Primary HPV testing verification: A retrospective ad-hoc analysis of screening algorithms on women doubly tested for cytology and HPV.

To evaluate human papillomavirus (HPV) testing as a primary screening tool, we retrospectively analyzed data comparing (1) HPV testing to the algorithms of the ATHENA Study: (2) cytology alone, (3) cytology with ASCUS triage in women 25-29 and (4) cotesting ≥ 30 or (5) cotesting ≥ 25. We retrospectively analyzed data from women tested with both cytology and HPV testing from 2010 to 2013. Cumulative risk (CR) for CIN3+ was calculated. Crude and verification bias adjusted (VBA) sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, likelihood ratios, colposcopy rate, and screening test numbers were compared. About 15,173 women (25-95, 7.1% <30) had both HPV and cytological testing. Nearly 1,184 (8.4%) had biopsies. About 19.4% had positive cytology, 14.5% had positive HPV. HPV testing unassociated with ASCUS was requested in 40% of women <30, versus 84% ≥30, with similar HPV16/18 genotyping results (68% vs. 70%). 84 CIN3+ were detected with the following 3-year cumulative risk (CR) (95% confidence interval): HPV+/ASCUS+, 46% (32-66%), HPV+/NILM 30% (15-58%), HPV-/ASCUS+ 12% (6-23%), and HPV-/NILM 0.8% (0.2-3.6%). HPV had higher specificity 57% (54-60%) than cotesting ≥30 52% (49-55%). HPV sensitivity 78% (69-87%), positive 12.3% (9.8-15.3%), negative 97 (96-98%) predictive values, positive 1.8 (1.6-2.1) and negative likelihood ratios 0.6 (0.5-0.6), were not significantly different. Cotesting increased colposcopy rate and doubled testing per CIN3+ diagnosed. While HPV-/NILM cotesting results are associated with low CIN3+ risk, HPV testing had similar screening performance to cotesting and to cytology alone. Additionally, HPV testing and cytology incur false negatives in nonoverlapping subsets of patients. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2017;45:580-586. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Tracht J ，Wrenn A ，Eltoum IE 《-》

Performance of carcinogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) testing and HPV16 or HPV18 genotyping for cervical cancer screening of women aged 25 years and older: a subanalysis of the ATHENA study.

The ATHENA study was designed to assess the performance of carcinogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) testing and HPV16 or HPV18 genotyping compared with liquid-based cytology for cervical cancer screening in a large US population aged 21 years and older. We did a subanalysis of this population to compare the screening performance of the cobas HPV test versus liquid-based cytology in women aged 25 years and older, and assess management strategies for HPV-positive women. Women aged 25 years or older who were attending routine cervical screening were enrolled from 61 clinical centres in 23 US states. Cervical specimens were obtained for liquid-based cytology and HPV DNA testing with two first-generation assays (Amplicor HPV test and Linear Array HPV genotyping test) and the second-generation cobas HPV test (with individual HPV16 and HPV18 detection). Colposcopy and diagnostic biopsies were done on women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) or worse cytology, those who tested positive with either first-generation HPV test, and a random sample of women who tested negative for HPV and cytology. All women not selected for colposcopy received their results and exited the study. Participants and colposcopists were masked to cytology and HPV test results until the colposcopy visit was completed. The primary endpoint for this substudy was histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN3) or worse. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00709891; the study is in the follow-up phase, which is due to be completed in December, 2012. From May 27, 2008, to Aug 27, 2009, 47,208 women were enrolled, of whom 41,955 met our eligibility criteria. Valid cobas HPV and liquid-based cytology test results were available for 40,901 women (97%), who were included in this analysis. Of these, 4275 women (10%) tested cobas HPV positive and 2617 (6%) had abnormal cytology. 431 women were diagnosed with CIN2 or worse and 274 with CIN3 or worse. In women who had colposcopy, the cobas HPV test was more sensitive than liquid-based cytology for detection of CIN3 or worse (252/274 [92·0%, 95% CI 88·1-94·6] vs 146/274 [53·3%, 95% CI 47·4-59·1]; difference 38·7%, 95% CI 31·9-45·5; p<0·0001). Addition of liquid-based cytology to HPV testing increased sensitivity for CIN3 or worse to 96·7% (265/274, 95% CI 93·9-98·3), but increased the number of screen positives by 35·2% (5783/40,901 vs 4275/40,901) compared with HPV testing alone. As a triage test to identify CIN3 or worse in HPV-positive women, detection of HPV16, HPV18, or both alone was equivalent to detection of ASC-US or worse alone in terms of sensitivity (150/252 [59·5%] vs 133/252 [52·8%]; p=0·11) and positive predictive value (PPV) (150/966 [15·5%] vs 133/940 [14·1%]; p=0·20). Among HPV-positive women, detection of HPV16, HPV18, or both or low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or worse cytology had better sensitivity (182/252 [72·2%]; p<0·0001) and similar PPV (182/1314 [13·9%]; p=0·70) for detection of CIN3 or worse than ASC-US or worse cytology alone. Furthermore, detection of HPV16, HPV18, or both or high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or worse cytology had higher sensitivity (165/252 [65·5%]; p=0·0011) and PPV (165/1013 [16·3%]; p=0·031) for detection of CIN3 or worse than ASC-US or worse cytology alone. HPV testing with separate HPV16 and HPV18 detection could provide an alternative, more sensitive, and efficient strategy for cervical cancer screening than do methods based solely on cytology. Roche Molecular Systems.

Castle PE ，Stoler MH ，Wright TC Jr ，Sharma A ，Wright TL ，Behrens CM ... -  《-》

The effectiveness of HPV16 and HPV18 genotyping and cytology with different thresholds for the triage of human papillomavirus-based screening on self-collected samples.

Song F ，Du H ，Wang C ，Huang X ，Wu R ，CHIMUST team ... -  《PLoS One》

Comparison of cytology, HPV DNA testing and HPV 16/18 genotyping alone or combined targeting to the more balanced methodology for cervical cancer screening.

The objective of the present study was to identify the most effective cervical cancer screening algorithm incorporating different combinations of cytology, HPV testing and genotyping. Women 25-55years old recruited for the "HERMES" (HEllenic Real life Multicentric cErvical Screening) study were screened in terms of cytology and high-risk (hr) HPV testing with HPV 16/18 genotyping. Women positive for cytology or/and hrHPV were referred for colposcopy, biopsy and treatment. Ten screening algorithms based on different combinations of cytology, HPV testing and HPV 16/18 genotyping were investigated in terms of diagnostic accuracy. Three clusters of algorithms were formed according to the balance between effectiveness and harm caused by screening. The cluster showing the best balance included two algorithms based on co-testing and two based on HPV primary screening with HPV 16/18 genotyping. Among these, hrHPV testing with HPV 16/18 genotyping and reflex cytology (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance - ASCUS threshold) presented the optimal combination of sensitivity (82.9%) and specificity relative to cytology alone (0.99) with 1.26 false positive rate relative to cytology alone. HPV testing with HPV 16/18 genotyping, referring HPV 16/18 positive women directly to colposcopy, and hrHPV (non 16/18) positive women to reflex cytology (ASCUS threshold), as a triage method to colposcopy, reflects the best equilibrium between screening effectiveness and harm. Algorithms, based on cytology as initial screening method, on co-testing or HPV primary without genotyping, and on HPV primary with genotyping but without cytology triage, are not supported according to the present analysis.

Chatzistamatiou K ，Moysiadis T ，Moschaki V ，Panteleris N ，Agorastos T ... -  《-》

Management of HPV-positive women in cervical screening using results from two consecutive screening rounds.

We studied whether triage of human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive women participating in an HPV-based screening programme can be improved by including the HPV result at the previous screen in the triage algorithm. We analyzed data of a subgroup of 366 women from the POBASCAM trial, screened by cytology and HPV cotesting. Women were included if they tested HPV-positive in the second HPV-based screening round. We evaluated the clinical performance of 16 strategies, consisting of cytology, HPV genotyping, and/or previous screen HPV result. The clinical endpoint was cervical precancer or cancer (CIN3+). The current Dutch triage testing policy for HPV-positive women is to refer women for colposcopy if they have abnormal cytology at baseline or after 6-18 months. In the second HPV-based screening round, this strategy yielded a negative predictive value (NPV) of 95.8% (95% confidence interval: 91.9-98.2) and colposcopy referral rate of 37.6% (32.3-43.2%). Replacing repeat cytology by the previous screen HPV result yielded a similar NPV (96.9%, 93.3-98.9) and colposcopy referral rate (38.8%, 33.4-44.4). A higher NPV (99.2%, 96.3-100%) at the cost of a higher colposcopy referral rate (49.2%, 43.6-54.8) was achieved when cytology was combined with HPV16/18 genotyping. The other 13 triage strategies yielded a lower NPV, a higher colposcopy referral rate or performed similarly but required additional testing. HPV-positive women in the second HPV-based screening round can be suitably managed by cytology, HPV16/18 genotyping and the HPV result at the previous screen, obviating the need for repeat testing of HPV-positive, cytology negative women.

Polman NJ ，Veldhuijzen NJ ，Heideman DAM ，Snijders PJF ，Meijer CJLM ，Berkhof J ... -  《-》