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.     

High-risk human papillomavirus testing in women with ASC-US cytology: results from the ATHENA HPV study

This study evaluated the clinical performance of the cobas 4800 HPV Test (Roche Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, CA) for high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing with individual HPV-16/HPV-18 genotyping in women 21 years or older with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US). Women (N = 47,208) were recruited in the United States during routine screening, and liquid-based cytology and HPV testing were performed. The ASC-US prevalence was 4.1% (1,923/47,208), and 1,578 women underwent colposcopy with valid results. The cobas 4800 HPV Test demonstrated performance comparable to the Hybrid Capture 2 test (QIAGEN, Gaithersburg, MD) for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or worse and grade 3 or worse. HPV-16/HPV-18+ women had a greater absolute risk of CIN 2 or worse compared with pooled HR-HPV+ and HR-HPV- women (24.4%, 14.0%, and 0.8%, respectively). The cobas 4800 HPV Test is clinically validated for ASC-US triage. HPV-16/HPV-18 genotyping can identify women at highest risk for high-grade cervical disease, and this additional risk stratification may be used in formulating patient management decisions.     

Anyplex II HPV28 detection and Anyplex II HPV HR detection assays are highly concordant with other commercial assays for detection of high-risk HPV genotypes in women with high grade cervical abnormalities

Purpose: to evaluate the performance of Anyplex II HPV28 and HPV HR Detection assays against the EuroArray HPV, Cobas 4800 HPV (Cobas), HPV Amplicor (Amp), Linear Array HPV (LA) and Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) in detection of high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) from liquid-based cervical cytology samples. Methods: cervical specimens from 404 women undergoing management of high-grade cytological abnormality were evaluated by Anyplex II HPV28 and HPV HR Detection assays for detection of HR-HPV genotypes and prediction of histologically-confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (≥CIN2). The results were compared to EuroArray, HC2, Cobas, Amp, and LA. Results: specimens were evaluated from 404 women with an average age of 30 years, including 336 with a histological diagnosis of?≥?CIN2 and 68 with?≤?CIN1. Concordance of HR-HPV detection between Anyplex II HPV28 and other genotyping assays was 94.79 % (κ?=?0.84; EuroArray) and 97.27 % (κ?=?0.91; LA); and between Anyplex II HPV HR and other HR-HPV detection assays was 86.35 % (κ?=?0.62; HC2), 96.03 % (κ?=?0.87; Cobas) and 96.77 % (κ?=?0.89; Amp). Using HR-HPV detection for prediction of?≥?CIN2 by Anyplex II HPV28 and HPV HR, sensitivity (90.18, 95 % CI 86.48–93.14; 90.77, 95 % CI 87.16–93.65) and specificity (both 67.16, 95 % CI 54.60–78.15) were not significantly different to the other HPV assays tested, with one exception. Both Anyplex assays had significantly higher sensitivity than HC2 (p?<?0.0001), with a specificity of 96 % (p?>?0.05) of HC2 in this high-risk population. Conclusions: both Anyplex II HPV detection assays were concordant with other commercial assays for HR-HPV detection, with comparable sensitivity and specificity for?≥?CIN2 detection.     

The interplay of age stratification and HPV testing on the predictive value of ASC-US cytology. Results from the ATHENA HPV study

We have previously shown that human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping, using the cobas HPV Test (Roche Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, CA), can be used to identify women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) at the highest risk for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or worse. We investigated the impact of age stratification on the risk of CIN 2 or worse in women with ASC-US and the performance of HPV genotyping in different age strata. The sensitivity of the cobas HPV Test was 93.3% in the 21- to 29-year-old age group and 67.7% in the 40 years or older group, most likely owing to pathologic misclassification of CIN 2 or worse in older women. The prevalence of CIN 2 or worse in younger women was nearly 4-fold that detected in older women and was predominantly HPV-16-related. Age-specific evaluation of ASC-US cytology in conjunction with HPV genotype status enables more effective risk assessment and could be used in clinical management.     

Comparison of the performance of paired urine and cervical samples for cervical cancer screening in screening population

The main objective of this work is to determine the performance of urine for human papillomavirus (HPV) detection in cervical cancer screening in screening population. Paired urine and cervical samples were collected from 2038 women (careHPV group: 1002, cobas4800 group: 1036) in 2015. Urine was tested by a new urine-based HPV test and cervical samples by careHPV or cobas4800 HPV test. Women were triaged based on cervical results and then referred to colposcopy with biopsy as clinically indicated. In 2017, women were followed up and screened with cotesting strategy, women with any positive would be referred and biopsied if necessary. In careHPV group, the HPV prevalence of urine was 14.1%, and 16.4% for cervical samples. In cobas4800 group, it was 19.1% and 20.4%, correspondingly. The concordance of urine samples compared with cervical samples was moderate (careHPV group: 86.6%; κ = 0.48; cobas4800 group: 83%; κ = 0.46). The baseline sensitivity and specificity for urine against CIN2+ detection were 85.7%, 86.8% in careHPV group, and 69.2%, 82.3% in cobas4800 group, respectively. Cervical samples were 100% sensitive for both tests (careHPV and cobas4800) and 85.2% specific in careHPV group and 81.9% specific in cobas4800 group, respectively. The corresponding cumulative sensitivity and specificity were 68.8% and 87.1%, 58.8% and 81.9%, 87.5% and 85.5%, and 94.1% and 81.4%. Urine demonstrated certain potential in cervical cancer screening and could be an alternative if no better screening strategies available.     

Evaluation of HPV-16 and HPV-18 genotyping for the triage of women with high-risk HPV+ cytology-negative results

The ATHENA (Addressing THE Need for Advanced HPV Diagnostics) HPV study evaluated the clinical usefulness of the cobas HPV Test (Roche Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, CA) for high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing (14 HR types) and individual HPV-16/HPV-18 genotyping in women undergoing routine cervical cytology screening in the United States. For the study, 47,208 women were recruited, including 32,260 women 30 years or older with negative cytology. All women with positive results for HR-HPV (n = 4,219) plus a subset of HR-HPV- women (n = 886) were referred for colposcopy and biopsy. The overall prevalence of HR-HPV was 6.7% and of HPV-16/HPV-18 was 1.5%. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN 2) or worse was found in 1.2% of women examined. The estimated absolute risk of CIN 2 or worse in HPV-16+ and/or HPV-18+ women was 11.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.4%-14.8%) compared with 6.1% (95% CI, 4.9%-7.2%) in HR-HPV+ and 0.8% (95% CI, 0.3%-1.5%) in HR-HPV- women. These analyses validate the 2006 American Society of Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology guidelines for HPV-16/HPV-18 genotyping, which recommend referral to colposcopy of HPV-16/HPV-18+ women with negative cytology.     

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   

Comparison of Human Papillomavirus Detection by Aptima HPV and cobas HPV Tests in a Population of Women Referred for Colposcopy following Detection of Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance by Pap Cytology

Few studies have compared the cobas HPV test to the Aptima HPV assay (AHPV) and the Aptima HPV 16 18/45 genotype assay (AHPV GT) for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) detection, clinical performance in detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) or more severe (CIN2+) diagnoses, and risk stratification by partial HPV genotyping. The cobas HPV test is a DNA test that separately and concurrently detects HPV16, HPV18, and a pool of 12 other hrHPV types. AHPV is an RNA test for a pool of 14 hrHPV genotypes, and AHPV GT is an RNA test run on AHPV-positive results to detect HPV16 separately from HPV18 and HPV45, which are detected together. In a population of patients (n = 988) referred for colposcopy because of a cervical Pap cytology result of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US), a cervical scrape specimen was taken, placed into a ThinPrep Pap test vial containing PreservCyt liquid cytology medium, and tested in a blinded fashion with cobas and AHPV and with AHPV GT for AHPV-positive results. The final diagnoses were based on a consensus panel review of the biopsy specimen histology. AHPV and cobas were equally sensitive for CIN2+ diagnoses (89.4% each; P = 1.000), and AHPV was more specific than cobas (63.1% versus 59.3%; P ≤ 0.001). The percent total agreement, percent positive agreement, and kappa value were 90.9%, 81.1%, and 0.815, respectively. Risk stratification using partial HPV genotyping was similar for the two assays. AHPV and AHPV GT had similar sensitivity and risk stratification to cobas HPV, but they were more specific than cobas HPV.     

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.     

Assessment of the effectiveness of HPV16/18 infection referred for colposcopy in cervical cancer screening in Northwest of China

To evaluate the effectiveness of Human papillomavirus16/18 infection referral to colposcopy in cervical cancer screening for women aged 25 years and older in Chinese northwest region Shaan'xi province. A total of 2224 women were diagnosed with primary high‐risk HPV infection by HPV‐DNA genotyping technology during August 2014 to August 2015. A total of 1916 cases referred for colposcopy with histological evidence were enrolled, including 1124 women with HPV16/18 genotype and 792 with other High‐risk human papillomavirus genotypes. A total of 1916 women aged 25 years and older with HR‐HPV positive were referred to colposcopy. The distribution of HPV16, HPV18, and other HR‐HPVs infection were 49.22%, 9.45%, and 41.33%, respectively. 71.56% had normal cervical histology, 7.05% had Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia1, 8.82% had CIN2, 7.25% had CIN3, and 5.32% had cervical cancer. The percentage of positivity of HPV16 and HPV18 was highly associated with the relative risk of cervical lesion. The sensitivity and specificity of HPV16/18 for detection of CIN2+ (CIN3+) was 82.68% (92.12%) and 47.87% (46.15%), respectively. The positive predictive value and negative predictive value of HPV16/18 for detection of CIN2+ (CIN3+) was 30.16% (19.75%) and 91.03% (97.60%), respectively. HPV16 and HVP18 are the most common genotypes in high grade cervical lesions in Shaan'xi province. Meanwhile, these two types play predominant roles in the progression of high grade cervical lesion. Primary HPV16/18 detection has high sensitivity and negative predictive value in cervical cancer screening and the strategy for women with HPV16 and HPV18 infection referral to colposcopy is efficient and feasible in northwestern region of China.     

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.

     

Comparison of the cobas Human Papillomavirus (HPV) test with the hybrid capture 2 and linear array HPV DNA tests

The cobas human papillomavirus (HPV) test (cobas) was recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and identifies HPV16 and HPV18 separately as well as detecting a pool of 11 HR-HPV genotypes (HPV31, -33, -35, -39, -45, -51, -52, -56, -58, -59, -68) and also HPV66. We compared cobas, Linear Array (LA), and Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) assays for detection of carcinogenic HPV DNA, and cobas and LA for detection of HPV16 and HPV18 DNA, among the first 1,852 women enrolled in the HPV Persistence and Progression Cohort (PaP Cohort) study. Specimens were tested by all 3 assays 1 year after an HC2-positive result. In 1,824 specimens with cobas results, cobas had an 85.9% agreement with HC2 and 91.0% agreement with LA for carcinogenic HPV detection. When results between cobas and HC2 disagreed, cobas tended to call more women HPV positive (P < 0.01). Categorizing cobas and LA results hierarchically according to cancer risk (HPV16, HPV18, other carcinogenic HPV genotypes, or carcinogen negative), there was a 90% agreement for all categories of HPV (n = 1,824). We found good agreement between the two U.S. FDA-approved HPV tests, with discrepancies between the two assays due to specific characteristics of the individual assays. Additional studies are needed to compare HC2 and cobas for detecting and predicting CIN3 to understand the clinical implications of the discrepant test results between the two tests.     

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.     

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.     

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%.     

Head-to-Head Comparison of the RNA-Based Aptima Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Assay and the DNA-Based Hybrid Capture 2 HPV Test in a Routine Screening Population of Women Aged 30 to 60 Years in Germany

Testing for E6/E7 mRNA in cells infected with high-risk (HR) human papillomavirus (HPV) might improve the specificity of HPV testing for the identification of cervical precancerous lesions. Here we compared the RNA-based Aptima HPV (AHPV) assay (Hologic) and the DNA-based Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) HPV test (Qiagen) to liquid-based cytology (LBC) for women undergoing routine cervical screening. A total of 10,040 women, 30 to 60 years of age, were invited to participate in the study, 9,451 of whom were included in the analysis. Specimens were tested centrally by LBC, the AHPV test, and the HC2 test, and women who tested positive on any test were referred for colposcopy. Genotyping was performed on all HR-HPV-positive samples. Test characteristics were calculated based on histological review. As a result, we identified 90 women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN2+), including 43 women with CIN3+. Sensitivity differences between the AHPV test and the HC2 test in detecting CIN2+ (P = 0.180) or CIN3+ (P = 0.0625) lesions were statistically nonsignificant. Of three CIN3 cases that were missed with the AHPV test, two cases presented lesion-free cones and one had a non-HR HPV67 infection. The specificity (<CIN2) and positive predictive value (CIN2+) of the AHPV test were significantly higher (both P < 0.001) than those of the HC2 test. The overall agreement between the tests was substantial (κ = 0.77). Finally, we present results for several possible triage strategies, based on the primary screening test being either the AHPV test or the HC2 test. In summary, the AHPV assay is both specific and sensitive for the detection of high-grade precancerous lesions and may be used in primary cervical cancer screening for women ≥30 years of age.     

Clinical performance of Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV test for detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in women with abnormal cytology

BackgroundAbbott RealTime High Risk (HR) HPV is a recently developed test for the detection of 14 high-risk oncogenic HPV types combined with the ability to concurrently identify genotypes 16 and 18.ObjectivesThe clinical performance of the Abbott RealTime HR HPV test was evaluated in comparison with the Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) test for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse (CIN2+). The relative accuracy of the Abbott RealTime HR HPV to detect high-risk HPV was also determined.Study designCervical specimens were collected from 702 patients with abnormal cytology who were referred for colposcopy, and were tested with liquid based cytology (LBC), Abbott RealTime HR HPV and HC2. Genotyping was done using the Linear Array (LA) method. Histological assessment was used as the gold standard for disease status. Clinical performance for detection of disease was evaluated for Abbott RealTime HR HPV in comparison with HC2 in the overall population and in each cytological grade. The relative accuracy for detection of high-risk HPV was assessed by concordance between the two tests and based on LA genotyping.Results and ConclusionsThe Abbott RealTime HR HPV showed similar clinical performance for detection of CIN2+ when compared with HC2, for both the overall population and those with a cytological grade of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US). The accuracy for detection of high-risk HPV was significantly higher with Abbott RealTime HR HPV than with HC2.     

Comparison of the Cobas 4800 HPV Test and the Seeplex HPV4A ACE with the Hybrid Capture 2 Test

Background: It is well-known that persistent cervical infections with high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) are related to the development of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and invasive cervical cancer and that infection with HPV 16 and HPV 18 accounts for approximately 70% of all cases of invasive cervical cancer.Methods: We performed 3 HPV molecular tests―the Cobas 4800 HPV test, the Seeplex HPV4A ACE, and the hybrid capture 2 (HC2) test―in 146 cervical swab samples to compare between these three tests.Results: There was a concordance rate of 82.8% between the results of the Cobas 4800 HPV and the HC2 test and a concordance rate of 84.9% between the results of the Seeplex HPV4A ACE and the HC2 test. Between the Cobas 4800 HPV test and the Seeplex HPV4A ACE, there was a concordance rate of 89.6% in the detection of high-risk HPV between the results and a concordance rate of 98.7% in the detection of HPV 16 or 18. When an abnormal Pap test was defined as ≥low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL), the sensitivity of the Cobas 4800 HPV test, the Seeplex HPV4A ACE and the HC2 test were 71.1%, 80.0%, and 88.9%, respectively, while their specificities were 76.4%, 74.5%, and 67.9%, respectively.Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that the Cobas 4800 HPV test and the Seeplex HPV4A ACE may be as effective as the HC2 test in detecting HR HPV and that the concordance between the results of the Cobas 4800 HPV test and the Seeplex HDV4A ACE may be higher in the detection of HPV 16 and HPV18 than concerning high-risk HPV.     

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].     

Evaluation of the Clinical Performance of the cobas 4800 HPV Test in Patients Referred for Colposcopy

The clinical performance of the cobas human papillomavirus (HPV) test for detection of high-grade disease in a colposcopy-referred population was compared with that of Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2). The overall agreement between the tests was 92.3%. Clinical sensitivity and specificity for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or greater (CIN2+) were 90.0% and 55.5% for cobas and 90.5% and 50.2% for HC2, respectively. In conclusion, both tests showed comparable performance for detection of CIN2+.