity to evaluate the impact of interlaboratory variations on the performance of cervical cytology. All women with abnormal cytology (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or higher) were referred to colposcopy, as were all high‐risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)–positive women ≥25 years of age and a random subset of those ≥25 years of age who were negative by both hrHPV testing and cytology. Sociodemographics, risk factors for cervical disease, and prevalence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) were similar across the laboratories. There were considerable differences among the laboratories both in overall cytological abnormal rates, ranging from 3.8 to 9.9%, and in sensitivity of cytology to detect CIN grade 2 or worse (CIN2+), from 42.0 to 73.0%. In contrast, the hrHPV positivity rate varied only from 10.9 to 13.4%, and the sensitivity of hrHPV testing from 88.2 to 90.1%. These observations suggest that hrHPV testing without cytology should be considered as the initial method for cervical cancer screening.     

Specimen self‐collection and HPV DNA screening in a pilot study of 100,242 women

Since cervical cancer remains common in Mexico despite an established cytology screening program, the Ministry of Health recently introduced pilot front‐line HPV testing into the Mexican cervical cancer screening program (CCSP). Here, we present the key field performance metrics of this population‐based study. High‐risk HPV DNA (hrHPV) testing was conducted on self‐collected vaginal specimens from 100,242 women aged 25–75 years residing in Morelos State. All hrHPV positive women and a random sample of 3.2% (n = 2,864) of hrHPV negative participants were referred for colposcopic examination. The main disease endpoint of interest was cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+). We calculated relative risk, positive predictive value and negative predictive value adjusted for screening test verification bias. The overall prevalence of hrHPV was 10.8% (95%CI 10.6–11.0). Women positive for hrHPV had a relative risk of 15.7 for histologically detectable CIN2+. The adjusted positive predictive value of the hrHPV test was 2.4% (95%CI 2.1–2.7); whereas the adjusted negative predictive value was 99.8% (95%CI 99.8–99.9). These findings suggest that large‐scale vaginal hrHPV testing in a middle‐income country can identify women at greater risk of advanced cervical abnormalities in a programmatically meaningful way but care is warranted to ensure that disease not detectable at colposcopy is kept to a minimum. PASS shows areas that need improvement and sets the stage for wider use of hrHPV screening of self‐collected vaginal specimens in Mexico.     

Expectant management versus immediate treatment for low-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia : a randomized trial in Canada and Brazil

BACKGROUND:

The optimal management strategy for women with low‐grade biopsy‐proven cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) is not clear. Our objective was to compare the effectiveness of regular colposcopic follow‐up and treatment of progressive disease only versus immediate treatment.

METHODS:

Data were accrued between November 2000 and March 2006 for a noninferiority randomized clinical trial of 415 women with biopsy‐proven grade 1 CIN from 8 Canadian and 2 Brazilian colposcopy clinics. Subjects were randomly assigned to either undergo immediate treatment with a loop electrical excision procedure (LEEP) or receive regular colposcopic follow‐up for 18 months. The primary outcome was progression of disease to CIN 2 to 3 was based on histology obtained during 18 months of follow‐up. Treatments were compared using differences of proportion with a 9% noninferiority margin. Analysis was conducted on the basis of intention‐to‐treat.

RESULTS:

An initial LEEP was performed on 179 women. Disease progression was found in 32. Easily controlled vaginal bleeding occurred in 16 (8.9%). During follow‐up, disease progression was identified in 3 (1.7%) women in the immediate treatment arm and 9 (4.4%) in the colposcopic follow‐up arm—a tolerable difference of 2.7% with 1‐sided 95% confidence interval (CI) upper limit of 6.0%. Compliance with all 3 follow‐up visits was 61% overall, but significantly worse in women ≤30 years of age (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS:

The risk of progression to CIN grade 2 or 3 or cancer over 18 months was similar in the 2 treatment groups. In Canada and Brazil, follow‐up for 18 months is a reasonable management strategy for women with persistent low‐grade cytology who are found to have grade 1 CIN on referral for colposcopy and cervical biopsy. Cancer 2011. © 2010 American Cancer Society.     

Primary human papillomavirus DNA screening for cervical cancer prevention: Can the screening interval be safely extended?

Cytological screening has substantially decreased the cervical cancer incidence, but even better protection may be achieved by primary high‐risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) screening. In the Netherlands, five‐yearly cytological screening for women aged 30–60 years will be replaced by primary hrHPV screening in 2016. The new screening guidelines involve an extension of the screening interval from 5 to 10 years for hrHPV‐negative women aged 40 or 50 years. We investigated the impact of this program change on the lifetime cancer risks in women without an hrHPV infection at age 30, 35, 40, 45 or 50 years. The time to cancer was estimated using 14‐year follow‐up data from a population‐based screening intervention trial and the nationwide database of histopathology reports. The new screening guidelines are expected to lead to a reduced cervical cancer risk for all age groups. The average risk reduction was 34% and was smallest (25%) among women aged 35 years. The impact of hrHPV screening on the cancer risk was sensitive to the duration from cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2/3 (CIN2/3) to cancer; a small increase in the cancer risk was estimated for women aged 35 or 40 years in case a substantial proportion of CIN2/3 showed fast progression to cancer. Our results indicate that primary hrHPV screening with a ten‐yearly interval for hrHPV‐negative women of age 40 and beyond will lead to a further reduction in lifetime cancer risk compared to five‐yearly cytology, provided that precancerous lesions progress slowly to cancer.     

Methylation testing for the detection of recurrent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

Women treated for CIN2/3 remain at increased risk of recurrent CIN and cervical cancer, and therefore posttreatment surveillance is recommended. This post hoc analysis evaluates the potential of methylation markers ASCL1/LHX8 and FAM19A4/miR124-2 for posttreatment detection of recurrent CIN2/3. Cervical scrapes taken at 6 and 12 months posttreatment of 364 women treated for CIN2/3 were tested for methylation of ASCL1/LHX8 and FAM19A4/miR124-2 using quantitative multiplex methylation-specific PCR. Performance of the methylation tests were calculated and compared with the performance of HPV and/or cytology. Methylation levels of recurrent CIN were compared between women with a persistent HPV infection, and women with an incident HPV infection or without HPV infection. Recurrent CIN2/3 was detected in 42 women (11.5%), including 28 women with CIN2 and 14 with CIN3. ASCL1/LHX8 tested positive in 13/14 (92.9%) of recurrent CIN3 and 13/27 (48.1%) of recurrent CIN2. FAM19A4/miR124-2 tested positive in 14/14 (100%) of recurrent CIN3 and 10/27 (37.0%) of recurrent CIN2. Combined HPV and/or methylation testing showed similar positivity rates as HPV and/or cytology. The CIN2/3 risk at 12 months posttreatment was 30.8% after a positive ASCL1/LHX8 result at 6 months posttreatment. Methylation levels of CIN2/3 in women with a persistent HPV infection were significantly higher compared with women with an incident or no HPV infection. In conclusion, posttreatment monitoring by methylation analysis of ASCL1/LHX8 and FAM19A4/miR124-2 showed a good performance for the detection of recurrent CIN. DNA methylation testing can help to identify women with recurrent CIN that require re-treatment.     

Type-specific HPV geno-typing improves detection of recurrent high-grade cervical neoplasia after conisation

The aim of this case-control study was to examine if type-specific human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA geno-typing before and after treatment of high-grade cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia (CIN) improves prediction of recurring or persisting CIN 2 or 3 compared with follow-up cytology or high-risk (hr)HPV testing. Women with biopsy-proven recurrence of CIN 2 or 3 (cases) in a follow-up period of at least 24 months after treatment of high-grade CIN were compared with women without recurrence (controls). These cohorts were identified by a database search of the Riatol Laboratoria (Antwerp, Belgium). In a cohort of 823 women treated with conisation for high-grade CIN between January 2001 and December 2007, 21 patients with a histologically proven recurrence of CIN2+ were identified. A group of women (n=42) from the same cohort without recurrence was randomly chosen. We found that hrHPV testing at 6 months post-treatment is significantly more sensitive compared with follow-up cytology (ratio: 1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.10-1.54), but less specific (ratio: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.81-0.90) to predict failure of treatment. When compared with hrHPV testing, HPV geno-typing is more efficient (equal sensitivity, but higher specificity, ratio: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.280-1.62). When compared with follow-up cytology, HPV geno-typing is more sensitive (ratio: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.10-1.54) and more specific (ratio: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.14-1.36). All women who developed a recurrence tested positive for hrHPV. The negative predictive value in the absence of hrHPV DNA was 100%. Six months after treatment HPV geno-typing is the most sensitive and specific method to predict recurrent or persistent CIN 2-3 in the next 24 months.