Screening for high-grade cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia and cancer by testing for high-risk HPV, routine cytology or colposcopy

The validity of testing for high-risk types of human papillomavirus (HPV) in cervical cancer prevention programs is undetermined. We compared the performance on primary screening of HPV DNA testing, cytology and colposcopy in detecting cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or 3 or cancer. A cohort of 4,761 women, median age 35 years, was screened by routine cytology, routine colposcopy and testing for high-risk HPV by a PCR-based method. Within an 8-month period, women with abnormal findings on cytology or screening colposcopy or in whom high-risk HPV types were detected were referred for colposcopy and biopsy. Women negative on all initial screening tests were followed by a second screening examination. To correct for work-up bias, the true prevalence of CIN 2 or 3 or cancer was estimated by projection from histologically verified subgroups. Cervical biopsies were taken in 364 women (7.6%), of whom 114 (2.4%) showed CIN 2 (n = 34) or CIN 3 (n = 71) or cancer (n = 9). High-risk HPV testing achieved bias-corrected performance measures of 89.4% sensitivity, 93.9% specificity, 35.8% positive predictive value and 99.6% negative predictive value. Bias-corrected rates of true- and false-positives by high-risk HPV testing compared to cytology (colposcopy) were about 4.5 (6.7) and 19.1 (7.4) times higher, respectively. The quality of routine cytology was controlled by computer-assisted review, and the observed number of true-positives more than doubled after adding automated review results. In middle-aged women, testing for high-risk HPV types, particularly when negative, may be used to increase the screening interval in programs for secondary prevention of cervical cancer.     

Human papillomavirus testing and liquid-based cytology in primary screening of women younger than 35 years: results at recruitment for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA is more sensitive but less specific than cytological analysis. Loss in specificity is most relevant in women younger than 35 years because of increased HPV prevalence. We aimed to compare conventional screening with an experimental strategy in women aged 25-34 years, and investigate the effect of different criteria of referral to define the best methods of HPV screening. METHODS: Women were randomly assigned to the conventional procedure (standard cytology, with referral to colposcopy if cytology showed atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or more [ASCUS+]) or an experimental procedure (liquid-based cytology and testing for high-risk HPV types, with referral to colposcopy with ASCUS+ cytology). Women positive for HPV (cutoff > or = 1 pg/mL) but with normal cytology were retested after 1 year. The main endpoint was the presence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia at grade 2 or more (CIN2+) in reviewed histology. The main analysis was by intention to screen. This trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN81678807. FINDINGS: We randomly assigned 5808 women aged 25-34 years to the conventional group and 6002 to the experimental group. The experimental procedure was significantly more sensitive than the conventional procedure (55 vs 33 CIN2+ lesions detected; relative sensitivity 1.61 [95% CI 1.05-2.48]), but had a lower positive predictive value (PPV; relative PPV 0.55 [0.37-0.82]). HPV testing (> or = 1 pg/mL) with cytology triage was also more sensitive than conventional cytology (relative sensitivity 1.58 [1.03-2.44], relative PPV 0.78 [0.52-1.16]). Relative PPV could be improved, with minimum loss in sensitivity, by use of a 2 pg/mL cutoff for HPV testing. Compared with conventional cytology, liquid-based cytology had a relative sensitivity of 1.32 (0.84-2.06), relative PPV 0.58 [0.38-0.89]). INTERPRETATION: HPV testing alone with cytology triage could be a feasible alternative to conventional cytology for screening women younger than 35 years. Follow-up will provide data on possible overdiagnosis and on the feasibility of extended intervals.     

Evaluation of the sensitivity of cervicography in a consecutive colposcopic series.

Cervicography was performed in 606 women referred for colposcopy. Cervigrams were blindly reviewed by two independent readers. The positivity rate at cervicography was high (operator A = 50%, B = 58.8%). The sensitivity for papillomavirus infection (HPV)/cervical intraepithelial neoplasia I (CIN I) (n = 141) was 79.4% for operator A and 80.8% for operator B. The sensitivity for CIN II or more severe lesions (n = 22) was 95.2% and 90.5% for operators A and B, respectively. The positive predictive value for HPV/CIN I or CIN II, or more severe lesions was 36.9% and 6.9% for operator A and 32.1% and 5.3% for operator B, respectively. Interobserver variability was acceptable (kappa = 0.62). Cervicography suspected 27 HPV/CIN I, 1 CIN II and 1 CIN III which showed no cytologic abnormalities. This study confirms that cervicography has a good sensitivity for cervical lesions, but it is based on a selected series, not representative of a screening condition. The combination of cervicography and cytology in screening is presently under evaluation in a prospective study of screened women.     

Comparing PAP smear cytology, aided visual inspection, screening colposcopy, cervicography and HPV testing as optional screening tools in Latin America. Study design and baseline data of the LAMS study

OBJECTIVES: This is a European Commission (EC)-funded ongoing study known as the LAMS (Latin American Screening) study, where PAP smear/liquid-based cytology and screening colposcopy were compared with i) three optional screening tools [visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), or Lugol's iodine (VILI), cervicography] and with ii) Hybrid Capture II from a) conventional samples and from b) self-samples, in women at different risk for cervical cancer in Brazil and Argentina. STUDY DESIGN: During 2002-2003, a cohort of 12,107 women attending four clinics: Campinas (CA), Sao Paulo (SP), Porto Alegre (PA) and Buenos Aires (BA), were interviewed for risk factors, and examined using the 8 diagnostic arms. Colposcopy was performed for women positive in any test and for 5% of women with baseline PAP-negative and 20% of HCII-negatives. All high-grade lesions (CIN2/3) were treated, and low-grade CIN are prospectively followed-up. RESULTS: Of the 12,107 women, the following baseline data are available: epidemiological data (n=11,996), conventional PAP smears (n=10,363), LBC, SurePATH (n=320), LBC, DNA-Citoliq (n=1,346), VIA (n=12.067), VILI (n=3,061), cervicography (n=279), screening colposcopy (n=3,437), HCII conventional (n=4,710), HCII self-sampling (n=246) and cervical biopsies (n=1,524). The four sub-cohorts differ significantly in all their baseline data on the implicated risk factors of cervical cancer, consonant with their origin from regions with different cancer incidence. Around 95% of all PAP smears were negative, with slight variations in the prevalence of LSIL and HSIL between the four centers. Significant differences were found in the detection rates of abnormal findings in VIA, VILI and colposcopy between the four centers (p=0.0001). The prevalence of HPV was practically identical (16.5-18.8%) in all four cohorts (p=0.486), with no differences in the relative viral loads. Biopsy results were different depending on whether the women underwent screening colposcopy (BA) or elective colposcopy (others). CONCLUSION: Four cohorts with significantly different baseline data are available, and prospective follow-up of these women permits analysis of whether variations in cervical cancer incidence in these regions is due to i) different natural history of the precursor lesions, or ii) due to different levels of exposure to the known risk factors.     

Evaluation of cervical screening strategies with adjunct high-risk human papillomavirus testing for women with borderline or mild dyskaryosis

The management of women with a smear read as borderline/mild dyskaryosis (BMD) found by cervical cancer screening is still under discussion as only few of these cases are associated with high-grade lesions. To determine the optimal screening strategy for these women, a simulation model of cervical cancer development was used that is based on high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) infection. The current strategy of repeat cytological testing at 6 and 18 months after BMD was compared to strategies with adjunct hrHPV testing. Calculations were done for both conventional and liquid-based cytology as the primary screening tool. In comparison to current screening, adjunct hrHPV testing was more effective in preventing cancer and more woman-friendly (reduction in colposcopy referrals with outcome < cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2) of up to 56% and in repeat smears of 30-100%). In combination with conventional cytology, cost-effective strategies were the ones in which a sample for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing is collected at a return visit within 1 month or in which hrHPV testing is restricted to repeat smears taken at 6 and 18 months. For these strategies, co-collection of samples for hrHPV testing at baseline is not necessary which has organizational and cost advantages. In combination with liquid-based cytology, it was cost-effective to perform a reflex hrHPV test at baseline from the liquid-based specimen. Liquid-based screening was more effective than conventional screening, but annual diagnosis costs were euro5 million higher (population size 16 million). In conclusion, our calculations indicate that implementation of hrHPV testing for the management of women with borderline or mild dyskaryosis (BMD) is feasible both in settings where conventional and liquid-based cytology is current practice.     

Neither one‐time negative screening tests nor negative colposcopy provides absolute reassurance against cervical cancer

A population sample of 10,049 women living in Guanacaste, Costa Rica, was recruited into a natural history of human papillomavirus (HPV) and cervical neoplasia study in 1993–1994. At the enrollment visit, we applied multiple state‐of‐the‐art cervical cancer screening methods to detect prevalent cervical cancer and to prevent subsequent cervical cancers by the timely detection and treatment of precancerous lesions. Women were screened at enrollment with 3 kinds of cytology (often reviewed by more than one pathologist), visual inspection and cervicography. Any positive screening test led to colposcopic referral and biopsy and/or excisional treatment of CIN2 or worse. We retrospectively tested stored specimens with an early HPV test (hybrid capture tube test) and for >40 HPV genotypes using a research PCR assay. We followed women typically 5–7 years and some up to 11 years. Nonetheless, 16 cases of invasive cervical cancer were diagnosed during follow‐up. Six cancer cases were failures at enrollment to detect abnormalities by cytology screening; 3 of the 6 were also negative at enrollment by sensitive HPV DNA testing. Seven cancers represent failures of colposcopy to diagnose cancer or a precancerous lesion in screen‐positive women. Finally, 3 cases arose despite attempted excisional treatment of precancerous lesions. Based on this evidence, we suggest that no current secondary cervical cancer prevention technologies applied once in a previously under‐screened population is likely to be 100% efficacious in preventing incident diagnoses of invasive cervical cancer. © 2009 UICC     

Impact of utilizing p16INK4A immunohistochemistry on estimated performance of three cervical cancer screening tests

The histopathological diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2,3 (CIN 2,3) is subjective and prone to variability. In our study, we analyzed the impact of utilizing a biomarker (p16(INK4A)) together with histopathology to refine the "gold standard" utilized for evaluating the performance of 3 different cervical cancer screening tests: cervical cytology, human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing and visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA). Cervical biopsies from 2 South African cervical cancer screening studies originally diagnosed by a single pathologist were reevaluated by a second pathologist and a consensus pathology diagnosis obtained. Immunohistochemical staining for p16(INK4A) was then performed. The estimated sensitivity of some cervical cancer screening tests was markedly impacted by the criteria utilized to define CIN 2,3. Use of routine histopathology markedly underestimated the sensitivity of both conventional cytology and HPV DNA testing compared to an improved gold standard of consensus pathology and p16(INK4A) positivity. In contrast, routine histopathology overestimated the sensitivity of VIA. Our results demonstrate that refining the diagnosis of CIN 2,3 through the use of consensus pathology and immunohistochemical staining for p16(INK4A) has an important impact on measurement of the performance of cervical cancer screening tests. The sensitivity of screening tests such as HPV DNA testing and conventional cytology may be underestimated when an imperfect gold standard (routine histopathology) is used. In contrast, the sensitivity of other tests, such as VIA, may be overestimated with an imperfect gold standard.     

Screening with a primary human papillomavirus test does not increase detection of cervical cancer and intraepithelial neoplasia 3

Aim:To determine cross-sectional validity of primary human papillomavirus (HPV) screening in comparison to cytological screening.Methods:During 2003–2004, 61,149 women were individually randomised to screening with a test for oncogenic HPV DNA or to conventional cytological screening within the Finnish cervical screening programme.Results:For HPV screening, cross-sectional relative sensitivity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) or cancer was 1.58 (95 % confidence interval 1.19–2.09) in comparison to cytology. At the level of CIN 3 or cancer no increase in relative sensitivity was observed. Cross-sectional specificity estimates for the screening arms were comparable, but the specificity of screening with sole HPV DNA test was clearly inferior.Conclusions:Primary HPV screening with cytology triage finds more CIN lesions compared to conventional screening but mild lesions are overrepresented. This is likely to result in overdiagnosis since most mild lesions are regressive.     

Comparison of human papillomavirus genotyping and cytology triage,COMPACT Study: Design,methods and baseline results in 14 642 women

Although cytology‐based screening programs have significantly reduced mortality and morbidity from cervical cancer, the global consensus is that primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical screening increases detection of high‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and invasive cancer. However, the optimal triage strategy for HPV‐positive women to avoid over‐referral to colposcopy may be setting specific. As Japan requires data that have been generated domestically to modify screening guidelines, we conducted a 3‐year prospective study, COMparison of HPV genotyping And Cytology Triage (COMPACT), to evaluate the potential role of HPV16/18 partial genotyping and cytology for primary HPV screening. In total, 14 642 women aged 20 to 69 years undergoing routine screening at 3 centers in Hokkaido were enrolled. Conventional cytology and HPV testing were carried out. Women with abnormal cytology or HPV16/18 positivity underwent colposcopy. Those with 12 other high‐risk (hr) HPV types underwent repeat cytology after 6 months. Primary study endpoints were detection of high‐grade cervical disease defined as CIN2/CIN3 or greater as determined by consensus pathology. Prevalence of cytological abnormalities was 2.4%. hrHPV, HPV 16, and HPV 18 were detected in 4.6%, 0.9%, and 0.3% of women, respectively. HPV16/18 were detected in all (8/8) invasive cervical cancers and in all (2/2) adenocarcinomas in situ. Both cytological abnormalities and hrHPV positivity declined with increasing age. This is the first Japanese study to investigate the role of partial genotyping and cytology in an HPV‐based screening program. Results should help policy‐makers develop guidelines for future cervical screening programs and management of cervical abnormalities based on HPV genotype.     

Human papillomavirus type-specific 18-month risk of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in women with a normal or borderline/mildly dyskaryotic smear.

INTRODUCTION: High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) DNA testing is an increasingly used instrument in cervical cancer prevention along cervical cytology. The inclusion of hrHPV testing in cervical screening requires efficient management as many hrHPV infections are transient. We investigated the potential value of hrHPV genotyping in normal and borderline/mildly dyskaryotic (BMD) smears. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From a screening population of 44,102 women in the Netherlands, we included hrHPV-positive women with a normal or BMD smear. We assessed the type-specific 18-month risk of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). RESULTS: In hrHPV-positive women, 18-month risk of CIN grade 3 or invasive cancer (> or =CIN3) was 6% [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 4-9] after normal cytology and 20% (95% CI, 16-25) after BMD. If positive for HPV16, > or =CIN3 risks were 14% (95% CI, 9-21) and 37% (95% CI, 28-48), respectively. In the subset of hrHPV-positive women without HPV16, HPV18 was associated with an increased risk of high-grade CIN after normal cytology and HPV31 and HPV33 were associated with an increased risk, particularly after BMD. HPV16 and HPV18 were also associated with an increased risk of high-grade CIN in women with an hrHPV-positive normal baseline smear and a repeat normal smear at 6 months. DISCUSSION: HrHPV-positive women without type 16, 18, 31, or 33 had a relatively low risk of high-grade CIN. Among women with baseline normal cytology and among women with a baseline and repeat normal smear, HPV16/18-positive women showed an increased risk of high-grade CIN. This warrants more aggressive management of HPV16/18-positive women compared with other hrHPV-positive women.     

cobas 4800 HPV检测在宫颈癌筛查中的应用价值

  目的  评价cobas 4800 HPV检测技术在宫颈癌及癌前病变筛查中的可行性及应用价值。  方法  对河南省新密市856例年龄 > 21岁有性生活的妇女进行宫颈癌筛查。每位妇女均接受了cobas 4800 HPV检测、高危型HPV第二代杂交捕获试验(hy brid capture 2 technology, HC2)检测、ThinPrep液基细胞学和阴道镜检查。阴道镜下在可见病变处直接取活检; 任意筛查结果阳性但无可见病变时, 于宫颈外口鳞柱交界处行四象限随机活检和宫颈管搔刮术(endocervical curettage, ECC)。  结果  cobas 4800HPV检测与HC2检测对宫颈上皮内瘤变(cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, CIN)2级以上(CIN2、CIN3及宫颈癌)患者的灵敏度均为94.4%(34/36), 特异度分别为63.2%(516/817)和63.9%(522/817);一致率为83.4%(711/853), 两者具有高度一致性(Kappa=0.65)。cobas 4800 HPV检测对于液基细胞学检查漏诊的患者具有100%检出率。cobas 4800 HPV16及18分型检测对于CIN2以上患者的阳性预测值21.9%为HC2检测10.3%的2.13倍。妇女感染HPV16及18型患CIN2以上病变的年龄比感染其他类型平均小5.4岁。  结论  cobas 4800 HPV检测与HC2检测具有相似的准确性和良好的一致性, 比ThinPrep液基细胞学检查更为灵敏, 并且能鉴别HPV16及18两种高风险类型HPV感染, 利于医生更有针对性地随访宫颈病变中的高危病例。      

Cervical cancer screening

There is abundant evidence that cervical cancer screening with conventional cytology(CC)has reduced mortality from cervical cancer. Based on the evidence, CC has been implemented as a modality of the population-based screening for the last several decades in Japan. Several issues are currently faced during screening. For instance, very low coverage is one of the greatest unsolved problems. At the same time, a reliable system is required to monitor specimen adequacy and to calculate detection rates of not only invasive cancer, but also cervical intraepithelial neoplasia(CIN), for the quality control and evaluation of screening efficacy. Recently, two new modalities may be applicable for cervical cancer screening. One is liquid-based cytology(LBC)and the other is the HPV test. LBC and CC did not differ significantly in terms of sensitivity and specificity for detection of CIN2+or CIN3+. HPV tests are superior to CC in sensitivity but are inferior in specificity for detection of CIN2+or CIN3+. Because there is a possibility reducing mortality from and incidence of invasive cervical cancer, implementation of these modalities to Japan should be taken into consideration. Prior to this, however, it is necessary to organize a system to compare performance indicators reflecting the effectiveness of the new modalities to those of CC in a population-based screening. Also, these results must be disclosed for a steady perspective on the cervical cancer screening in Japan.     

A comparison of liquid-based cytology and Pap smear as a screening method for cervical cancer

The implementation of population-based screening for cervical cancer with Pap smear in the early sixties was set to detect and treat precancerous lesions, hopefully preventing a subsequent invasive cervical cancer. Epidemiological data indicate that organized screening has a major impact on morbidity and mortality from cervical cancer. The limited sensitivity of a single smear necessitates repeated smears in organized program. It is suggested that liquid-based cytology improves the sensitivity. The aim of this split-sample study was to compare ThinPrep liquid-based cytology with conventional Pap smear, relying on a laboratory with long-term experience of the latter. In total, 137 women with atypical Pap smear in population-based cervical screening were enrolled for the split-sample study. The performance of both techniques (ThinPrep liquid-based cytology and conventional Pap smear) were compared and validated by a histological follow-up. Women without representative histological biopsy were excluded from the study. Pap smear had sensitivity for detection of CIN2-3 of 47% compared to 66% for liquid-based material. The concordance of the two sampling techniques with the histological diagnosis was 37% and 53%, respectively, this difference being statistically significant. The proportion of reports on atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) was significantly less in the liquid-based material, 4.3% compared to 8% of the conventional smears. This improved sensitivity in combination with the possibility to perform reflex testing such as HPV DNA or p16 immunocytochemistry without renewed sampling gives ThinPrep a substantial advantage and makes the liquid-based technique interesting.     

Switch from cytology-based to human papillomavirus test-based cervical screening: implications for colposcopy

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is more sensitive than cytology; some cervical cancer prevention programs will switch from cytology to carcinogenic HPV test-based screening. The objective of our study is to evaluate the clinical implications of a switch to HPV test-based screening on performance and workload of colposcopy. Women in the population-based, 7-year Guanacaste cohort study were screened at enrollment using cytology. We also took another specimen for HPV DNA testing and collected magnified cervical photographic images (cervigrams). A final case diagnosis (≥cervical intraepithelial neoplasia [CIN] grade 3, CIN2, 相似文献   

高危型HPV DNA 检测在宫颈不典型鳞状细胞再分类中的意义

 目的 明确高危型人乳头瘤病毒基因（high risk human papillomavirus DNA，HR-HPV DNA）检测在宫颈不典型鳞状细胞（atypical squamous cell，ASC）再分类中的意义，为其临床应用提供依据。方法 我院2002年于山西省阳城县和襄垣县进行的“中国山西宫颈癌普查方法研究”项目中，9034名妇女均进行了液基细胞学检查、HR-HPVDNA检测和5％醋酸染色肉眼观察。我们对其中细胞学诊断为ASC，伴有HR-HPVDNA检测阳性或5％醋酸染色肉眼观察异常的病例进行了阴道镜检查及活检，比较HR-HPVDNA阳性ASC组和HR-HPV DNA阴性-5％醋酸染色肉眼观察阳性ASC组中宫颈上皮内瘤变（Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia，CIN）的发生率，从而评价HR-HPVDNA检测作为ASC再分类方法的可行性。结果 在进行阴道镜检查的548例ASC中，HR-HPV DNA阳性者有333例（60．8％），HR-HPV DNA阴性-肉眼观察阳性者215例（39．2％）。这两组ASC中CIN的发生率分别为22．5％和5．1％（P〈0．05）；CIN2／3的发生率分别为7．8％和0．9％（P〈0．05）。结论 HR-HPV DNA检测是ASC再分类的有效方法。     

Human papillomavirus testing in primary screening for the detection of high-grade cervical lesions: a study of 7932 women

High-risk human papillomaviruses (HR-HPV) are the necessary cause of cervical carcinomas. To determine whether HPR-HPV DNA detection in primary routine screening could represent a sensitive and reliable technique for the detection of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HGSIL), laboratory analysis using 2 cytologic techniques (conventional and liquid-based), HPV testing with Hybrid Capture II assay (HC-II), followed by colposcopic examination of women with abnormal cervical finding and/or persistent HR-HPV infection, was conducted in 7932 women who had routine cervical examination. The sensitivity of HPV testing for detecting a histologically proven HGSIL was 100%, higher than that of conventional (68.1%) and liquid-based (87.8%) cytology. The low specificities of 85.6% and 87.3% of HPV testing slightly increased to 88.4% and 90.1% if HPV testing was reserved for woman >30 years old. The quantitative approach provided by the HC-II assay for the assessment of the viral load was not reliable for predicting HGSIL in normal smears. HR-HPV testing could be proposed in primary screening in association with cytology. With conventional cytology it significantly improves the detection of HGSIL. With the use of the same cervical scrape for HPV testing and liquid-based cytology, HR-HPV testing would allow to select positive samples treated in a second time for cytology which gives a good specificity.     

Validity of combined cytology and human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping with adjuvant DNA-cytometry in routine cervical screening: results from 31031 women from the Bonn-region in West Germany

Our aim was to improve the accuracy of routine cervical screening by a risk-adapted multimodal protocol with special focus on possible reduction and prognostic assessment of false positive results. A cohort of 31031 women from the Bonn-region in West Germany, median age 36 years, were screened by cytology (conventional or liquid-based), followed by PCR-based HVP detection with genotyping and adjuvant DNA image cytometry, if indicated, in a sequential manner. The true prevalence of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and carcinoma (>/=CIN2) was 0.32% in the population as projected from cervical biopsies of 123 women (0.4%), of whom 100 showed >/=CIN2. Sensitivity of the cytology screening program at PapIIID/HSIL threshold for detecting histologically confirmed >/=CIN2 cases was 81%, with specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 99, 20.9 and 99.9%, respectively. Of 38 women receiving the complete screening protocol, all the 31 >/=CIN2 cases were correctly detected by cytology alone, 30 by positive high-risk HPV genotype and 30 by aneuploid DNA profile. The combination of the three methods resulted in an up to 6.9% increase in PPV for >/=CIN2 at practically unchanged detection rate with the additional benefit of being able to predict the probable outcome of CIN1 lesions detected as false positives with any single test. Multimodal cervical screening might permit identification of those women with low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions likely to progress at an earlier and curable stage of disease and lengthen the screening interval in those with transient minor lesions caused by productive HPV infection.     

Human papillomavirus as a target for management,prevention and therapy

The discovery that human papillomavirus (HPV) is the necessary causal factor in cervical carcinogenesis has made it a target for prophylactic and therapeutic vaccines, as well as a diagnostic tool in cervical screening. Whilst prophylactic vaccination has proven very effective in terms of preventing cervical cancer precursor lesions, therapeutic strategies have presented far greater challenges. HPV testing has shown itself to be extremely valuable in the triage of low grade cytological abnormalities, test of cure following treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), and will, over the next 10 years, gradually replace cytology as the mainstay of primary cervical screening. In this review, the latest evidence supporting HPV as both a biomarker of risk for cervical cancer and a target for prophylactic and therapeutic vaccination is presented.     

Impact of HPV testing in opportunistic cervical screening: Support for primary HPV screening in the United States

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical screening increases diagnosis of precancer and reduces the incidence of cervical cancer more than cytology alone. However, real-world evidence from diverse practice settings is lacking for the United States (U.S.) to support clinician adoption of primary HPV screening. Using a population-based registry, which captures all cervical cytology (with or without HPV testing) and all cervical biopsies, we conducted a real-world evidence study of screening in women aged 30 to 64 years across the entire state of New Mexico. Negative cytology was used to distinguish cotests from reflex HPV tests. A total of 264 198 cervical screening tests (with exclusions based on clinical history) were recorded as the first screening test between 2014 and 2017. Diagnoses of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grades 2 or 3 or greater (CIN2+, CIN3+) from 2014 to 2019 were the main outcomes. Of cytology-negative screens, 165 595 (67.1%) were cotests and 4.8% of these led to biopsy within 2 years vs 3.2% in the cytology-only group. Among cytology-negative, HPV tested women, 347 of 398 (87.2%) CIN2+ cases were diagnosed in HPV-positive women, as were 147 of 164 (89.6%) CIN3+ cases. Only 29/921 (3.2%) CIN3+ and 67/1964 (3.4%) CIN2+ cases were diagnosed in HPV-negative, cytology-positive women with biopsies. Under U.S. opportunistic screening, across a diversity of health care delivery practices, and in a population suffering multiple disparities, we show adding HPV testing to cytology substantially increased the yield of CIN2+ and CIN3+. CIN3+ was rarely diagnosed in HPV-negative women with abnormal cytology, supporting U.S. primary HPV-only screening.     

Evaluation of a validated methylation triage signature for human papillomavirus positive women in the HPV FOCAL cervical cancer screening trial

Human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening requires triage of HPV positive women to identify those at risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) or worse. We conducted a blinded case–control study within the HPV FOCAL randomized cervical cancer screening trial of women aged 25–65 to examine whether baseline methylation testing using the S5 classifier provided triage performance similar to an algorithm relying on cytology and HPV genotyping. Groups were randomly selected from women with known HPV/cytology results and pathology outcomes. Group 1: 104 HPV positive (HPV+), abnormal cytology (54 CIN2/3; 50 <CIN2); Group 2: 103 HPV+, normal cytology with HPV persistence at 12 mo. (53 CIN2/3; 50 <CIN2); Group 3: 50 HPV+, normal cytology with HPV clearance at 12 mo. (assumed <CIN2), total n=257. For the combined groups, S5 risk score CIN2/3 relative sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) were compared with other triage approaches. Methylation showed a highly significant increasing trend with disease severity. For CIN3, S5 relative sensitivity and specificity were: 93.2% (95%CI: 81.4–98.0) and 41.8% (35.2–48.8), compared to 86.4% (75.0–95.7) and 49.8% (43.1–56.6) respectively for combined abnormal cytology/HPV16/18 positivity (differences not statistically significant at 5% level); adjusted PPVs were 18.2% (16.2–20.4) and 19.3% (16.6–22.2) respectively. S5 was also positive in baseline specimens from eight cancers detected during or after trial participation. The S5 methylation score had high sensitivity and PPV for CIN3, compatible with US and European thresholds for colposcopy referral. Methylation signatures can identify most HPV positive women at increased risk of cervical cancer from their baseline screening specimens.