Search

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is very sensitive for primary cervical screening but has low specificity. Triage tests that improve specificity but maintain high sensitivity are needed. Women enrolled in the experimental arm of Phase 2 of the New Technologies for Cervical Cancer randomized controlled cervical screening trial were tested for high-risk HPV (hrHPV) and referred to colposcopy if positive. hrHPV-positive women also had HPV genotyping (by polymerase chain reaction with GP5+/GP6+ primers and reverse line blotting), immunostaining for p16 overexpression and cytology. We computed sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) for different combinations of tests and determined potential hierarchical ordering of triage tests. A number of 1,091 HPV-positive women had valid tests for cytology, p16 and genotyping. Ninety-two of them had cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN2+) histology and 40 of them had CIN grade 3+ (CIN3+) histology. The PPV for CIN2+ was >10% in hrHPV-positive women with positive high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (61.3%), positive low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL+) (18.3%) and positive atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (14.8%) cytology, p16 positive (16.7%) and, hierarchically, for infections by HPV33, 16, 35, 59, 31 and 52 (in decreasing order). Referral of women positive for either p16 or LSIL+ cytology had 97.8% sensitivity for CIN2+ and women negative for both of these had a 3-year CIN3+ risk of 0.2%. Similar results were seen for women being either p16 or HPV16/33 positive. hrHPV-positive women who were negative for p16 and cytology (LSIL threshold) had a very low CIN3+ rate in the following 3 years. Recalling them after that interval and referring those positive for either test to immediate colposcopy seem to be an efficient triage strategy. The same applies to p16 and HPV16., (© 2020 UICC.)

Human papilloma virus (HPV) testing is more sensitive but less specific than cytology. We evaluated stand-alone genotyping as a possible triage method. During a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing HPV testing to conventional cytology, HPV-positive women were referred to colposcopy and followed up if no high-grade lesion was detected. HPV-positive samples were genotyped by GP5+/GP6+ primed polymerase chain reaction followed by reverse line blot. Genotypes were hierarchically ordered by positive predictive value (PPV) for CIN grade 2 or more (CIN2+), and grouped by cluster analysis into three groups (A, B and C in decreasing order). Receiver operating characteristic curves were computed. Among 2,255 HPV-positive women with genotyping, 239 CIN2+ (including 113 CIN3+) were detected at baseline or during a 3-year follow-up. HPV33 had the highest PPV with CIN2+ and CIN3+ as the endpoint and when considering lesions detected at baseline or also during follow-up. HPV16 and HPV35 were the second and third, respectively. Cross-sectional sensitivity for CIN2+ at baseline was 67.3% (95% CI 59.7-74.2), 91.8% (95% CI 86.6-95.5) and 94.7% (95% CI 90.2-97.6), respectively, when considering as "positive" any of the HPV types in group A (33, 16 and 35), A or B (31, 52, 18, 59 and 58) and A or B or C (39, 51, 56, 45 and 68). The corresponding cross-sectional PPVs for CIN2+ were 15.8% 95% (CI 13.2-18.7), 12.0% (95% CI 10.3-13.9) and 9.6% (95% CI 8.2-11.1), respectively. HPV33, 16 and 35 confer a high probability of CIN2+ but this rapidly decreases when adding other genotypes., (© 2018 The Authors International Journal of Cancer published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of UICC.)

The Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) test targets 13 human papillomavirus (HPV) types. Here, cross-reactivity with non-HC2-targeted HPV types is described. We aimed to define the proportion of HC2-positive women who had negative results with HC2-targeted HPV types and estimate its determinants and impact on women's health management. The New Technologies for Cervical Cancer (NTCC) trial was followed in two predetermined phases. Women in the experimental arm were tested for the presence of HPV DNA by HC2 following a sample collection in PreservCyt (first phase) or Digene specimen transport medium (STM) (second phase). HPV genotyping was performed on DNA samples from HC2-positive women by PCR with GP5(+)/GP6(+) primers and reverse line blot (RLB) hybridization. Untyped samples were submitted to direct sequencing or restriction fragment length polymorphism. Multivariate logistic regression analysis estimated the adjusted odds ratios (ORs) between the presence of HC2-targeted types and age, viral load, and type of transport medium. Out of 2,920 HC2-positive samples, 2,310 (79.1%) were positive on RLB for HC2-targeted types, 396 were positive (13.6%) for only non-HC2-targeted types (mostly represented by HPV-53, HPV-66, and HPV-70), and in 214 (7.33%) samples, no HPV types were detected. The probability of detecting HC2-targeted types increased with increasing viral load expressed as the relative light unit/positive-control specimen ratio (RLU/PC) (OR for unitary increase of log RLU/PC, 1.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30 to 1.42) and with STM versus PreservCyt (OR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.25 to 1.84). If only the samples containing HC2-targeted types tested positive, the positive predictive value (PPV) would have increased from 7.0% (95% CI, 6.1% to 8.0%) to 8.4% (95% CI, 7.3 to 9.6), although 4.9% (95% CI, 2.4% to 8.8%) of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2(+) (CIN2(+)) cases would have been missed. In conclusion, STM use and an increased cutoff would reduce the HC2 analytical false-positive rate and increase the positive predictive value for high-grade CIN. The gain in clinical sensitivity by detecting non-HC2-targeted HPV types is limited.

Background: Immunostaining for p16-INK4A (henceforth p16) is a sensitive and specific method for detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) in women infected with human papillomavirus (HPV), but longitudinal data have not been obtained. We investigated the relation between p16 status and risk of CIN during 3 years of follow-up., Methods: Women aged 25-60 years were enrolled between June 10, 2003, and Dec 31, 2004, in a multicentre randomised trial comparing HPV testing with cytology. HPV-positive women were referred for colposcopy and, in seven of nine centres, were tested for p16 overexpression by immunostaining. If no CIN was detected, these women were followed up at yearly intervals until clearance of HPV infection. The primary endpoint was histologically confirmed CIN of grade 2 or worse (CIN of grade 2 [CIN2], CIN of grade 3 [CIN3], or invasive cervical cancer) at recruitment or during follow-up. We calculated the absolute and relative risks by p16 status at recruitment. We also calculated the longitudinal sensitivity of p16 testing. Additionally, we assessed the relative sensitivity of an alternative strategy (referral to colposcopy and follow-up of only HPV-positive, p16-positive women) versus conventional cytology in two age groups. Percentages were weighted by the inverse of the tested fraction. The trial in which this study is nested is registered, number ISRCTN81678807., Findings: Of 1042 HPV-positive women who were tested for p16 with no CIN detected during the first round of screening, 944 (91%) had further HPV tests. 793 (84%) of these 944 were followed up until detection of CIN2 or worse, HPV infection clearance, or for at least 3 years. CIN2 or worse was detected during follow-up in more p16-positive women (31 of 365, 8·8% [95% CI 5·8-11·8]) than in p16-negative women (17 of 579, 3·7% [1·9-5·4]; relative risk [RR] 2·61 [95% CI 1·49-4·59]). RR was higher in women aged 35-60 years at recruitment (3·37 [1·39-8·15]) than in those aged 25-34 years (2·15 [1·00-4·61]), but age was not a significant modifier. CIN3 or worse was detected during follow-up in more p16-positive women (16 of 365, 4·4% [2·3-6·6]) than in p16-negative women (six of 579, 1·3% [0·2-2·3]; RR 3·90 [95% CI 1·57-9·68]). Longitudinal sensitivity of p16 testing for detection of CIN3 or worse during follow-up at all ages was 77·8% (95% CI 63·9-91·6). The relative sensitivity of the alternative strategy compared with conventional cytology was 2·08 (1·13-3·56) in women aged 35-60 years and 2·86 (1·28-5·36) in those aged 25-34 years. HPV-positive, p16-negative women aged 35-60 years had a higher cumulative risk of CIN3 or worse during recruitment or follow-up (2·0%, 95% CI 0·3-3·7) than did HPV-negative women (0·01%, 0-0·04) or those who were cytologically normal (0·04%, 0·02-0·09) at recruitment., Interpretation: p16 overexpression is a marker for CIN2 or worse or for development of CIN2 or worse within 3 years in HPV-positive women, especially those aged 35-60 years. HPV-positive, p16-positive women need immediate colposcopy and, if the assessment is negative, annual follow-up. Immediate colposcopy can be avoided in HPV-positive, p16-negative women, who can be safely managed with repeat screening after 2-3 year intervals., Funding: European Union; Italian Ministry of Health; Regional Health Administrations of Piemonte, Tuscany, Veneto and Emilia Romagna; and Public Health Agency of Lazio Region., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: We investigated clustering patterns of human papillomavirus (HPV) in a large study, the New Technologies in Cervical Cancer (NTCC) screening study., Materials and Methods: Women aged 25-60 years who attended cervical screening in eight different areas in Northern and Central Italy were tested for HPV infection with Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2). Genotyping of the HC2-positive samples was performed for 13 HPV types targeted by GP5+/GP6+ PCR, followed by Reverse Line Blot. Logistic regression was used to model type-specific HPV positivity, adjusted for age, study area, and specific HPV type prevalence. Subject-level random effects were added to represent unobservable risk factors common to all HPV types., Results: A total of 36,877 women were included. Of 2833 HC2-positive women, 2108 were confirmed to be positive for any of the 13 specific HPV infections using the PCR assay, and amongst them 430 (20.4% of all PCR-positive women) were infected with multiple types. The observed-to-expected ratio for infection with ≥2 HPV types was 1.21 (95% Credible Interval: 1.13-1.30). Amongst the 78 combinations of specific HPV types, none of the pairs reached the chosen level of significance, p-value <0.01., Conclusions: Multiple HPV infections occurred more frequently than predicted by chance. The excess of multiple infections was small, though not completely absent, after controlling for all sources of common correlation between HPV types. The present analysis of the NTCC screening study showed no evidence that specific HPV types have the tendency to be found more or less often than others in coinfections., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is known to be more sensitive, but less specific than cytology for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). We assessed the efficacy of cervical-cancer screening policies that are based on HPV testing., Methods: Between March, 2004, and December, 2004, in two separate recruitment phases, women aged 25-60 years were randomly assigned to conventional cytology or to HPV testing in combination with liquid-based cytology (first phase) or alone (second phase). Randomisation was done by computer in two screening centres and by sequential opening of numbered sealed envelopes in the remaining seven centres. During phase one, women who were HPV-positive and aged 35-60 years were referred to colposcopy, whereas women aged 25-34 years were referred to colposcopy only if cytology was also abnormal or HPV testing was persistently positive. During phase two, women in the HPV group were referred for colposcopy if the HPV test was positive. Two rounds of screening occurred in each phase, and all women had cytology testing only at the second round. The primary endpoint was the detection of grade 2 and 3 CIN, and of invasive cervical cancers during the first and second screening rounds. Analysis was done by intention to screen. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN81678807., Findings: In total for both phases, 47,001 women were randomly assigned to the cytology group and 47,369 to HPV testing. 33,851 women from the cytology group and 32,998 from the HPV-testing group had a second round of screening. We also retrieved the histological diagnoses from screening done elsewhere. The detection of invasive cervical cancers was similar for the two groups in the first round of screening (nine in the cytology group vs seven in the HPV group, p=0.62); no cases were detected in the HPV group during round two, compared with nine in the cytology group (p=0.004). Overall, in the two rounds of screening, 18 invasive cancers were detected in the cytology group versus seven in the HPV group (p=0.028). Among women aged 35-60 years, at round one the relative detection (HPV vs cytology) was 2.00 (95% CI 1.44-2.77) for CIN2, 2.08 (1.47-2.95) for CIN3, and 2.03 (1.60-2.57) for CIN2 and 3 together. At round two the relative detection was 0.54 (0.23-1.28) for CIN2, 0.48 (0.21-1.11) for CIN3, and 0.51 (0.28-0.93) for CIN2 and 3 together. Among women aged 25-34 years, there was significant heterogeneity between phases in the relative detection of CIN3. At round one the relative detection was 0.93 (0.52-1.64) in phase one and 3.91 (2.02-7.57) in phase two. At round two the relative detection was 1.34 (0.46-3.84) in phase one and 0.20 (0.04-0.93) in phase two. Pooling both phases, the detection ratio of CIN2 for women aged 25-34 years was 4.09 (2.24-7.48) at round one and 0.64 (0.23-1.27) at round two., Interpretation: HPV-based screening is more effective than cytology in preventing invasive cervical cancer, by detecting persistent high-grade lesions earlier and providing a longer low-risk period. However, in younger women, HPV screening leads to over-diagnosis of regressive CIN2., Funding: European Union, Italian Ministry of Health, Regional Health Administrations of Piemonte, Tuscany, Veneto and Emilia-Romagna, and Public Health Agency of Lazio., (Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Within a large Italian randomized trial on new technologies for cervical cancer screening involving 7 laboratories with different levels of experience, an intralaboratory and interlaboratory quality control program for human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing by Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2; Digene, Gaithersburg, MD) was implemented. To monitor the hybridization and detection steps, target samples containing purified, concentration-defined, HPV DNA were introduced in each test run. Only 3 of 1,024 showed a mistake in a positive vs negative classification with a 1 relative light unit (RLU)/positive control specimen (PC) ratio cutoff. To monitor the preanalytic steps (particularly denaturation), blinded specimens (33 collected in PreservCyt (Cytyc, Boxborough, MA) and 36 in Specimen Transport Medium (STM, Digene) were centrally prepared, divided into aliquots, and sent to each laboratory. The multiple-rater scores for negative (<1 RLU/PC), low-positive (1 to <11 RLU/PC), and high-positive (> or =11 RLU/PC) samples, respectively, were 0.91, 0.60, and 0.69 with PreservCyt and 0.93, 0.87, and 0.90 with STM. Our data showed high reliability and reproducibility with HC2, with values higher for STM than ThinPrep (Cytyc) samples.

The aim of the study was to evaluate the immunohistochemical expression of p16INK4a as a marker of progression risk in low-grade dysplastic lesions of the cervix uteri. p16INK4a immunohistochemistry was performed on 32 CIN1 with proven spontaneous regression of the lesion in the follow-up (group A), 31 (group B) with progression to CIN3 and 33 (group C) that were randomly chosen irrespective of the natural history of the lesion. p16INK4a staining pattern was scored as negative (less than 5% cells in the lower third of dysplastic epithelium stained), as focally positive (< or = 25%) and as diffuse positive (> 25%). A diffuse staining pattern was detected in 43.8% of CIN1 of group A, 74.2% of group B and 56.3% of group C. No p16INK4a staining was detected in 31.3% and 12.9% CIN1 lesions of groups A and B, respectively. Overall, 71.4% and 37.8% of p16INK4a-negative and diffusely positive CIN1 had regressed at follow-up, whereas 28.6% and 62.2% negative and diffusely positive CIN1 were progressed to CIN3, respectively (P < 0.05). All CIN3 lesions analyzed during follow-up of group B were diffusely stained for p16INK4a. Although p16INK4a may be expressed in low-grade squamous lesions that undergo spontaneous regression, in this study, CIN1 cases with diffuse p16INK4a staining had a significantly higher tendency to progress to a high-grade lesion than p16INK4a-negative cases. p16INK4a may have the potential to support the interpretation of low-grade dysplastic lesions of the cervix uteri.