Search

Cervical screening programmes are moving towards HPV testing as part of the screening process and as a triage for colposcopy. Three HPV detection methods were evaluated using cervical cytology specimens from colposcopy patients. PreservCyt™ liquid based cytology specimens from 241 women attending colposcopy clinics with greater than 2 persistently abnormal smears were recruited through the Coombe Women and Infants University Hospital, Dublin. HPV DNA was detected by Hybrid Capture (HC2) for 13 high-risk HPV types, Full-Spectrum HPV (FS-HPV) for 49 high and low-risk types and Molecular Beacon Real-Time HPV assay (MBRT-HPV) for 16 high and low-risk types. HPV genotyping was performed using Linear Array HPV Assay (LA-HPV). HPV was detected in 83.3% (195/234), 91.9% (217/236) and 80.1% (169/211) of cytology specimens by HC2, FS-HPV and MBRT-HPV, HPV DNA detection assays. The sensitivity of the assays for the detection of high-risk HPV in cytology specimens that had a Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade 2+ result by histology were, 98%, 97% and 94% for HC2, FS-HPV and MBRT-HPV assays with positive predictive values of 94.1%, 94.1% and 97.3%. The most common HPV genotypes were HPV 16, 31, 33, 58, 42, 61 and 53, and the most common high-risk HPV genotypes were HPV 16, 31, 33, 58, 18, 45, 59, 51, 56 and 39, with detection of multiple infections in 57.7% of all cases. FS-HPV and MBRT-HPV are highly sensitive and have a similarly high PPV as the HC2 assay for detection of HPV in patients with Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade 2+ disease. HPV genotyping of women with persistent abnormalities is warranted prior to the introduction of HPV DNA testing in a colposcopy setting., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing using molecular methods in liquid based cytology (LBC) specimens may be useful as an adjunct to cervical screening by cytology. We compared the positivity rate of the commercially available HPV DNA method hybrid capture 2 (hc2) and the commercially available E6/E7 mRNA method PreTect HPV-Proofer in cytological specimens (n=299). LBC specimens collected (n=299) represented the following cervical cytological disease categories: Normal (n=60), borderline nuclear abnormalities (BNA) (n=34), CIN1 (n=121), CIN2 (n=60), CIN3 (n=24). Overall, 69% (205/299) of the cases were positive by hc2 and 38% (112/299) of the cases were positive by PreTect HPV-Proofer. Concordance rates between the two tests were highest in the high-grade cytology cases (CIN2: 67% and CIN3: 83%) and the normal cytology cases (88%) and lowest in the BNA and CIN1 categories (56% and 52%). HPV DNA viral load analyses were carried out on HPV16 (n=55), HPV18 (n=9) and HPV33 (n=13) samples that were positive by PreTect HPV-Proofer. The sensitivity and specificity of PreTect HPV-Proofer and the hc2 DNA test for the detection of high-grade cytology (i.e. CIN2+) were 71.4% and 75.8% vs 100% and 43.7%, respectively. The relatively low detection rate observed by PreTect HPV-Proofer in the whole range of cytological positive cases, combined with a relatively higher specificity and PPV, suggests that PreTect HPV-Proofer may be more useful than hc2 for triage and in predicting high-grade disease.