Search

In response to calls by the World Health Organization for cervical precancer screening services in low-resource settings to lean toward HPV DNA testing, a number of testing platforms have been made available. This study aimed to evaluate the operational parameters of four HPV testing systems in previous (careHPV) and current (GeneXpert, AmpFire, and MA-6000) use in a secondary healthcare setting in terms of 'appropriateness', ease of use, throughput, and diagnostic yield. This descriptive retrospective cohort analysis included 6056 women who presented to our facility between June 2016 and March 2022 for cervical precancer screening via HPV testing. A large majority of this cohort underwent AmpFire testing (55.8%), followed by careHPV (23.3%), MA-6000 (14.7%), and GeneXpert (6.1%). MA-6000 showed the highest hr-HPV positivity rate of 26.4% (95% CI, 23.6-29.5), followed by AmpFire (17.2%; 95% CI, 15.9-17.5). GeneXpert and careHPV showed similar hr-HPV positivity rates of 14.8% (95% CI, 11.3-18.8) and 14.8% (95% CI, 13.0-16.8), respectively. For the AmpFire and MA-6000 platforms, which utilize similar detection and reporting formats, we found a significant excess detection rate of 9.2% (95% CI, 6.1-12.4; p-value <0.0001) for MA-6000 compared to AmpFire. At the genotype level, MA-6000 also detected significantly higher rates of HPV 16 and other hr-HPV types (both p-values <0.001) than AmpFire; there was no difference in detection for HPV 18. Based on our experiences and preliminary analysis, we believe that the choice of HPV testing platform cannot be accomplished with a one-size-fits-all approach. Factors worth considering are the financial implications of platform acquisition, costs to clients, and throughput when screening programs are not sufficiently large. We describe our successes and challenges with the different platforms which we believe will be helpful to centers in low-income countries as they transition into using HPV DNA testing for cervical precancer screening., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Effah et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Cytology-based cervical cancer screening programs have been difficult to implement and scale up in developing countries. Thus, the World Health Organization recommends a 'see and treat' approach by way of hr-HPV testing and visual inspection. We aimed to evaluate concurrent HPV DNA testing and visual inspection in a real-world low-resource setting by comparing the detection rates of concurrent visual inspection with dilute acetic acid (VIA) or mobile colposcopy and hr-HPV DNA testing to standalone hr-HPV DNA testing (using the careHPV, GeneXpert, AmpFire, or MA-6000 platforms). We further compared their rates of loss to follow-up. This retrospective, descriptive cross-sectional study included all 4482 women subjected to cervical precancer screening at our facility between June 2016 and March 2022. The rates of EVA and VIA 'positivity' were 8.6% (95% CI, 6.7-10.6) and 2.1 (95% CI, 1.6-2.5), respectively, while the hr-HPV-positivity rate was 17.9% (95% CI, 16.7-19.0). Overall, 51 women in the entire cohort tested positive on both hr-HPV DNA testing and visual inspection (1.1%; 95% CI, 0.9-1.5), whereas a large majority of the women tested negative (3588/4482, 80.1%) for both and 2.1% (95% CI, 1.7-2.6) tested hr-HPV-negative but visual inspection 'positive'. In total, 191/275 (69.5%) participants who tested hr-HPV positive on any platform, as a standalone test for screening, returned for at least one follow-up visit. In light of factors such as poor socioeconomic circumstances, additional transportation costs associated with multiple screening visits, and lack of a reliable address system in many parts of Ghana, we posit that standalone HPV DNA testing with recall of hr-HPV positives will be tedious for a national cervical cancer prevention program. Our preliminary data show that concurrent testing (hr-HPV DNA testing alongside visual inspection by way of VIA or mobile colposcopy) may be more cost-effective than recalling hr-HPV-positive women for colposcopy., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Effah et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)