Intracellular Human Papillomavirus E6, E7 mRNA Quantification Predicts CIN 2+ in Cervical Biopsies Better Than Papanicolaou Screening for Women Regardless of Age

Context.-Cervical cancer screening in women younger than 30?years relies on cervical cytology because of the poor performance of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing in this age group. Objectives.-To determine the performance of in-cell HPV E6, E7 mRNA quantification (HPV OncoTect) for the detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in women younger than 30?years. Design.-We analyzed 3133 cytology specimens from a screening population of women aged 19-75?years investigate HPV OncoTect as a triage/secondary screening test for atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) cytology in women younger than 30?years. Test results were compared to histology in 246 cases. Results.-The sensitivity of E6, E7 mRNA was 89% for CIN 2+ and 100% for CIN 3+ lesions in women 30?years and older. In women younger than 30?years, the sensitivity of E6, E7 mRNA for CIN 2+ lesions was 88% for CIN 2+ and 92% for CIN 3+ lesions. Abnormal cytology (≥ASCUS) exhibited a sensitivity of 89% for CIN 2+ and 100% for CIN 3+ in women 30?years and older and 96% sensitivity for CIN 2+ and 93% sensitivity for CIN 3+ in women younger than 30. The specificity of E6, E7 mRNA was >80% for CIN 2+ and CIN 3+ in both groups of women compared to a specificity of abnormal cytology of <10% for CIN 2+ and CIN 3+ in both groups. Conclusions.-HPV OncoTect demonstrates a performance that would be effective for ASCUS/LSIL triage in women including those younger than 30?years.     

Sensitivity, specificity, and clinical value of human papillomavirus (HPV) E6/E7 mRNA assay as a triage test for cervical cytology and HPV DNA test

There is evidence that testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) E6/E7 mRNA is more specific than testing for HPV DNA. A retrospective study was carried out to evaluate the performance of the PreTect HPV-Proofer E6/E7 mRNA assay (Norchip) as a triage test for cytology and HPV DNA testing. This study analyzed 1,201 women, 688 of whom had a colposcopy follow-up and 195 of whom had histology-confirmed high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia or worse (CIN2+). The proportion of positive results and the sensitivity and specificity for CIN2+ were determined for HPV mRNA in comparison to HPV DNA and cytology. All data were adjusted for follow-up completeness. Stratified by cytological grades, the HPV mRNA sensitivity was 83% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 63 to 94%) in ASC-US (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance), 62% (95% CI = 47 to 75%) in L-SIL (low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion), and 67% (95% CI = 57 to 76%) in H-SIL (high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion). The corresponding figures were 99, 91, and 96%, respectively, for HPV DNA. The specificities were 82, 76, and 45%, respectively, for HPV mRNA and 29, 13, and 4%, respectively, for HPV DNA. Used as a triage test for ASC-US and L-SIL, mRNA reduced colposcopies by 79% (95% CI = 74 to 83%) and 69% (95% CI = 65 to 74%), respectively, while HPV DNA reduced colposcopies by 38% (95% CI = 32 to 44%) and by 15% (95% CI = 12 to 19%), respectively. As a HPV DNA positivity triage test, mRNA reduced colposcopies by 63% (95% CI = 60 to 66%), having 68% sensitivity (95% CI = 61 to 75%), whereas cytology at the ASC-US+ threshold reduced colposcopies by 23% (95% CI = 20 to 26%), showing 92% sensitivity (95% CI = 87 to 95%). In conclusion, PreTect HPV-Proofer mRNA can serve as a better triage test than HPV DNA to reduce colposcopy referral in both ASC-US and L-SIL. It is also more efficient than cytology for the triage of HPV DNA-positive women. Nevertheless, its low sensitivity demands a strict follow-up of HPV DNA positive-mRNA negative cases.     

Performance of proex c and pretect hpv‐proofer e6/e7 mrna tests in comparison with the hybrid capture 2 hpv dna test for triaging ascus and lsil cytology

The clinical usefulness of the ProEx C (Becton Dickinson) and PreTect HPV‐Proofer E6/E7 mRNA tests (Proofer; Norchip) for the triage of ASCUS and LSIL cytology was determined in comparison with the Hybrid Capture 2 HPV DNA test (HC2; Qiagen). The study population consisted of women with a history of abnormal cytology referred to colposcopy. Histology‐confirmed CIN 2+ served as the disease endpoint. The study was based on 1,360 women (mean age 30.7 years), of whom 380 had CIN 2+. Among 315 with ASCUS (CIN 2+, n = 67), the sensitivities of ProEx C, Proofer, and HC2 to detect CIN 2+ were, 71.6, 71.6, and 95.5%, respectively, with a corresponding specificity of 74.6, 74.2, and 35.1%. Among 363 with LSIL (CIN 2+, n = 108), the sensitivities of ProEx C, Proofer, and HC2 were, 67.6, 74.1, and 96.3%, respectively, with a corresponding specificity of 60, 68.2, and 18.4%. Among 225 HC2‐positive ASCUS (CIN 2+, n = 64), 105 tested positive by ProEx C, reducing colposcopy referral by 53.3% and detecting 71.9% of CIN 2+; Proofer was positive in 112/225, reducing colposcopy referral by 50.2% and detecting 75.0% of CIN 2+. Among 312 HC2‐positive LSIL (CIN 2+, n = 104), 160 tested positive by ProEx C, reducing coloposcopy referral by 48.7% and detecting 66.3% of CIN 2+; Proofer was positive in 159/312, reducing colposcopy referral by 49.0% and detecting 75.0% of CIN 2+. In conclusion, both ProEx C and Proofer have a similar performance profile with a significantly higher specificity but lower sensitivity than HC2 for the detection of CIN 2+. Consequently, although they can reduce colposcopy referral, they will miss a proportion of CIN 2+ cases. This is a major limitation and should be taken into account if these tests are considered for ASCUS or LSIL triage. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2013;41:767–775. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Comparing triage algorithms using HPV DNA genotyping,HPV E7 mRNA detection and cytology in high-risk HPV DNA-positive women

BackgroundHigh-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) DNA positive women require triage testing to identify those with high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or cancer (≥CIN2).ObjectiveComparing three triage algorithms (1) E7 mRNA testing following HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58 genotyping (E7 mRNA test), (2) HPV16/18 DNA genotyping and (3) cytology, for ≥CIN2 detection in hrHPV DNA-positive women.Study designhrHPV DNA-positive women aged 18–63 years visiting gynecology outpatient clinics were included in a prospective observational cohort study. From these women a cervical scrape and colposcopy-directed biopsies were obtained. Cervical scrapes were evaluated by cytology, HPV DNA genotyping by bead-based multiplex genotyping of GP5+6+-PCR-products, and presence of HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58 E7 mRNA using nucleic acid sequence-based amplification (NASBA) in DNA positive women for respective HPV types. Sensitivities and specificities for ≥CIN2 were compared between E7 mRNA test and HPV16/18 DNA genotyping in the total group (n = 348), and E7 mRNA test and cytology in a subgroup of women referred for non-cervix-related gynecological complaints (n = 133).ResultsSensitivity for ≥CIN2 of the E7 mRNA test was slightly higher than that of HPV16/18 DNA genotyping (66.9% versus 60.9%; ratio 1.10, 95% CI: 1.0002–1.21), at similar specificity (54.8% versus 52.3%; ratio 1.05, 95% CI: 0.93–1.18). Neither sensitivity nor specificity of the E7 mRNA test differed significantly from that of cytology (sensitivity: 68.8% versus 75.0%; ratio 0.92, 95% CI: 0.72–1.17; specificity: 59.4% versus 65.3%; ratio 0.91, 95% CI: 0.75–1.10).ConclusionFor detection of ≥CIN2 in hrHPV DNA-positive women, an algorithm including E7 mRNA testing following HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58 DNA genotyping performs similar to HPV16/18 DNA genotyping or cytology.     

5-type HPV mRNA versus 14-type HPV DNA test: test performance,over-diagnosis and overtreatment in triage of women with minor cervical lesions

Background

Repeat cytology and HPV testing is used in triage of women with minor cytological lesions. The objective of this study was to evaluate 14-type HPV DNA and 5-type HPV mRNA testing in delayed triage of women with ASC-US/LSIL.

Methods

We compared a DNA test (Roche Cobas 4800) and an 5-type mRNA test (PreTect HPV-Proofer). In total 564 women were included in the study.

Results

The sensitivity among solved cases for CIN3+ were 100 % (15/15) for both tests. The sensitivity for CIN2+ of the HPV DNA test was 100 % (38/38) relative to 79 % (30/38) for the 5-type HPV mRNA test. The corresponding estimates of specificity for CIN2+ among solved cases were 84 % (393/466; 95 % CI: 81–88) and 91 % (451/498; 95 % CI: 88–93). The positive predictive values for CIN3+ were 13.5 % (15/111) for DNA+ and 19.5 % (15/77) for 5-type mRNA+. Significantly more women screened with 5-type mRNA than DNA returned to screening (81 % vs 71 %, p?<?0.01). Subsequently, significantly fewer women were referred for colposcopy/biopsies/treatment (19 % (105/564) vs 29 % (165/564), p?<?0.01).

Conclusions

5-type HPV mRNA is more specific than 14-type HPV DNA in delayed triage of women with ASC-US/LSIL. The referral rate for colposcopy was 57 % higher for DNA+ relative to mRNA+ cases (165 vs 105), with the same detection rate of CIN3+, but the 5-type mRNA test had lower sensitivity for CIN2+. It is important to consider the trade-off between sensitivity and specificity of the diagnostic test when designing screening algorithms.

     

Findings to date from the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study (ALTS)

Controversy exists in the United States regarding the proper evaluation and management of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) and equivocal (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance [ASCUS, now ASC-US]) cervical cytologic interpretations. To address this issue, the National Cancer Institute initiated the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study (ALTS). ALTS is a multicenter, randomized clinical trial designed to evaluate 3 alternative methods of management, namely, immediate colposcopy, cytologic follow-up, and triage by human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing. This article summarizes the major findings of ALTS that have been published to date. Patients with ASCUS (n = 3488) or LSIL (n = 1572) were randomly assigned to research arms between November 1996 and December 1998, and were monitored for 2 years. The disease outcome was histologic cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 3/cancer. The prevalence of oncogenic HPV was too high to permit effective triage of LSIL using HPV DNA testing by Hybrid Capture 2. However, for the women referred with a cytologic interpretation of ASCUS, HPV triage proved useful, with sensitivity equivalent to immediate colposcopy and a halving of colposcopic referrals. Among older women with ASCUS, HPV testing remained sensitive for detecting CIN 3 and cancer, but the referral percentage was dramatically lower compared to younger women. ALTS yielded insight into the performance of cytology and histopathology; experienced pathologists differed significantly in their interpretations of cervical abnormalities, especially histologic CIN 1 and cytologic ASCUS. Nonetheless, it was possible to distinguish a relatively uncommon type of ASCUS, equivocal for high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, that has a high positive predictive value for identifying women with underlying high-grade CIN. Many additional analyses are underway.     

人乳头瘤病毒检测在宫颈病变中的应用价值

目的了解宫颈细胞学异常患者中人乳头瘤“毒（HPV）的感染状况,评估HPV检测在宫颈病变筛查中的价值。方法随机选取宫颈薄层液基细胞学检测异常的101例患者进行了HPV检测,同时行组织病理学检查。结果（1）101例宫颈细胞学异常患者中,细胞学为ASCUS、LSIL、HSIL、鳞状细胞癌时高危型HPV阳性率分别为84．2％、88．6％、100．0％和2／2;（2）10l例细胞学异常患者中20例为CINI,81例为CINⅡ及以上级别,高危型HPV阳性率存CINI、CINⅡ及以上级别分别为60％、97．5％;（3）ASCUS组中,高危型HPV阳性患者中CINⅡ及以上病变的发生率为87．5％,HPV阴性患者中CINⅡ及以上病变的发生率为16．7％;（4）高危型HPV型别分布由高到低分别为HPVl6型39．6％（40／101）,HPV58型17．8％（18／101）,HPV52型16．8％（17／101）,HPVl8型9．9％（10／101）以及HPV33型9．9％（10／101）。结论高危型HPV感染率与宫颈病变级别呈正相关;HPV检测可作为ASCUS患者的有效分流手段。宫颈病变患者中高危型HPV感染以16、58、52、18、33型为主。     

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%.     

Management of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or low‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesions of the uterine cervix with human papilloma virus infection among young women aged less than 25 years

Current ASCCP guidelines recommend repeat cytology 12 months after HPV‐positive results in women aged 21–24 years with either atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) or a low‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL). The purpose of this study was to validate an algorithm in such women with ASCUS or LSIL. A multicenter cross‐sectional study was carried out at three academic hospitals involving 40,847 Korean women who underwent cervical cancer screening with cytology and HPV testing with or without subsequent colposcopic biopsies between January 2007 and December 2013. Among a total of 3,193 women with available histopathology data, 762 women with ASCUS and 758 with LSIL were HPV‐positive. Among HPV‐positive women with ASCUS, 38.5% of women aged 21–24 years had ≥CIN2, compared to 20.8% of women aged 30–65 years and 21.1% of the total women. Among HPV‐positive women with LSIL, 25.8% aged 21–24 years had ≥CIN2, compared to 21.2% of women aged 30–65 years and 21.9% of the total women. In HPV‐positive women with ASCUS/LSIL aged less than 25 years, the prevalence of ≥CIN2 lesions was 34.5%, which was significantly higher than that (21.0%) in women aged ≥25 years. The risk of ≥CIN2 lesions in HPV‐positive Korean women aged 21–24 years with ASCUS or LSIL was not lower than that in older women. Colposcopic examination should be considered for management of HPV‐positive young women with ASCUS or LSIL. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2016;44:959–963. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

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.     

Screening properties of human papillomavirus testing for predicting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion smears: a prospective study

The aim of the present study was to determine the usefulness of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for predicting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 1 and 2 to 3 on cervical biopsies in women who had atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) on Papanicolaou tests. In this prospective cohort, 167 women with abnormal cytologic examination (ASCUS and LSIL) were evaluated by colposcopy-directed biopsy and endocervical curettage. Colposcopy was performed on all study participants to obtain cervical tissue for histologic examination for detection of underlying CIN in patients with an initial cytologic test result of ASCUS and LSIL. A sample for HPV DNA detection by polymerase chain reaction was obtained. The HPV type 16 was positive in 35.4% of the 167 women with abnormal cytologic examination result in our gynecologic outpatient's clinic. Histologic diagnosis of CIN 1 was found in 45 of 135 women with ASCUS and in 17 of 32 women with LSIL. According to the cytologic findings, the frequency of CIN grade 2 or 3 in patients classified as ASCUS and LSIL was 12.5% (17/135) and 18.7% (6/32), respectively. Of the ASCUS smears, 9.6% were positive for HPV type 16. The sensitivity of the HPV type 16 using polymerase chain reaction technique threshold in detecting CIN 1 and CIN 2 to 3 was 57% and 46% in ASCUS-LSIL cytologic examination, respectively. The positive predictive value of HPV type 16 ranged from 60% in patients with CIN 1 and 42% in CIN 2 to 3 in ASCUS-LSIL. By contrast, negative predictive value was 58% in patients with CIN 1 and 80% in CIN 2 to 3. The low positive predictive value of HPV testing with ASCUS smears suggests that HPV positivity could be not used for predicting the presence of CIN 2 to 3.     

Resolving ASCUS without recourse to HPV testing: manual reprocessing of residual automated liquid-based cytology (ALBC) material using manual liquid-based cytology (MLBC)

We show that residual cell material from ThinPrep PapTest (Cytyc Corporation, Boxborough, MA) atypical squamous-cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) cases may be manually reprocessed to triage women into actionable diagnostic categories (HSIL, LSIL, and Negative). Material remaining from each of 358 ThinPrep ASCUS cases was manually reprocessed as two slides, labeled "A" and "B." Interobserver agreement between case contributors (CCs) and three sequential reviewers (SRs) was analyzed with 186 cases (Study 1), and diagnostic reproducibility between SRs was examined with an additional 172 cases (Study 2). In Study 1, CCs classified 33% of cases as LSIL or greater, SRs classified 60% as LSIL or greater, and there was 58% diagnostic agreement between CCs and SRs. No "Negative" case assignment by one group afforded an "HSIL" assignment by the complementary group. In Study 2, there was 95% agreement between SRs A slide and B slide diagnoses with 54% of A slides and 55% of B slides classified as LISL or greater. Again, no "Negative" case assignment to one slide afforded an "HSIL" assignment to the complementary slide. Overall, 12.6% of the 358 cases showed HSIL, and all HSILs by one observer group were ASCUS or greater by the complementary observer group. Using manual reprocessing beyond the 21-day specimen outdate for HPV testing by the Hybrid Capture II High Risk HPV test (HR-HCII; Digene Corporation, Beltsville, MD), many ThinPrep ASCUS cases were reclassified as LSIL or HSIL. The 12.6% HSIL proportion of this study approximated the 11.5% CIN 2 or greater proportion of the ALTS ASCUS arm. Similar to ALTS, manual liquid-based cytology (MLBC) would have referred nearly 60% of women to colposcopy for a definitive diagnosis of HSIL or LSIL without resorting to HPV testing. These data demonstrate that many cases of automated liquid-based cytology (ALBC)-diagnosed ASCUS represent unrecognized SIL, which is present in the ALBC specimen vial at the time the ASCUS diagnosis is rendered.     

High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) E6/E7 mRNA testing by PreTect HPV-Proofer for detection of cervical high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia and cancer among hrHPV DNA-positive women with normal cytology

Our aim was to investigate whether high-risk HPV (hrHPV) mRNA detection by PreTect HPV-Proofer can be used to stratify hrHPV DNA-positive women of different cytology classes for risk of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or worse (cervical precancer or cancer, i.e., cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher [≥ CIN2]). A total of 375 women participating in population-based screening, with a GP5+/6+-PCR hrHPV DNA-positive cervical scrape with normal cytology (n = 202), borderline or mild dyskaryosis (BMD) (n = 88), or moderate dyskaryosis or worse (>BMD) (n = 85), were enrolled. Cervical scrapes were additionally subjected to HPV16/18/31/33/45 E6/E7 mRNA analysis by PreTect HPV-Proofer (mRNA test). Referral and follow-up policies were based on cytology, hrHPV DNA, and mRNA testing. The primary study endpoint was the number of ≥CIN2 detected within 3 years of follow-up. The mRNA positivity increased with the severity of cytological abnormality, ranging from 32% (64/202) in hrHPV DNA-positive women with normal cytology to 47% (41/88) in BMD and 68% (58/85) in >BMD groups (P < 0.01). Women with ≥ CIN2 were more likely to test positive by mRNA test (63%) than women without evidence of ≥ CIN2 (32%; P < 0.01). A positive mRNA test result conferred an increased ≥ CIN2 risk in hrHPV DNA-positive women with normal cytology, i.e., 0.55 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.34 to 0.76) in mRNA-positive versus 0.20 (95% CI, 0.07 to 0.33) in mRNA-negative women. In hrHPV DNA-positive women with BMD or >BMD, the result of the mRNA test did not influence the ≥ CIN2 risk. In conclusion, mRNA testing by PreTect HPV-Proofer might be of value to select hrHPV DNA-positive women with normal cytology in need of immediate referral for colposcopy.     

FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation analysis as a triage test for HPV-positive women: cross-sectional and longitudinal data from a Dutch screening cohort

ObjectivesThe aim was to evaluate the cross-sectional and long-term triage performance of FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation analysis in human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical screening.MethodsWe conducted a post hoc analysis within a Dutch population-based HPV-positive study cohort of women aged 30–60 years (n = 979). Cross-sectional cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 3+ sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value as well as cumulative CIN3+ or cervical cancer risks after 9 and 14 years were compared for three baseline triage strategies: (1) cytology, (2) FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation analysis and (3) combined FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation with cytology.ResultsCIN3+ sensitivity of FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation analysis was similar to that of cytology (71.3% vs 76.0%, ratio 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.05), at a lower specificity (78.3% vs 87.0%, ratio 0.90, 95% CI 0.86 to 0.94). Combining FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation analysis with cytology resulted in a CIN3+ sensitivity of 84.6% (95% CI 78.3 to 90.8) at a specificity of 69.6% (95% CI 66.5 to 72.7). Similar 9- and 14-year CIN3+ risks for baseline cytology-negative women and baseline FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation-negative women were observed, with risk differences of –0.42% (95% CI –2.1 to 1.4) and –0.07% (95% CI –1.9 to 1.9), respectively. The 14-year cumulative cervical cancer incidence was significantly lower for methylation-negative women compared to cytology-negative women (risk difference 0.98%, 95% CI 0.26 to 2.0).DiscussionFAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation analysis has a good triage performance on baseline screening samples, with a cross-sectional CIN3+ sensitivity and long-term triage-negative CIN3+ risk equalling cytology triage. Therefore, FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation analysis appears to be a good and objective alternative to cytology in triage scenarios in HPV-based cervical screening.     

The relationship of community biopsy-diagnosed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 to the quality control pathology-reviewed diagnoses: an ALTS report

We examined the predictors (cytologic interpretations, pathology review, human papillomavirus [HPV] testing results, and colposcopic impressions) of precancer among 545 women with clinical center biopsy diagnoses of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 in the ASCUS LSIL Triage Study. Among women with a CIN 2 biopsy result, there was an increasing likelihood that the loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) tissue sample was diagnosed as precancer (CIN 3) with an increasing number of clinical risk factors of cervical precancer (high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion [HSIL] cytology, high-grade colposcopy, detection of HPV type 16; Ptrend < .0005). In a multivariate model, using a case definition of worst histologic diagnosis made by the quality control pathology review of biopsy and LEEP tissue samples, HPV-16 was positively associated (odds ratio [OR], 4.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6-8.8) with a CIN 3 diagnosis, whereas testing negative for HPV or positive for noncarcinogenic HPV types was negatively associated (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.14-0.75) with a CIN 3 diagnosis. Although we found clear evidence that HPV-16 detection helped clarify whether a biopsy specimen diagnosed as CIN 2 represented HPV infection or cervical precancer, this relationship was not sufficiently robust to be clinically useful for reducing the overtreatment of women with HPV infection.     

Is the human papillomavirus test in combination with the Papanicolaou test useful for management of patients with diagnoses of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance/low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions?

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is useful in the evaluation of patients diagnosed with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS)/low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) and whether the HPV test is appropriate as an alternative screening method. DESIGN: The results of Papanicolaou (Pap) tests and subsequent hybrid capture tube (HCT) II tests for high-risk-type HPV were analyzed for 457 patients. Among these tests, 208 histologic diagnoses were made and correlated with the results of Pap and HPV tests. The sensitivity and specificity of the Pap test, HPV test, and the combined method of Pap and HPV tests to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2/3 and all CIN were also measured. RESULTS: Sixty (63.8%) of 94 women with LSIL and 31 (26.3%) of 118 women with ASCUS tested positive for high-risk HPV. The sensitivity values for Pap tests in detecting all cases of CIN and CIN 2/3 were 91.4% and 92.9%, respectively. The sensitivity values of HCT II tests using the high-risk probe for detecting all cases of CIN and CIN 2/3 were 62.6% and 88.1%, respectively. Biopsies confirmed that 10 (22.7%) of 44 LSIL patients with high-risk HPV had CIN 2/3, but only 1 (4.5%) of 22 LSIL patients without high-risk HPV had CIN 2/3. CONCLUSION: Testing for high-risk HPV with the HCT II test is useful in the detection of CIN 2/3 in LSIL groups and in the selection of patients for colposcopy in ASCUS groups, but it is not suitable for cervical cancer screening tests.     

人乳头状瘤病毒分型检测在宫颈细胞学诊断为ASCUS分层处理中的意义

目的 探讨人乳头状瘤病毒(human papillomavirus,HPV)分型检测在宫颈细胞学诊断为不典型鳞状细胞意义不明确(atypical squamous cell of undetermined significance.ASCUS)分层处理中的意义.方法 对184例宫颈细胞学诊断为ASCUS的患者,分别进行HPV检测和阴道镜下宫颈组织活检.结果 184例宫颈细胞学诊断为ASCUS的患者中,经组织病理学证实炎症112例(60.87%),CIN Ⅰ级33例(17.93%),CIN Ⅱ级17例(9.24%),CIN Ⅲ级8例(4.35%),宫颈鳞癌4例(2.17%),宫颈湿疣10例(5.43%).其中124例经检测呈高危型HPV(high-risk types HPV,HR-HPV)阳性,阳性率为67.39%(124/184),随后经病理学证实炎症66例(53.23%),CIN Ⅰ级22例(17.74%),CIN Ⅱ级16例(12.90%),CIN Ⅲ级8例(6.45%),宫颈鳞癌4例(3.23%),宫颈湿疣8例(6.45%).HPV阳性组CIN以上病变检出率明显高于HPV阴性组(P<0.003).结论对宫颈细胞学诊断为ASCUS的患者,建议作HPV检测,若HR-HPV阳性,则需进一步阴道镜下宫颈活检;若HPV阴性,酌情处理.     

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.     

Telomerase and human papillomavirus as diagnostic adjuncts for cervical dysplasia and carcinoma

Telomerase and human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA were evaluated as potential markers of high-grade dysplasia in cervical cytological specimens. Cytology specimens were collected from patients at the time of colposcopic evaluation for management of a previous abnormal cytology test result. Telomerase activity was evaluated by the telomeric repeat amplification protocol (TRAP), and HPV DNA was detected by polymerase chain reaction with L1 consensus-sequence primers and filter hybridization genotyping. Telomerase was detected in 8 of 97 (8.2%) cases with normal cytology or benign cellular changes, in 7 of 98 (7.1%) cases of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS), in 3 of 95 (3.2%) cases of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL), and in 17 of 48 (35.4%) cases with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL). High-risk HPVs were detected in 23 of 97 (23.7%) cases with normal/reactive cellular changes (RCC) cytology, in 28 of 98 (28.6%) cases of ASCUS, in 69 of 95 (72.6%) cases of LSIL, and in 35 of 48 (72.9%) cases of HSIL. Telomerase expression did not correlate with the detection of high-risk HPVs in any cytological diagnostic categories. Telomerase and HPV test results of cytological specimens were correlated with the histological diagnoses of concurrent cervical biopsy specimens. Telomerase showed a sensitivity of 29.9% and a specificity of 94.0% for biopsy-confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) II/III. In contrast, high-risk HPVs were detected in 70.1% of cases with underlying CIN II/III, with a specificity of 62.5%. A relatively high proportion of normal/RCC or ASCUS cases with telomerase-positive test results had underlying high-grade dysplasia on cervical biopsy. Thus, technical and practical limitations of the TRAP assay in cervical cytology specimens limit the practical application of telomerase as a diagnostic adjunct in cervical cytopathology.     

高危型人乳头状瘤病毒DNA检测方法在宫颈疾病中的临床意义

目的 评价高危型人乳头状瘤病毒DNA(酶切信号放大法)(Cervista High-risk humanpapilloma vires,Cervista HR-HPV)检测方法在宫颈疾病中的临床意义.方法 利用Cerrista HR-HPV检测方法对437例人组标本进行高危型HPV检测,检测结果与基因测序结果进行对比,同时评价Cervista HR-HPV检测方法在检测CIN2以上的宫颈病变(CIN 2+CIN 3+Cancer,以下简称CIN2+)的能力,以及三组A5/A6,A7,A9与CIN2+的相关性.结果 Cervista HR-HPV检测方法与基因测序结果相比总体符合率为88.26%,基因测序阳性率为29.08%,本实验为38.96%(P<0.0001).该检测方法对CIN2+灵敏度98.46%.特异度58.49%.阳性预测值29.68%,阴性预测值99.54%.A9和CIN2+的95%OR值的可信区间为10.086～57.283(P<0.0001).结论 Cervista HR-HPV与基因测序的检测一致性较好.对于CIN2+灵敏度与特异性较好,可以应用于宫颈癌的防癌筛查,出现A阳性的患者建议进一步行阴道镜检测确诊是否有CIN2+.