THE CASE FOR CONTINUING PRIMARY CERVICAL SCREENING WITH CYTOLOGY RATHER THAN HPV TESTING

Infection by certain types of human papilloma virus is now recognised as the main factor for cervical cancer. About 50% of cancers contain HPV 16 and over 95% contain one or more of the high-risk types (16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58). Several studies have shown that HPV testing is considerably more sensitive than conventional cytology. However it is not as specific, especially for younger women. These studies will be reviewed and overall comparisons with cytology will be made. Data from the 11 000 women HART study will be presented which suggest that for women aged 30 or over, a rational strategy would be to use HPV testing as the sole primary screening test, reserving cytology for the triage of HPV positive women. The results of this study indicate that HPV positive cytology negative women can be safely managed by repeat testing at one year. This reverses the current role of HPV testing as a triage test for women with borderline (ASCUS) cytology. Use of liquid-based collection media will facilitate the transition to this new approach to screening. A detailed algorithm will be presented.     

HPV mRNA Is More Specific than HPV DNA in Triage of Women with Minor Cervical Lesions

Background

In Norway, repeat cytology and HPV testing comprise delayed triage of women with minor cytological lesions. The objective of this study was to evaluate HPV DNA and HPV mRNA testing in triage of women with an ASC-US/LSIL diagnosis.

Materials and Methods

We used repeat cytology, HPV DNA testing (Cobas 4800) and HPV mRNA testing (PreTect HPV-Proofer) to follow up 311 women aged 25–69 years with ASC-US/LSIL index cytology.

Results

Of 311 women scheduled for secondary screening, 30 women (9.6%) had ASC-H/HSIL cytology at triage and 281 women (90.4%) had ASC-US/LSIL or normal cytology. The HPV DNA test was positive in 92 (32.7%) of 281 instances, and 37 (13.2%) were mRNA positive. Of the 132 women with repeated ASC-US/LSIL, we received biopsies from 97.0% (65/67) of the DNA-positive and 92.9% (26/28) of the mRNA-positive cases. The positive predictive values for CIN2+ were 21.5% (14/65) for DNA positive and 34.6% (9/26) for mRNA positive (ns). The odds ratio for being referred to colposcopy in DNA-positive cases were 2.8 times (95% CI: 1.8–4.6) higher that of mRNA-positive cases. Compared to the mRNA test, the DNA test detected four more cases of CIN2 and one case of CIN3.

Conclusions

The higher positivity rate of the DNA test in triage leads to higher referral rate for colposcopy and biopsy, and subsequent additional follow-up of negative biopsies. By following mRNA-negative women who had ASC-US/LSIL at triage with cytology, the additional cases of CIN2+ gained in DNA screening can be discovered. Our study indicates that in triage of repeated ASC-US/LSIL, HPV mRNA testing is more specific and is more relevant in clinical use than an HPV DNA test.     

Primary HPV testing: a proposal for co‐testing in initial rounds of screening to optimise sensitivity of cervical cancer screening

As explained by Kitchener in a previous issue of Cytopathology (2015; 26 :4‐6), primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is likely to be introduced in the UK for all women aged 25–64 years following pilot site studies already in place. This will be necessary when the prevalence of cervical cancer and its precursors declines when vaccination takes effect but there is a risk in abandoning cytology as a primary test: a risk that would be most apparent in the present unvaccinated population in which the prevalence of cervical cancer and its precursors is exceptionally high. HPV testing is more sensitive than cytology but has a significant false‐negative rate that could be detrimental to a successful screening programme if introduced without cytology backup. Accurate cytology would be needed for triage and could be compromised if HPV‐negative tests were excluded from examination. This article proposes a compromise: cytology and HPV co‐testing for the first two screening tests to optimise the sensitivity of the test as a whole. Registrations of invasive and in situ carcinoma of the uterine cervix in England indicate that the prevalence of the disease is highest in young women in the early rounds of screening. Calculations of the likely impact on the workload of this proposal have been based on a service evaluation of 295 cytology tests received at St Thomas’ Hospital, which suggests that the volume of cytology tests would be reduced by approximately 60% compared with 80% for primary HPV testing alone. This proposal should be debated openly before irrevocable changes are made to a skilled workforce.     

Human Papillomavirus Assays and Cytology in Primary Cervical Screening of Women Aged 30 Years and Above

In women aged ≥30 years, Human Papillomavirus testing will replace cytology for primary cervical screening. We compared Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2), cobas, CLART, and APTIMA HPV assays with cytology on 2869 SurePath samples from women undergoing routine screening at 30–65 years in Copenhagen, Denmark. Women with cytological abnormalities were managed according to routine recommendations, with 92% completeness. Those with cytology-normal/HPV-positive samples (on any of the four assays) were invited for repeated cytology and HPV testing in 1.5 year, and 58% had additional testing. HPV testing detected more ≥CIN3 than cytology (HC2: 35, cobas, CLART: 37, APTIMA: 34, cytology: 31), although statistically the differences were not significant. Cobas and CLART detected significantly more ≥CIN2 than cytology (cobas, CLART: 49, cytology: 39). The proportion of women with false-positive test results (positive test results without ≥CIN3) varied between 3.3% with cytology and 14.9% with cobas. All HPV assays led to significantly more false-positive tests, whereas compared to HC2 cobas and CLART were associated with a significantly higher and APTIMA with a significantly lower proportion. Detection of CIN1 was particularly increased for the three DNA assays. With APTIMA combined with cytological triage, about 20% more women were referred for colposcopy than with cytology screening. With the three DNA assays, the increase was ≥50%. The number of women with repeated testing was twice as high with APTIMA and almost five times as high with cobas compared to cytology. To our knowledge, Horizon was the only study set in routine practice that compared more than two HPV assays in the same women while also ascertaining the histological status of women with normal cytology/HPV-positive test results. HPV-based screening of Danish women aged 30–65 detected more high-grade CIN but decreased the screening specificity, and increased the demand for additional testing.     

Triage of Women with Minor Cervical Lesions: Data Suggesting a “Test and Treat” Approach for HPV E6/E7 mRNA Testing

Background

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is included in the cervical cancer screening program in the triage of women with equivocal (ASC-US) or low-grade (LSIL) cytological lesions. These women have an increased risk for developing high grade dysplasia and cancer (CIN2+) compared to women with normal cytology. However, in order to avoid unnecessary follow-up, as well as overtreatment, a high positive predictive value (PPV) of the triage test is important.

Methodology/Principal Findings

The HPV test PreTect HPV-Proofer, detecting E6/E7 mRNA from the HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33 and 45, is used as triage test together with repeat cytology. PPV data for HPV E6/E7 mRNA testing during the period from January 2006 up to June 2009 are reported. In total, 406 of 2099 women (19.3%) had a positive HPV test result. Of the women with a positive test result and with a histological diagnosis (n = 347), 243 women had histological high-grade dysplasia or cancer (CIN2+), giving a PPV of 70.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.2%–74.8%). For HPV 16 or HPV 33 positive women above 40 years of age, the PPV was 83.7% (95% CI, 73.3%–94.0%) and 84.6% (95% CI, 65.0%–100.0%) respectively. The PPV of test positive women with HSIL cytology was 94.2% (95% CI, 88.7%–99.7%).

Conclusions

When the result in triage is HPV mRNA positive, our data suggest direct treatment for women above 40 years of age or for women with a concurrent cytological HSIL diagnosis, contributing to better clinical safety for these women. In addition, by decreasing the time to treatment, thereby reducing the number of recalls, the patient management algorithm will be considerably improved, in turn reducing follow-up costs as well as unnecessary psychological stress among patients.     

The early detection of cervical cancer. The current and changing landscape of cervical disease detection

Cervical cancer prevention has undergone dramatic changes over the past decade. With the introduction of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, some countries have seen a dramatic decline in HPV‐mediated cervical disease. However, widespread implementation has been limited by economic considerations and the varying healthcare priorities of different countries, as well as by vaccine availability and, in some instances, vaccine hesitancy amongst the population/government. In this environment, it is clear that cervical screening will retain a critical role in the prevention of cervical cancer and will in due course need to adapt to the changing incidence of HPV‐associated neoplasia. Cervical screening has, for many years, been performed using Papanicolaou staining of cytology samples. As our understanding of the role of HPV in cervical cancer progression has advanced, and with the availability of sensitive detection systems, cervical screening now incorporates HPV testing. Although such tests improve disease detection, they are not specific, and cannot discriminate high‐grade from low‐grade disease. This has necessitated the development of effective triage approaches to stratify HPV‐positive women according to their risk of cancer progression. Although cytology triage remains the mainstay of screening, novel strategies under evaluation include DNA methylation, biomarker detection and the incorporation of artificial intelligence systems to detect cervical abnormalities. These tests, which can be partially anchored in a molecular understanding of HPV pathogenesis, will enhance the sensitivity of disease detection and improve patient outcomes. This review will provide insight on these innovative methodologies while explaining their scientific basis drawing from our understanding of HPV tumour biology.     

Triage of women with low-grade cervical lesions--HPV mRNA testing versus repeat cytology

Background

In Norway, women with low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL) are followed up after six months in order to decide whether they should undergo further follow-up or be referred back to the screening interval of three years. A high specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) of the triage test is important to avoid unnecessary diagnostic and therapeutic procedures.

Materials and Methods

At the University Hospital of North Norway, repeat cytology and the HPV mRNA test PreTect HPV-Proofer, detecting E6/E7 mRNA from HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33 and 45, are used in triage of women with ASC-US and LSIL. In this study, women with LSIL cytology in the period 2005–2008 were included (n = 522). Two triage methods were evaluated in two separate groups: repeat cytology only (n = 225) and HPV mRNA testing in addition to repeat cytology (n = 297). Histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) was used as the study endpoint.

Results

Of 522 women with LSIL, 207 had biopsies and 125 of them had CIN2+. The sensitivity and specificity of repeat cytology (ASC-US or worse) were 85.7% (95% confidence interval (CI): 72.1, 92.2) and 54.4 % (95% CI: 46.9, 61.9), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the HPV mRNA test were 94.2% (95% CI: 88.7, 99.7) and 86.0% (95% CI: 81.5, 90.5), respectively. The PPV of repeat cytology was 38.4% (95% CI: 29.9, 46.9) compared to 67.0% (95% CI: 57.7, 76.4) of the HPV mRNA test.

Conclusion

HPV mRNA testing was more sensitive and specific than repeat cytology in triage of women with LSIL cytology. In addition, the HPV mRNA test showed higher PPV. These data indicate that the HPV mRNA test is a better triage test for women with LSIL than repeat cytology.     

European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening: recommendations for clinical management of abnormal cervical cytology, part 1

The current paper presents the first part of Chapter 6 of the second edition of the European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Cervical Cancer Screening. It provides guidance on how to manage women with abnormal cervical cytology. Throughout this article the Bethesda system is used for cervical cytology terminology, as the European guidelines have recommended that all systems should at least be translated into that terminology while cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) is used for histological biopsies (Cytopathology 2007; 18 :213–9). A woman with a high‐grade cytological lesion, a repeated low‐grade lesion or with an equivocal cytology result and a positive human papillomavirus (HPV) test should be referred for colposcopy. The role of the colposcopist is to identify the source of the abnormal cells and to make an informed decision as to whether or not any treatment is required. If a patient requires treatment the colposcopist will decide which is the most appropriate method of treatment for each individual woman. The colposcopist should also organize appropriate follow‐up for each woman seen. Reflex testing for high‐risk HPV types of women with atypical squamous cells (ASC) of undetermined significance with referral for colposcopy of women who test positive is a first option. Repeat cytology is a second possibility. Direct referral to a gynaecologist should be restricted to special circumstances. Follow‐up of low‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesion is more difficult because currently there is no evidence to support any method of management as being optimal; repeat cytology and colposcopy are options, but HPV testing is not sufficiently selective, unless for older women. Women with high‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) or atypical squamous cells, cannot exclude HSIL (ASC‐H) should be referred without triage. Women with glandular lesions require particular attention. In a subsequent issue of Cytopathology, the second part of Chapter 6 will be presented, with recommendations for management and treatment of histologically confirmed intraepithelial neoplasia and guidance for follow‐up of special cases such as women who are pregnant, postmenopausal or immunocompromised.     

Clinical relevance of human papillomavirus testing in cytopathology

Cancer of the uterine cervix is the second most common cancer in women worldwide. Currently, cervical screening is based on cytology alone. Because infection with high-risk human papillomavirus types (hrHPVs) is a necessary cause of cervical cancer, it has been postulated that screening might become more efficient when it is based on combined cytology and hrHPV testing. In this review we will discuss the advantages of added HPV tests in cervical cancer screening, as a quality control for false-negative smears, in triage of women with equivocal smears, in follow-up of women treated for CIN3 or cervical cancer and for the detection of cervical adenocarcinoma.     

Primary Screening for Cervical Cancer Based on High-Risk Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Detection and HPV 16 and HPV 18 Genotyping,in Comparison to Cytology

Objectives

The objective of the present study is to assess the performance of a high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) DNA test with individual HPV-16/HPV-18 genotyping as a method for primary cervical cancer screening compared with liquid-based cytology (LBC) in a population of Greek women taking part in routine cervical cancer screening.

Methods

The study, conducted by the “HEllenic Real life Multicentric cErvical Screening” (HERMES) study group, involved the recruitment of 4,009 women, aged 25–55, who took part in routine cervical screening at nine Gynecology Departments in Greece. At first visit cervical specimens were collected for LBC and HPV testing using the Roche Cobas 4800 system. Women found positive for either cytology or HPV were referred for colposcopy, whereas women negative for both tests will be retested after three years. The study is ongoing and the results of the first screening round are reported herein.

Results

Valid results for cytology and HPV testing were obtained for 3,993 women. The overall prevalence of HR-HPV was 12.7%, of HPV-16 2.7% and of HPV-18 1.4%. Of those referred for colposcopy, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) was detected in 41 women (1.07%). At the threshold of CIN2+, cytology [atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) or worse] and HPV testing showed a sensitivity of 53.7% and 100% respectively, without change between age groups. Cytology and HPV testing showed specificity of 96.8% and 90.3% respectively, which was increased in older women (≥30) in comparison to younger ones (25–29). Genotyping for HPV16/18 had similar accuracy to cytology for the detection of CIN2+ (sensitivity: 58.5%; specificity 97.5%) as well as for triage to colposcopy (sensitivity: 58.5% vs 53.7% for cytology).

Conclusion

HPV testing has much better sensitivity than cytology to identify high-grade cervical lesions with slightly lower specificity. HPV testing with individual HPV-16/HPV-18 genotyping could represent a more accurate methodology for primary cervical cancer screening in comparison to liquid-based cytology, especially in older women.     

O‐110 YEAR AUDIT OF GLANDULAR CYTOLOGY REPORTS WITH SPECIAL REGARD TO THE EFFECT OF CONVERSION TO LBC

Objectives: A randomised trial in screening to improve cytology (ARTISTIC Trial) was set up to evaluate the effectiveness of human papilloma virus (HPV) testing in primary cervical screening. Design: Women attending the NHS Cervical Screening Programme in Greater Manchester were screened for HPV in addition to routine cytological testing with ThinPrep Liquid‐Based Cytology (LBC). 25 020 women aged 20–64 were screened at entry and 3 years later. Participants were randomised in a 3 : 1 ratio between those whose HPV test result was revealed and acted upon and those in whom it was concealed. Results: A total of 24 510 women (18 386 revealed and 6124 concealed) had adequate cytology and HPV results. Cytology results at entry were: 87% normal, 11% borderline or mild, 1.1% moderate and 0.6% severe dyskaryosis or worse. Prevalence of HPV decreased sharply with age, from 40% at age 20–24 to 12% at 35–39 and 7% or less above age 50, and increased with cytological grade, from 10% (normal cytology) to 31% (borderline), 70% (mild), 86% (moderate), and 96% (severe or worse). Only 60% of women with severe dyskaryosis showed HPV 16 and / or 18 infection. Conclusion: The ARTISTIC Trial has provided the largest collection of LBC samples with HPV typing in Greater Manchester population. It has shown that the HPV testing is practicable in routine screening in women aged over 30. HPV 16 and 18 are more predictive for underlying disease, but other HPV types account for 30% of high‐grade disease.     

HPV testing for cervical cancer screening in Croatia

Opportunistic screening based on the Pap smear has been undertaken in Croatia since 1953. However, cervical cancer remains an important health problem in Croatia when compared to European countries with organised screening programmes. In Croatia, in addition to screening based on well established cytology, Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is widely used as secondary test as a triage to borderline cytology and as a follow-up after treatment of severe cervical lesions. Many different approaches for HPV testing arose in Croatia over the last decade depending on the needs of each medical institution involved. Presently, there is an urgent need for better networking between the laboratories, the implementation of quality assessment and the adaptation of a uniform system of referring to and reporting of HPV testing. In conclusion, the best possible organisation for HPV testing would be essential for implementation of HPV testing as primary screening test in Croatia, an thus ultimately and hopefully, the more successful cervical cancer control.     

HPV E6/E7 mRNA testing is more specific than cytology in post-colposcopy follow-up of women with negative cervical biopsy

Background

In Norway, women with negative or low-grade cervical biopsies (normal/CIN1) are followed up after six months in order to decide on further follow-up or recall for screening at three-year intervals. A high specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) of the triage test is important to avoid unnecessary diagnostic and therapeutic procedures whereas a low risk of high-grade disease among triage negative women assures safety.

Materials and Methods

At the University Hospital of North Norway, cytology and the HPV mRNA test PreTect HPV-Proofer, detecting E6/E7 mRNA from HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33 and 45, are used in post-colposcopy follow-up of women with negative or low-grade biopsy. In this study, women with negative biopsy after high grade cytology (ASC-H/HSIL) and/or positive HPV mRNA test in the period 2005–2009 were included (n = 520). Histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) was used as study endpoint.

Results

Of 520 women with negative or low-grade biopsy, 124 women (23.8%) had CIN2+ in follow-up biopsy. The sensitivity and specificity of the HPV mRNA test were 89.1% (95% CI, 80.1–98.1) and 92.5% (95% CI, 88.2–96.7), respectively. The ratios of sensitivity, specificity and PPV of HPV mRNA testing compared to repeat cytology for finding CIN2+ was 1.05 (95% CI: 0.92–1.21), 1.21 (95% CI: 1.12–1.32), and 1.49 (95% CI: 1.20–1.86), respectively. The PPV of mRNA was 77.3% (95% CI, 59.8–94.8) in women aged 40 or older.

Conclusion

Women with negative cervical biopsy require follow-up before resumption of routine screening. Post-colposcopy HPV mRNA testing was as sensitive but more specific than post-colposcopy cytology. In addition, the HPV mRNA test showed higher PPV. A positive mRNA test post-colposcopy could justify treatment in women above 40 years.     

The ideal strategy for cervical cancer screening in Japan: Result from the Fukui Cervical Cancer Screening Study

Introduction

The aims of the Fukui Cervical Cancer Screening (FCCS) study are to determine the frequency of women with high‐risk HPV (hrHPV), whether HPV16 or HPV18 (HPV16/18), in the Japanese cancer screening population for the first time and to identify the best strategy for cervical cancer screening in Japan.

Methods

This study enrolled 7584 women aged ≥25 years who were undergoing routine screening. All women underwent LBC and cobas HPV tests. Women with abnormal cytology, whether hrHPV positive or negative; women with hrHPV positivity with either normal or abnormal cytology; and women randomly selected from women with normal cytology and negative hrHPV negative were referred for colposcopy.

Results

The prevalences of hrHPV positivity and HPV16/18 positivity were 6.8% and 1.7%, respectively. The baseline data from the FCCS study showed that the combination of HPV tests and cytology was more sensitive than cytology with respect to the detection of intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse. However, the specificity (94.1%) of the co‐testing strategy that required all women with abnormal cytology or hrHPV positivity to be referred for colposcopy was much lower than that (97.8%) of cytology. The sensitivity and specificity of the co‐testing strategy that required only women with abnormal cytology or HPV16/18 positivity to undergo colposcopy were 85.5% and 97.0%, respectively.

Conclusion

The baseline data from the FCCS study suggest that a cervical cancer screening strategy in which only women with abnormal cytology or HPV16/18 positivity undergo colposcopy offers a more balanced sensitivity and specificity than other strategies.     

Cervical Cancer Screening in Partly HPV Vaccinated Cohorts – A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Background

Vaccination against the oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) types 16 and 18 will reduce the prevalence of these types, thereby also reducing cervical cancer risk in unvaccinated women. This (measurable) herd effect will be limited at first, but is expected to increase over time. At a certain herd immunity level, tailoring screening to vaccination status may no longer be worth the additional effort. Moreover, uniform screening may be the only viable option. We therefore investigated at what level of herd immunity it is cost-effective to also reduce screening intensity in unvaccinated women.

Methods

We used the MISCAN-Cervix model to determine the optimal screening strategy for a pre-vaccination population and for vaccinated women (~80% decreased risk), assuming a willingness-to-pay of €50,000 per quality-adjusted life year gained. We considered HPV testing, cytology testing and co-testing and varied the start age of screening, the screening interval and the number of lifetime screens. We then calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of screening unvaccinated women with the strategy optimized to the pre-vaccination population as compared to with the strategy optimized to vaccinated women, assuming different herd immunity levels.

Results

Primary HPV screening with cytology triage was the optimal strategy, with 8 lifetime screens for the pre-vaccination population and 3 for vaccinated women. The ICER of screening unvaccinated women 8 times instead of 3 was €28,085 in the absence of herd immunity. At around 50% herd immunity, the ICER reached €50,000.

Conclusion

From a herd immunity level of 50% onwards, screening intensity based on the pre-vaccination risk level becomes cost-ineffective for unvaccinated women. Reducing the screening intensity of uniform screening may then be considered.     

Evaluation of a cervical cancer screening program based on HPV testing and LLETZ excision in a low resource setting

We conducted studies in Vanuatu to evaluate potential screening and treatment strategies to assist with control of cervical cancer. In a pilot study of 496 women, visual inspection and cytology were evaluated as screening tests for detection of CIN 2 or worse (CIN2+), observed in 21 of 206 subjects biopsied on the basis of abnormal visual inspection or cytology. Sensitivity of visual inspection with Lugol's Iodine for detection of CIN2+ on biopsy was 0.63, specificity was 0.32, and the positive predictive value was 0.09. For HSIL cytology, sensitivity was 0.99, specificity was 0.77, and the positive predictive value was 0.88. HSIL cytology was significantly more sensitive and had a significantly higher PPV for CIN 2+ than visual inspection (p<0.01). In a further study of 514 women, we compared testing for HR HPV and cytology as predictors of biopsy proven CIN 2+. Sensitivity of HSIL cytology for CIN2+ as established by loop excision of the cervix was 0.81, specificity was 0.94, and positive predictive value was 0.48. Sensitivity of a positive test for HR HPV for detection of CIN2+ was non-significantly different from cytology at 0.81, specificity was 0.94, and positive predictive value was 0.42. Combining the two tests gave a significantly lower sensitivity of 0.63, a specificity of 0.98, and a positive predictive value of 0.68. For women over 30 in a low resource setting without access to cytology, a single locally conducted test for high risk HPV with effective intervention could reduce cervical cancer risk as effectively as intervention based on cytology conducted in an accredited laboratory.     

A human papillomavirus testing system in women with abnormal Pap results: a comparison study with follow-up biopsies

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of INFORM HPV using the SurePath collection method in women whose Pap tests indicated abnormal results. STUDY DESIGN: Ninety-two women from the gynecology clinics at The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center who had Pap tests and underwent follow-up biopsies were selected for the study. This included 51 women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS), 23 women with low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL), 15 women with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) and 3 women with negative Pap results. The INFORM HPV, an in situ hybridization assay, testing for oncogenic types of HPV was performed, and the results were compared with follow-up biopsies. RESULTS: The positive rate of the INFORM HPV increased with higher grades of cytology diagnoses. The sensitivity of the INFORM HPV testing for predicting high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 2/3) also increased with higher grades of cytology diagnoses. A negative predictive value (NPV) of 94.9% and a specificity of 80.4% for predicting CIN 2/3 were observed in the ASCUS group. CONCLUSION: Using SurePath Pap specimens, the INFORM HPV lacks sufficient sensitivity and NPV for predicting CIN 2/3 in women with ASCUS. Therefore, use of the test as a triage tool is limited.     

Improved rate of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia detection in human papillomavirus DNA hybrid capture testing

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have established a link between human papillomavirus (HPV), squamous intraepithelial lesions (SIL) and carcinoma of the cervix. Testing for HPV DNA in addition to cytology in screening programs for cervical cancer has been suggested to increase detection rates. STUDY DESIGN: HPV DNA testing (performed by hybridization antibody capture assay I or II), cytology and biopsy (performed within 1 month of each other) were retrospectively reviewed for a series of 155 women. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of HPV testing vs. cytology were calculated using biopsy as the gold standard. These values were also calculated in a subgroup of 37 individuals older than 35 years. RESULTS: The sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of DNA hybrid capture HPV testing for detecting high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) were 86%, 44%, 26% and 93%, respectively. The respective values for cytology detection of high-grade CIN were 17%, 97%, 56% and 82%. CONCLUSION: HPV testing was significantly more sensitive for detecting high-grade CIN than cytology (86% vs. 17%). Our data support immediate colposcopy and biopsy, rather than follow-up Papanicolaou testing, if the test for HPV DNA is positive for an intermediate- to high-risk type.     

Women’s preferences regarding options for management of atypical,borderline or low‐grade cervical cytological abnormalities: a review of the evidence

M. Z. Sadique and R. Legood Women’s preferences regarding options for management of atypical, borderline or low‐grade cervical cytological abnormalities: a review of the evidence Objectives: To review the evidence on women’s preferences for and valuation of alternative management pathways following identification of low‐grade cytological abnormalities as part of routine cervical cancer screening. The aim was to identify empirical studies evaluating women’s preferences regarding alternative management pathways and to compare the impact of alternative elicitation methods on results. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted using the online bibliographic information service PubMed database. Empirical studies were identified that elicited general preferences, utilities or valuations based on willingness to pay (WTP) with respect to management of low‐grade cytology results. Data were extracted on the methodology used and the empirical results. Results: Where quality of life data were elicited directly from patients that were undergoing management of low‐grade abnormalities utilizing direct elicitation techniques such as WTP, general preference questionnaires and the Euroqol, the studies tended towards a preference in favour of HPV testing (and colposcopy referral if HPV positive) rather than repeat cytology. In contrast, where studies included the general population and presented hypothetical scenarios of treatment pathways, and explicitly tried to incorporate assessment of process utility, the evidence indicated a slight tendency to favour repeat cytology. Conclusion: Consideration of patient preferences in the management of low‐grade cytology is important for designing screening protocols. The reviewed studies indicate that potentially different conclusions may be drawn depending on the elicitation methodology and selection of participants in the research.     

Prevalence of high-risk human papillomavirus type 16/18 infection among women with normal cytology: risk factor analysis and implications for screening and prophylaxis

Objective: To determine the prevalence of high‐risk human papillomavirus (HR‐HPV) 16/18 infection of uterine cervix among women in the reproductive age group, with cytologically normal cervical (Pap) smears; to analyse the risk factors for HR‐HPV acquisition and to address their implications for cervical cancer screening and prophylaxis in a low resource setting. Methods: Cervical samples from 769 cytologically negative women (age 18–45 years) attending a tertiary care centre in Delhi were subjected to HPV DNA testing and HR‐HPV 16/18 and low‐risk (LR)‐HPV 6/11 sub‐typing by polymerase chain reaction. Univariate risk factor analysis was carried out in HR‐HPV positive (n = 86) versus HR‐HPV negative women (n = 683) by chi‐square test. Results: The overall HPV prevalence among cytologically normal women was 16.6%. HR‐HPV16 was detected in 10.1%, whereas HPV18 was detected in 1% of women. HR‐HPV 16/18 comprised 67% of the total HPV positives. There was no decline in HR‐HPV positivity with age, and women aged 40–44 years were at significantly increased risk for HR‐HPV prevalence (P = 0.03). Statistically significant associations of HR‐HPV infection were found with risk factors such as high parity (P = 0.04), cervicitis/hypertrophic cervix (P = 0.01), unhealthy cervix (P = 0.04), rural residence (P = 0.03), low socioeconomic status (P = 0.01) and illiteracy (P = 0.07). Conclusions: Although the sample size was small, based on the observation that HR‐HPV 16 and 18 contributed significantly to the overall HPV prevalence in our setting, we speculate that testing/prophylaxis for these prevalent high‐risk types could perhaps make cervical cancer screening and preventive programmes cost‐effective. Larger community‐based studies on HPV prevalence and persistence are required to validate these findings before definitive recommendations can be made to the policy makers.