The Aptima HPV Assay Fulfills the Cross-Sectional Clinical and Reproducibility Criteria of International Guidelines for Human Papillomavirus Test Requirements for Cervical Screening

The Aptima HPV assay (Hologic Gen-Probe, San Diego, CA) is an FDA-approved assay for detecting human papillomavirus (HPV) E6/E7 mRNA from 14 high-risk HPV types. This study evaluated the clinical performance of the Aptima HPV assay for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+), relative to the high-risk HPV GP5+/GP6+ PCR, in a cross-sectional clinical equivalence analysis using the noninferiority score test with cervical samples from population-based screening, i.e., 69 cervical scraping samples from women with CIN2+ and 843 from women without evidence of CIN2+. In addition, intralaboratory reproducibility over time and interlaboratory agreement of the Aptima HPV assay results were assessed with another set of 548 cervical samples. The Aptima HPV assay showed a clinical sensitivity for CIN2+ of 94.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 85.5 to 97.8%) and a clinical specificity for CIN2+ of 94.5% (95% CI, 92.8 to 95.9%); by comparison, these figures were 97.1% (95% CI, 89.1 to 99.3%) (67/69 samples) and 93.6% (95% CI, 91.7 to 95.0%) (785/839 samples), respectively, for GP5+/GP6+ PCR. The clinical sensitivity and specificity of the Aptima HPV assay were noninferior to those of GP5+/GP6+ PCR (P = 0.039 and 0.00016, respectively). In addition, high reproducibility of the Aptima HPV assay, as reflected by the intralaboratory reproducibility over time of 96.0% (95% CI, 94.4 to 97.3%) (526/548 samples; kappa = 0.89) and interlaboratory agreement of 96.7% (95% CI, 95.4 to 98.1%) (531/548 samples; kappa = 0.91), was found. Altogether, these data show that the Aptima HPV assay meets the cross-sectional clinical and reproducibility criteria of the international guidelines for HPV test requirements for cervical screening. Longitudinal data are needed to ensure that the long-term negative predictive value of this mRNA assay is similar to those of validated HPV DNA tests.     

Clinical and Analytical Performance of the Onclarity HPV Assay Using the VALGENT Framework

As the demand for human papillomavirus (HPV)-related cervical screening increases, emerging HPV tests must be evaluated robustly using well-annotated samples, such as those generated in the Validation of HPV Genotyping Tests (VALGENT) framework. Through VALGENT, we assessed the performance of the BD Onclarity HPV assay, which detects 14 high-risk (HR) types and resolves six individual types and three groups of types. Consecutive samples from a screening population (n = 1,000), enriched with cytologically abnormal samples (n = 300), that had been tested previously with the GP5+/6+ PCR enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and the GP5+/6+ PCR LMNX assay (Diassay) were tested with the Onclarity assay. Type-specific HPV prevalences were analyzed according to age and cytological result. The accuracy of the Onclarity assay for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN2+) and CIN3+ was assessed relative to the GP5+/6+ EIA results by using noninferiority criteria. Overall agreement and type-specific agreement between the Onclarity assay and the GP5+/6+ LMNX assay were assessed. The prevalence of HPV types 16, 18, 31, and 45 increased with the severity of cytological results (P for trend, <0.05). For the detection of CIN2+, the Onclarity assay had a relative sensitivity of 1.02 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.99 to 1.05; P < 0.001 for noninferiority) and a relative specificity of 0.99 (95% CI, 0.97 to 1.00; P = 0.186 for noninferiority). The kappa for agreement between the Onclarity assay and the GP5+/6+ LMNX assay for HR-HPV was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.89 to 0.94), and values for the six individual types ranged from 0.78 (95% CI, 0.68 to 0.87) for HPV-52 to 0.96 (95% CI, 0.93 to 0.99) for HPV-16. These data suggest that the Onclarity assay offers applications for clinical workstreams while providing genotyping information that may be useful for risk stratification beyond types 16 and 18.     

Comparison of clinical performance of Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV test with that of hybrid capture 2 assay in a screening setting

Randomized trials have produced sound evidence about the efficacy of screening with human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA tests in reducing cervical cancer incidence and mortality. We evaluated the clinical performance and reproducibility of the Abbott RealTime High Risk (HR) HPV test compared with that of the HR hybrid capture 2 (HC2) assay as assessed by a noninferiority score test. A random sample of 998 cervical specimens (914 specimens of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia less severe than grade 2 [相似文献   

Clinical validation of Anyplex™ II HPV HR Detection according to the guidelines for HPV test requirements for cervical cancer screening

BackgroundAnyplex™ II HPV HR Detection (Seegene, Seoul, Korea) is a multiplex real-time PCR using tagging oligonucleotide cleavage and extension (TOCE) technology for simultaneous detection and genotyping of 14 high-risk (HR) HPV types, including HPV16 and HPV18.ObjectivesTo evaluate whether the clinical performance and reproducibility of Anyplex™ II HPV HR Detection meet the international consensus guidelines for HPV test requirements for cervical cancer screening [1].Study designThe clinical performance of Anyplex™ II HPV HR Detection for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) was determined relative to that of the reference assay, i.e., HR HPV GP5+/6+-PCR-EIA, by analysis of a total of 879 cervical liquid based cytology (LBC) specimens from a screening population, of which 60 were from women with CIN2+. The intra-laboratory reproducibility and inter-laboratory agreement were determined on 509 LBC samples, of which 172 were positive by the reference assay.ResultsAnyplex™ II HPV HR Detection showed a clinical sensitivity for CIN2+ of 98.3% (59/60; 95% CI: 89.1–99.8) and a clinical specificity for CIN2+ of 93.6% (764/816; 95% CI: 89.8–96.1). The clinical sensitivity and specificity were non-inferior to those of HR HPV GP5+/6+-PCR-EIA (non-inferiority score test: P = 0.005 and P = 0.023, respectively). Both intra-laboratory reproducibility (96.8%; 95% CI: 95.3–98.1; kappa value of 0.93) and inter-laboratory agreement (96.0%; 95% CI: 94.3–97.4; kappa value of 0.91) were high.ConclusionsAnyplex™ II HPV HR Detection performs clinically non-inferior to HR HPV GP5+/6+-PCR-EIA. Anyplex™ II HPV HR Detection complies with international consensus validation metrics for HPV DNA tests for cervical cancer screening [1].     

The BD Onclarity HPV Assay on Samples Collected in SurePath Medium Meets the International Guidelines for Human Papillomavirus Test Requirements for Cervical Screening

This study describes a validation of the BD Onclarity HPV (Onclarity) assay using the international guidelines for HPV test requirements for cervical cancer screening of women 30 years old and older using Danish SurePath screening samples. The clinical specificity (0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.88 to 0.91) and sensitivity (0.97, 95% CI = 0.87 to 1.0) of the Onclarity assay were shown to be not inferior to the reference assay (specificity, 0.90 [95% CI = 0.88 to 0.92]; sensitivity, 0.98 [95% CI = 0.91 to 1.0]). The intralaboratory reproducibility of Onclarity was 97%, with a lower confidence bound of 96% (kappa value, 0.93). The interlaboratory agreement was 97%, with a lower confidence bound of 95% (kappa value, 0.92). The BD Onclarity HPV assay fulfills all the international guidelines for a new HPV test to be used in primarily screening. This is the first clinical validation of a new HPV assay using SurePath screening samples, and thus the Onclarity HPV assay is the first HPV assay to hold an international validation for both SurePath and ThinPrep.     

Comparison of Human Papillomavirus Detections in Urine,Vulvar, and Cervical Samples from Women Attending a Colposcopy Clinic

While urine-based sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) is being explored as a simple and noninvasive approach for cervical cancer screening, data comparing HPV genotyping in urine and those in cellular sampling of the cervix and vulva, and their correlation with rigorously confirmed cervical disease status, are sparse. We performed HPV genotyping on voided-urine and clinician-collected vulvar and cervical samples from 72 women undergoing colposcopy. Although urine-based HPV carcinogenic HPV detection was lower (58.3%) than cervical (73.6%) and vulvar (72.1%) detection (P = 0.05 and 0.07, respectively), the agreement of urine HPV with cervical and vulvar HPV was moderate (kappa = 0.55) and substantial (kappa = 0.62), respectively. Urine-based carcinogenic HPV detection had a clinical sensitivity of 80.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 60.7 to 93.5) and a specificity of 53.3% (95% CI = 37.9 to 68.3) for diagnosing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grades 2/3 (CIN2/3) on histology; 90.0% of CIN3 was positive for urine HPV. The corresponding sensitivity and specificity values for vulvar sampling were 92% (95% CI = 74 to 99) and 40.5% (95% CI = 25.6 to 56.7), and those for cervical sampling were 96.2% (95% CI = 80.4 to 99.9) and 40% (95% CI = 25.7 to 55.7), respectively. HPV16 was the most common carcinogenic genotype detectable in 25% of urine, 33.8% of vulvar, and 31.9% of cervical samples overall, with prevalence increasing with cervical disease grade, regardless of the sampling method. Stronger cervical HPV PCR signal strengths were associated with increased frequency of urine HPV detection. In summary, the relatively lower detection rates but comparable clinical performance of urine-based HPV sampling underscore the need for larger studies to evaluate urine-based sampling for cervical cancer screening, epidemiologic studies, and postvaccination HPV disease surveillance.     

Comparison of Onclarity Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Assay with Hybrid Capture II HPV DNA Assay for Detection of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade 2 and 3 Lesions

Analytical and clinical performance validation is essential before introduction of a new human papillomavirus (HPV) assay into clinical practice. This study compares the new BD Onclarity HPV assay, which detects E6/E7 DNA from 14 high-risk HPV types, to the Hybrid Capture II (HC2) HPV DNA test, to concurrent cytology and histology results, in order to evaluate its performance in detecting high-grade cervical lesions. A population of 567 women, including 325 with ≥ASCUS (where ASCUS stands for atypical cells of undetermined significance) and any HC2 result and 242 with both negative cytology and negative HC2 results, were prospectively enrolled for the study. The overall agreement between Onclarity and HC2 was 94.6% (95% confidence intervals [CI], 92.3% to 96.2%). In this population with a high prevalence of disease, the relative sensitivities (versus adjudicated cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grades 2 and 3 [CIN2+] histology endpoints) of the Onclarity and HC2 tests were 95.2% (95% CI, 90.7% to 97.5%) and 96.9% (95% CI, 92.9% to 98.7%), respectively, and the relative specificities were 50.3% (95% CI, 43.2% to 57.4%) for BD and 40.8% (95% CI, 33.9%, 48.1%) for HC2. These results indicate that the BD Onclarity HPV assay has sensitivity comparable to that of the HC2 assay, with a trend to an increased specificity. Moreover, as Onclarity gives the chance to discriminate between the different genotypes, we calculated the genotype prevalence and the absolute risk of CIN2+: HPV 16 was the most prevalent genotype (19.8%) with an absolute risk of CIN2+ of 77.1%.     

Comparison of clinical and analytical performance of the Abbott Realtime High Risk HPV test to the performance of hybrid capture 2 in population-based cervical cancer screening

The clinical performance of the Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV (human papillomavirus) test (RealTime) and that of the Hybrid Capture 2 HPV DNA test (hc2) were prospectively compared in the population-based cervical cancer screening setting. In women >30 years old (n = 3,129), the clinical sensitivity of RealTime for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 (CIN2) or worse (38 cases) and its clinical specificity for lesions of less than CIN2 (3,091 controls) were 100% and 93.3%, respectively, and those of hc2 were 97.4% and 91.8%, respectively. A noninferiority score test showed that the clinical specificity (P < 0.0001) and clinical sensitivity (P = 0.011) of RealTime were noninferior to those of hc2 at the recommended thresholds of 98% and 90%. In the total study population (women 20 to 64 years old; n = 4,432; 57 cases, 4,375 controls), the clinical sensitivity and specificity of RealTime were 98.2% and 89.5%, and those of hc2 were 94.7% and 87.7%, respectively. The analytical sensitivity and analytical specificity of RealTime in detecting targeted HPV types evaluated with the largest sample collection to date (4,479 samples) were 94.8% and 99.8%, and those of hc2 were 93.4% and 97.8%, respectively. Excellent analytical agreement between the two assays was obtained (kappa value, 0.84), while the analytical accuracy of RealTime was significantly higher than that of hc2. RealTime demonstrated high intralaboratory reproducibility and interlaboratory agreement with 500 samples retested 61 to 226 days after initial testing in two different laboratories. RealTime can be considered to be a reliable and robust HPV assay clinically comparable to hc2 for the detection of CIN2+ lesions in a population-based cervical cancer screening setting.     

Evaluation of the clinical performance of OncoPredict HPV® SCR assay within the VALGENT-2 framework

Human papillomavirus (HPV) assays used in cervical cancer screening should be clinically validated according to international criteria. OncoPredict HPV® Screening (SCR) is a partial genotyping multiplex real-time PCR assay targeting E6/E7 genes of 13 high-risk (hr) HPVs. OncoPredict HPV® SCR (index assay) identifies HPV-16 and HPV-18 separately, 11 other hrHPV in aggregate and includes quality controls for sample adequacy, DNA extraction efficiency and PCR inhibition. 1300 VALGENT-2 study samples (from women aged 20–60 attending the Scottish cervical cancer screening program) were tested with the index assay and the GP5+/6+ PCR enzyme immunoassay (standard comparator assay). Non-inferior accuracy detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) of the index versus comparator was verified. Intra- and interlaboratory reproducibility of the index was evaluated by overall concordance and Cohen's kappa, using a sub-population (n = 526). Relative sensitivity and specificity for CIN2+ of the index versus comparator were 1.01 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.99–1.03) and 1.02 (95% CI: 1.0–1.04), respectively. Noninferiority p values were all ≤0.05, except for CIN3+ in patients ≥30 years. Excellent intra- and interlaboratory reproducibility was shown with concordance >98% and kappas >0.95. OncoPredict HPV® SCR fulfills the three international validation criteria for hrHPV DNA tests in cervical cancer screening.     

Enhanced detection and typing of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA in anogenital samples with PGMY primers and the Linear array HPV genotyping test

The Roche PGMY primer-based research prototype line blot assay (PGMY-LB) is a convenient tool in epidemiological studies for the detection and typing of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA. This assay has been optimized and is being commercialized as the Linear Array HPV genotyping test (LA-HPV). We assessed the agreement between LA-HPV and PGMY-LB for detection and typing of 37 HPV genotypes in 528 anogenital samples (236 anal, 146 physician-collected cervical, and 146 self-collected cervicovaginal swabs) obtained from human immunodeficiency virus-seropositive individuals (236 men and 146 women). HPV DNA was detected in 433 (82.0%) and 458 (86.7%) samples with PGMY-LB and LA-HPV (P = 0.047), respectively, for an excellent agreement of 93.8% (kappa = 0.76). Of the 17,094 HPV typing results, 16,562 (1,743 positive and 14,819 negative results) were concordant between tests (agreement = 96.9%; kappa = 0.76). The mean agreement between tests for each type was 96.4% +/- 2.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 95.6% to 97.2%; range, 86% to 100%), for an excellent mean kappa value of 0.85 +/- 0.10 (95% CI, 0.82 to 0.87). However, detection rates for most HPV types were greater with LA-HPV. The mean number of types per sample detected by LA-HPV (4.2 +/- 3.4; 95% CI, 3.9 to 4.5; median, 3.0) was greater than that for PGMY-LB (3.4 +/- 3.0; 95% CI, 3.1 to 3.6; median, 2.0) (P < 0.001). The number of types detected in excess by LA-HPV in anal samples correlated with the number of types per sample (r = 0.49 +/- 0.06; P = 0.001) but not with patient age (r = 0.03 +/- 0.06; P = 0.57), CD4 cell counts (r = 0.06 +/- 0.06; P = 0.13), or the grade of anal disease (r = -0.11 +/- 0.06; P = 0.07). LA-HPV compared favorably with PGMY-LB but yielded higher detection rates for newer and well-known HPV types.     

Aptima HPV E6/E7 mRNA test is as sensitive as Hybrid Capture 2 Assay but more specific at detecting cervical precancer and cancer

Detection of human papillomavirus (HPV) E6/E7 oncogene expression may be more predictive of cervical cancer risk than testing for HPV DNA. The Aptima HPV test (Gen-Probe) detects E6/E7 mRNA of 14 oncogenic types. Its clinical performance was compared with that of the Hybrid Capture 2 DNA test (HC2; Qiagen) in women referred for colposcopy and those routinely screened. Aptima was also compared with the PreTect HPV-Proofer E6/E7 mRNA assay (Proofer; Norchip) in the referral population. Cervical specimens collected in PreservCyt (Hologic Inc.) were processed for HPV detection and genotyping with the Linear Array (LA) method (Roche Molecular Diagnostics, Laval, Quebec, Canada). Histology-confirmed high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 2) or worse (CIN 2+) served as the disease endpoint. On the basis of 1,418 referral cases (CIN 2+, n = 401), the sensitivity of Aptima was 96.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.4, 98.2), whereas it was 94.3% (95% CI, 92.0, 96.6) for HC2. The specificities were 43.2% (95% CI, 40.2, 46.2) and 38.7% (95% CI, 35.7, 41.7), respectively (P < 0.05). In 1,373 women undergoing routine screening (CIN 2+, n = 7), both Aptima and HC2 showed 100% sensitivity, and the specificities were 88.3% (95% CI, 86.6, 90.0) and 85.3% (95% CI, 83.5, 87.3), respectively (P < 0.05); for women ≥ 30 years of age (n = 845), the specificities were 93.9% (95% CI, 92.3, 95.5) and 92.1% (95% CI, 90.3, 93.9), respectively (P < 0.05). On the basis of 818 referral cases (CIN 2+, n = 235), the sensitivity of Aptima was 94.9% (95% CI, 92.1, 97.7) and that of Proofer was 79.1% (95% CI, 73.9, 84.3), and the specificities were 45.8% (95% CI, 41.8, 49.8) and 75.1% (95% CI, 71.6, 78.6), respectively (P < 0.05). Both Aptima and Proofer showed a higher degree of agreement with LA genotyping than HC2. In conclusion, the Aptima test is as sensitive as HC2 but more specific for detecting CIN 2+ and can serve as a reliable test for both primary cervical cancer screening and the triage of borderline cytological abnormalities.     

Prevalence of HPV 16 and 18 DNA sequences in CIN III lesions of adults and adolescents

Adolescents may be more susceptible to cervical human papillomavirus (HPV) infections and may have more rapid progression of cervical intraepithelial neoplastic (CIN) lesions than adults. We evaluated Papanicolaou (Pap) smears and cervical tissue specimens from a consecutive series of 25 adolescent (age 15-20 yr) and 17 adult (age 35-40 yr) patients with a histologic diagnosis of CIN III. The study patients were all Detroit residents enrolled in a health maintenance organization (HMO) affliated with Henry Ford Hospital. The cervical tissue specimens were evaluated for HPV 6b/11, HPV 16, and HPV 18 using agarose gel electrophoresis and Southern hybridization following polymerase chain reaction (PCR) DNA amplification. While the small sample size precluded testing for statistical significance, HPV 16 and/or HPV 18 DNA was detected in specimens from 21/25 (84%) adolescents compared to 12/17 (71%) adults (odds ratio [OR] = 2.2; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.49-9.74). The relationship between adolescence and HPV infections appears to be stronger for HPV 18 and mixed HPV 16/18 infections (OR = 5.6; 95% CI = 0.7-42.4) than for HPV 16 infections (OR = 1.93; 95% CI = 0.4-8.8). None of the cervical specimens contained HPV 6b/11 DNA. Oral contraceptive (OC) use was associated with HPV infection in patients with CIN III, but there was no association between cigarette smoking and HPV infection. The effect of OC use on the relationship of age and HPV could not be evaluated due to small sample size. The effects of previous sexually transmitted disease (STD) on the relationship of age and HPV were assessed. Among women with a history of STD, there was a strong association between HPV and adolescent age (OR = 18.0; 95% CI = 1.2-260.0). Our data suggest that among women with CIN III, adolescents have a higher prevalence of certain high-risk types of HPV infections than adults. The excess is due predominantly to the higher rates of HPV 18 and mixed HPV 16/18 infections in adolescents. The positive relationship between high-risk HPV infections and young age was most evident in adolescents with a history of STD. The results from this study suggest that differences in HPV type infections may be related to the more aggressive clinical course of CIN in adolescents. © 1994 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Comparison between prototype hybrid capture 3 and hybrid capture 2 human papillomavirus DNA assays for detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cancer

We compared the performance of a prototype version of the Hybrid Capture 3 (HC3) human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA assay to the current generation Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) assay, both of which target 13 oncogenic HPV types, for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 and cancer (CIN3+) with cervicovaginal lavage specimens collected at enrollment into a 10-year cohort study at Kaiser Permanente (Portland, Oreg.). HC3 results for a risk-stratified sample (n = 4,364) were compared to HC2 results for the entire cohort (n = 20,810) with receiver operating characteristics curves, and the optimal cut points for both tests (relative light units [RLU]/positive control [PC]) for the detection of CIN3+ were determined. Specimens were also tested for HPV16 and HPV18 with separate HC3 type-specific probes. The optimal cut point for detecting CIN3+ was 1.0 RLU/PC for HC2, as previously shown, and was 0.6 RLU/PC for HC3. At the optimal cut points, HC3 and HC2 had similar screening performance characteristics for CIN3+ diagnosed at the enrollment visit. In analyses that included cases CIN3+ at enrollment and those diagnosed during early follow-up, HC3 had nonsignificantly higher sensitivity and equal specificity for the detection of CIN3+ compared to HC2; this increase in sensitivity was primarily the result of increased detection of CIN3+ in women who were 30 years of age or older and were cytologically negative (P = 0.006). We also compared the performance of the hybrid capture tests to MY09/11 L1 consensus primer PCR results (n = 1,247). HC3 was less likely than HC2 to test positive for specimens that tested positive by PCR for any untargeted types (P < 0.001). HC3 was less likely than HC2 to test positive for untargeted PCR-detected single infections with HPV53 (P = 0.001) and HPV66 (P = 0.01). There was good agreement between test positivity by PCR and by single type-specific HC3 probes for HPV16 (kappa = 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.71 to 0.82) and for HPV18 (kappa = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.68 to 0.79). In conclusion, we suggest that HC3 (>/=0.6 RLU/PC) may be slightly more sensitive than and equally specific test as HC2 (>/=1.0 RLU/PC) for the detection of CIN3+ over the duration of typical screening intervals.     

Direct comparison of two vaginal self-sampling devices for the detection of human papillomavirus infections

Background and objectivesTwo devices for vaginal self-sampling of dry cell material (Evalyn Brush, Rovers Medical Devices; Qvintip, Aprovix) were compared using the Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV test.Study designBoth self-sampling devices (change of order with every patient) including instructions for use and a questionnaire were handed to 146 patients in a colposcopy clinic prior to scheduled colposcopies with collection of cervical reference specimens by gynaecologists using a broom-like device. Matched self-collected and physician collected specimens were transferred to ThinPrep medium and tested for the presence of hr-HPV. Biopsies were taken if indicated by colposcopy.ResultsEvaluation of 136 patients with complete data (136/146; 93.2%) showed high agreement of overall hr-HPV detection rates between self-collected and clinician-collected specimens (Evalyn: 91.2% [kappa 0.822]; Qvintip: 89.0% [kappa 0.779]). Colposcopy and histological evaluation revealed 55 women without cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), 32 CIN1, 34 CIN2, 14 CIN3 and one adenocarcinoma in situ. Hr-HPV testing detected all CIN3+ cases on the clinician-taken or Evalyn self-samples (14/14) and 93% of them on the Qvintip samples (13/14). There was no significant difference regarding the sensitivity for CIN2+ or CIN3+ and specificity of hr-HPV testing on self- vs. clinician samples and on Evalyn vs. Qvintip. Based on signal intensities of β-globin, the observed DNA concentration with Evalyn samples (mean CN: 22.0; 95%-CI: 21.5–22.6) was found to be significantly higher compared to that of Qvintip samples (mean CN: 23.8; 95%-CI 23.2–24.4), regardless of the order of self-sampling (p < 0.0001). Most women considered self-sampling easy and comfortable. Qvintip was considered easier than the Evalyn Brush to understand (p < 0.001) and to use (p = 0.002).DiscussionThis study confirms that hr-HPV testing with a clinically validated PCR-based HPV assay is as accurate on self-samples as on clinician-samples without significant difference between both self-sampling devices.     

Clinical performance of the APTIMA® HPV Assay for the detection of high-risk HPV and high-grade cervical lesions

BackgroundHuman papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing is widely used in conjunction with Papanicolaou (Pap) testing in cervical cancer screening programs to improve the detection of high-grade lesions. While HPV DNA test sensitivity is good, an improvement in specificity is desired. Detection of HPV mRNA may improve specificity. The APTIMA® HPV Assay detects the mRNA of 14 high-risk HPV types in liquid-based cytology specimens.ObjectiveTo evaluate APTIMA HPV Assay performance for detection of high-risk HPV and high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) compared to Qiagen's Hybrid Capture 2 HPV DNA (HC2) test.Study designLiquid Pap specimens were collected from 800 women referred to colposcopy and tested with the APTIMA HPV Assay and the HC2 test. Complete results were available for 753 subjects. A subset of samples (n = 393) were typed using Roche's Linear Array HPV Genotyping Test.ResultsSensitivity and specificity for detection of high-risk HPV were >92% and 99% for the APTIMA HPV Assay and 93% and 82% for the HC2 test. Clinical sensitivity and specificity were 91% and >55% for detection of CIN 2+, and 98% and 53% for detection of CIN 3+ for the APTIMA HPV Assay; values for the HC2 test were 95% and 47% for CIN 2+, and 99% and 44% for CIN 3+. Conclusions: The APTIMA HPV Assay is sensitive and very specific for detection of high-risk HPV. The APTIMA HPV Assay had similar clinical sensitivity for disease detection but higher clinical specificity than the HC2 test, which may improve patient management and reduce the cost of care.     

Validation of the SPF10 LiPA Human Papillomavirus Typing Assay Using Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded Cervical Biopsy Samples

Lower levels of performance of human papillomavirus (HPV) typing assays in studies using formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue compared to those using exfoliated cervical cells have been reported. The interpretation of current studies is limited by bias in inclusion criteria, sample matching, and methods of cell collection. We aimed to validate FFPE tissue for typing by the use of the SPF₁₀ LiPA assay, comparing cervical scrapings to punch and cone biopsy specimens. We examined 165 paired cervical scraping and FFPE punch biopsy samples, and 66 paired FFPE punch and cone biopsy samples. HPV typing was performed using the SPF₁₀ LiPA assay. Kappa statistics were used to measure interrater agreement. The overall agreement with respect to HPV status was 100%. For 74.5% of subjects (kappa = 0.6147), the same numbers of HPV types were detected in scraping and biopsy specimens. The overall positive typing agreement was 95.4% (range, 93.4 to 97.3) for 441 out of 484 individual HPV type analyses. Agreement was good for HPV-39, -42, -43, and -70 (kappa = 0.6506 to 0.7166), excellent for HPV-6, -16, -18, -31, -33, -35, -40, -51, -52, -56, -58, and -66 (kappa = 0.8499 to 0.9665), and absolute for HPV-11, -44, -45, -53, and -68. In 43.9% of cases (kappa = 0.247), the same numbers of HPV types were found in punch and cone biopsy specimens. Overall positive agreement for typing was 86.8% (range, 82.5 to 91.1) for 204 out of 266 individual HPV type analyses. More infections by HPV-18, -33, -51, and -52 were detected in cone specimens. HPV typing by SPF₁₀ LiPA performed equally well for cervical scraping specimens and standard pathological material. Some viral types are preferentially detected in cone specimens, likely reflecting better sampling of diseased epithelium and endocervix tissue.The etiologic role of human papillomavirus (HPV) in the genesis of cervical cancer and squamous epithelial lesions at different sites has been strongly established (11a). More than 100 HPV types, at least 30 of which are found in the cervix, are known (23). The distribution of HPV types varies greatly worldwide depending on the target population, the severity of cervical lesions, and the geographical area (3).The clinical emphasis on HPV typing in the management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) has been mainly in distinguishing low- from high-risk infections; therefore, most assays use pooled analysis of multiple HPV types (12). However, as there is important variability in the risk of CIN, depending on the specific HPV types encountered, assays able to discriminate multiple types in a single test give an added value for patient stratification (5, 14, 21). Furthermore, as HPV immunity is essentially specific with respect to type (28), the distribution of HPV types guides the selection of candidate viruses for vaccination (22). Finally, a reduction of the incidence of infections by targeted viruses represents a surrogate endpoint in trials of vaccine efficacy (9).Analytical detection of specific HPV types usually employs PCR amplification of HPV sequences by either single or multiple consensus primers followed by type discrimination with specific probes. SPF₁₀ LiPA is a broad-spectrum, short-fragment PCR assay based on the amplification of a 65-bp region of the L1 open reading frame (15, 16). Relevant features of the assay are its potential to amplify up to 54 individual HPV types, its proven clinical significance, and its high performance compared to other tests in terms of sensitivity, reproducibility, and coverage of HPV types (4, 17, 24, 26, 30, 31).Rigorous quality control of both analytical and clinical performance is critical in the use of any HPV typing test (18). The present study was designed to validate formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) cervical biopsy samples for analyses by the use of SPF₁₀ LiPA. The primary aim was to establish the accuracy of HPV DNA detection and typing using FFPE punch biopsy specimens compared to exfoliated cells concurrently obtained by cervical scraping. A secondary aim was to assess the reproducibility of HPV typing for punch biopsy sampling compared to the corresponding cone biopsy sampling technique.     

Human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA triage of women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance with cobas 4800 HPV and Hybrid Capture 2 tests for detection of high-grade lesions of the uterine cervix

The triage of women with high-risk (HR) human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive smears for atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) to colposcopy is now an integrated option in clinical guidelines. The performance of cobas 4800 HPV and that of Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) for HR HPV DNA detection in cervical samples in PreservCyt were compared in 396 women referred to colposcopy for ASC-US. Of these, 316 did not have cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), 47 had CIN1, 29 had CIN2 or CIN3 (CIN2+), and 4 had CIN of unknown grade. HR HPV was detected in 129 (32.6%) and 149 (37.6%) samples with HC2 and cobas 4800 HPV, respectively (P = 0.15). The clinical sensitivities and specificities for detecting CIN2+ were 89.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 72.8 to 97.2%) and 66.7% (95% CI, 61.7 to 71.3%) with cobas 4800 HPV and 93.1% (95% CI, 77.0 to 99.2%) and 72.2% (95% CI 67.4 to 76.5%) with HC2. The performance of cobas 4800 HPV was similar to that of HC2 for identifying women with ASC-US who would benefit the most from colposcopy.     

Comparison of Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV and Hybrid Capture 2 for the detection of high-risk HPV DNA in a referral population setting

Background

The Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV assay (ART) is an automated multiplex real-time PCR test for detection of DNA from 14 high risk (HR) HPV types in cervical specimens and simultaneous distinction of HPV16 and HPV18 from other HR-HPV.

Objectives

To evaluate the performance of the ART assay in specimens referred for HPV testing to our laboratory (referral population) by comparison with historical data from HC2 and INNO-LiPA as well as histological status, if available.

Study design

412 cervical specimens were collected from women between 18 and 70 years of age: 301 previously tested by HC2 without clinical data and 111 previously tested by HC2 and INNO-LiPA with histological diagnosis of CIN3+.

Results

Our study demonstrated good overall agreement between ART, HC2 and INNO-LiPA. In the group of the CIN3+ specimens HR-HPV was detected by ART in 93.07% (95% CI: 88.12-98.02), while HR-HPV detection rates with HC2 and INNO-LiPA were 91.09% (95% CI: 85.53-96.65) and 95.05% (95% CI: 90.82-99.28), respectively. The typing capability of ART for HPV16, HPV18 and a pool of twelve other HR-HPV types was investigated by comparison with INNO-LiPA demonstrating high overall assay concordance (89.81%; k 0.87).

Conclusions

The Abbott RealTime assay showed similar clinical performance for detection of CIN3+ compared with HC2. The high level of automation and ability to identify HPV16, HPV18 and other HR-HPV make this assay a very attractive option for HR-HPV testing, potentially improving patient management by risk stratification of cytological abnormal populations.     

Human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA triage of women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance with Amplicor HPV and Hybrid Capture 2 assays for detection of high-grade lesions of the uterine cervix

Up to 20% of women having a cytology smear showing atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) and infected with high-risk human papillomavirus (HR HPV) have high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 2/3). Results obtained with the Amplicor HPV and Hybrid Capture 2 (HC-2) assays for HR HPV DNA detection in women referred to colposcopy for an ASC-US smear were compared. Cervical samples in PreservCyt were tested for the presence of 13 HR HPV types with HC-2, with Amplicor at three cutoffs for positivity (0.2, 1.0, and 1.5 optical density units), and for 36 genotypes with the Linear Array (LA). Of 396 eligible women, 316 did not have CIN, 47 had CIN 1, 29 had CIN 2/3, and 4 had CIN of unknown grade. HR HPV was detected in 129 (32.6%) and 164 (41.4%) samples with HC-2 and Amplicor HPV (cutoff, 0.2), respectively (P = 0.01). Overall, 112 specimens were positive and 215 were negative with the HC-2 and Amplicor HPV assays (agreement of 82.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 78.5 to 86.0). The clinical sensitivity and specificity of Amplicor HPV at cutoffs of 0.2, 1.0 and 1.5 and of HC-2 for detection of CIN 2/3 were 89.7% (95% CI, 72.8 to 97.2) and 62.5% (95% CI, 57.5 to 52.4), 89.7% (95% CI, 72.8 to 97.2) and 64.5% (95% CI, 59.4 to 69.2), 89.7% (95% CI, 72.8 to 97.2) and 64.7% (95% CI, 59.7 to 69.5), and 93.1% (95% CI, 77.0 to 99.2) and 72.2% (95% CI, 67.4 to 76.5), respectively. Both HR HPV detection tests identified women with ASC-US who would benefit the most from colposcopy. Women with persistent HR HPV infection need further investigation despite a first normal colposcopy.     

Human papillomavirus typing with GP5+/6+ polymerase chain reaction reverse line blotting and with commercial type-specific PCR kits.

BACKGROUND: Infection with human papillomavirus (HPV) is a necessary step in the progression to cervical cancer. Many methods for HPV testing are currently available, most developed to detect pools of HPV types. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the HPV typing by molecular methods and to compare commercial kits with an established laboratory method. STUDY DESIGN: Eighty-four cervical samples found to be positive for HPV DNA by GP5+/6+-polymerase chain reaction-enzyme immunoassay-reverse line blotting (PCR-EIA-RLB) were re-tested with two commercial methods, INNO-LiPA and Amplisense HPV typing, able to identify the HPV type predicted by PCR-EIA-RLB in 76 and 67 samples, respectively. RESULTS: The INNO-LiPA assay revealed HPV DNA in 75/76 samples (98.7%; 95% CI, 0.93-0.99) that would contain HPV types identifiable by this assay. The Amplisense HPV assay revealed HPV DNA in 58/67 samples (86.6%; 95% CI, 0.76-0.93) containing HPV types detectable by this assay. For samples with a single infection, the unweighted kappa for concordance of HPV typing was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.78-0.97) for PCR-EIA-RLB versus INNO-LiPA, 0.94 (95% CI, 0.87-0.99) for INNO-LiPA versus Amplisense HPV, and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.70-0.94) for PCR-EIA-RLB versus Amplisense HPV typing. PCR-EIA-RLB revealed 12 multiple infections, INNO-LiPA revealed 14, and Amplisense HPV revealed 5. The agreement among tests for samples with multiple infections was lower, giving kappa values of 0.44 (95% CI, 0.18-0.70) for PCR-EIA-RLB versus INNO-LiPA, 0.52 (95% CI, 0.19-0.85) for PCR-EIA-RLB versus Amplisense HPV and 0.43 (95% CI, 0.12-0.74) for INNO-LiPA versus Amplisense HPV. CONCLUSIONS: In HPV-positive samples, the agreement among tests for HPV typing was high for single infections but markedly lower for infections with multiple HPV types.