Analytical performance of the Investigational Use Only Cervista HPV HR test as determined by a multi-center study

Isothermal Technologies for HPV Detection: Current Trends and Future Perspectives

The human papillomavirus (HPV) is a non-enveloped DNA virus transmitted through skin-to-skin contact that infects epithelial and mucosal tissue. It has over 200 known genotypes, classified by their pathogenicity as high-risk and low-risk categories. High-risk HPV genotypes are associated with the development of different types of cancers, including cervical cancer, which is a leading cause of mortality in women. In clinical practice and the market, the principal tests used to detect HPV are based on cytology, hybrid detection, and qPCR. However, these methodologies may not be ideal for the required timely diagnosis. Tests have been developed based on isothermal nucleic acid amplification tests (INAATs) as alternatives. These tests offer multiple advantages over the qPCR, such as not requiring specialized laboratories, highly trained personnel, or expensive equipment like thermocyclers. This review analyzes the different INAATs applied for the detection of HPV, considering the specific characteristics of each test, including the HPV genotypes, gene target, the limit of detection (LOD), detection methods, and detection time. Additionally, we discuss the tests available on the market that are approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Finally, we address the challenges and potential solutions for the large-scale implementation of INAATs, particularly in rural or underserved areas.

Molecular diagnostics of infectious disease: Detection and characterization of microbial agents in cytology samples

BACKGROUND

Cytology samples are widely used to diagnose various infectious diseases by detection and identification of causative infectious agents, including bacteria, fungi, and viruses. The role of cytopathology in infectious disease has expanded tremendously in the past decades with the advances in molecular techniques. Molecular diagnostic methods, compared to conventional methods, have shown improved patient outcome, reduction in cost, and shortened hospital stay times. The aim of this article is to review molecular testing in cytology samples for diagnosis of infectious diseases.

METHODS

The literature search for molecular testing in common cytology samples for diagnosis of infectious diseases was performed. The findings of the studies were summarized. The common cytology samples included in this article were gynecologic specimens, cerebrospinal fluid, bronchoalveolar lavage, and urine samples.

CONCLUSIONS

There are a number of molecular diagnostic tests that are available to be used in common cytology samples to detect infectious agents. Each test has its own advantages and limitations. It is our hope that upon reading this review article, the readers will have better understanding of molecular diagnostic testing of infectious diseases utilizing commonly sampled cytology specimens in daily practice.

Review of the Standard and Advanced Screening, Staging Systems and Treatment Modalities for Cervical Cancer

Simple Summary

This review discusses the timeline and development of the recommended screening tests, diagnosis system, and therapeutics implemented in clinics for precancer and cancer of the uterine cervix. The incorporation of the latest automation, machine learning modules, and state-of-the-art technologies into these aspects are also discussed.

Abstract

Cancer arising from the uterine cervix is the fourth most common cause of cancer death among women worldwide. Almost 90% of cervical cancer mortality has occurred in low- and middle-income countries. One of the major aetiologies contributing to cervical cancer is the persistent infection by the cancer-causing types of the human papillomavirus. The disease is preventable if the premalignant lesion is detected early and managed effectively. In this review, we outlined the standard guidelines that have been introduced and implemented worldwide for decades, including the cytology, the HPV detection and genotyping, and the immunostaining of surrogate markers. In addition, the staging system used to classify the premalignancy and malignancy of the uterine cervix, as well as the safety and efficacy of the various treatment modalities in clinical trials for cervical cancers, are also discussed. In this millennial world, the advancements in computer-aided technology, including robotic modules and artificial intelligence (AI), are also incorporated into the screening, diagnostic, and treatment platforms. These innovations reduce the dependence on specialists and technologists, as well as the work burden and time incurred for sample processing. However, concerns over the practicality of these advancements remain, due to the high cost, lack of flexibility, and the judgment of a trained professional that is currently not replaceable by a machine.

Development and validation of a multiplex qPCR assay for detection and relative quantification of HPV16 and HPV18 E6 and E7 oncogenes

Human papillomaviruses (HPV) play a key role in promoting human anogenital cancers. Current high-risk HPV screening or diagnosis tests involve cytological or molecular techniques mostly based on qualitative HPV DNA detection. Here, we describe the development of a rapid quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) detection test of HPV16 and HPV18 oncogenes (E6 and E7) normalized on human gene encoding GAPDH. Optimized qPCR parameters were defined, and analytical specificities were validated. The limit of detection was 10¹ for all genes tested. Assay performances were evaluated on clinical samples (n = 96). Concordance between the Xpert HPV assay and the triplex assay developed here was 93.44% for HPV16 and 73.58% for HPV18. HPV co-infections were detected in 15 samples. The systems developed in the present study can be used in complement to traditional HPV tests for specifically validating the presence of HPV16 and/or HPV18. It can also be used for the follow-up of patients with confirmed infection and at risk of developing lesions, through the quantification of E6 and E7 oncogene expression (mRNA) normalized on the GAPDH expression levels.

Human Papillomavirus-Negative Cervical Cancer: A Comprehensive Review

Human papillomavirus (HPV) has been the leading cause of cervical cancer for over 25 years. Approximately 5.5–11% of all cervical cancers are reported to be HPV-negative, which can be attributed to truly negative and false-negative results. The truly HPV-negative cervical cancers are almost all cervical adenocarcinomas with unclear etiology. False HPV negativity can arise from histological misclassification, latent HPV infection, disruption of the targeting fragment, non-high risk HPV infection, and HPV testing methods. HPV-negative cervical cancers are often diagnosed at an advanced FIGO stage and have a poor prognosis; thus, the management of these cases requires greater attention.

Prevalence and Characteristics of hrHPV Infection among 414,540 Women: A Multicenter Study in Central and Eastern China

Objectives: Understanding the prevalence and characteristics of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) with the large-scale multicenter data based on a US FDA-approved testing method is important to guide ongoing vaccination programs in China.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study based on data from 11 large hospitals in central and eastern China. From October 1st, 2012 to December 31st, 2016, a total of 480,034 cervical specimens were collected, and 414,540 eligible participants (14-80 years, mean age 39.9 years) were included and tested using Cervista High-Risk HPV Assay (Hologic Inc., Bedford, Mass, USA).

Results: The overall hrHPV prevalence in this study was 17.8% (73,713/414,540), with Wuhan slightly higher than Zhejiang (18.6% vs. 17.6%, P < 0.001). The prevalence showed a declining trend from 2012 to 2016. The most common hrHPV group was A9 (61.7%), followed by A5/A6 (29.4%) and A7 (25.6%). A U-shaped curve was observed for age-specific hrHPV prevalence: ≤19 years and ≥50 years were higher than other age groups.

Conclusion: In pre-vaccination period, A9 was the most dominant hrHPV group, and infections were most likely to occur at younger and older ages. The prevalence of hrHPV varied by cities and age groups, suggesting vaccination programs should be propagated in a population-specific approach.

Current Status of p16 Immunohistochemistry and HPV Testing in Fine Needle Aspiration Specimens of the Head and Neck

Human papilloma virus (HPV)-related squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is biologically unique and has a better prognosis than conventional SCC of the head and neck. p16 immunohistochemistry emerged as a valuable surrogate marker for HPV in oropharyngeal SCC. The criteria for a positive p16 result in tissue specimens are well established. However, there is no consensus regarding interpreting p16 staining in cell blocks and other cytology specimens. This review discusses the current evidence on p16 testing in cytology specimens and also highlights other methods for HPV testing, including DNA and RNA in situ hybridization, as well as other molecular HPV tests.

Cervical cancer screening using the Cervista high-risk human papillomavirus test: opportunistic screening of a hospital-based population in Fujian province, China

Objectives

The Cervista^® high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) test was evaluated as a primary screening method for cervical cancer in women aged ≥21 years and was compared with different screening and triage combinations.

Materials and methods

A nested case–control study within the Fujian provincial Cervical Lesion Screening Cohorts was used to evaluate the Cervista test as the primary cervical screening method in a hospital-based population. Strategy 1 primarily screened using a cytology screen with HR-HPV testing used for triage. Strategy 2 primarily screened using cytology and HR-HPV co-testing. Strategy 3 primarily screened using HR-HPV testing and triaged HPV-positive women based on cytology. Strategy 4 primarily screened using HR-HPV testing and referred A9 pool HPV-positive women to colposcopy directly, whereas non-A9 HPV-positive women were triaged using cytology.

Results

There were 10,183 women included in this study; 16.49% (1677/10,183) were HR-HPV-positive, 9.52% had abnormal cytology, and 9907 women were normal during followup. A total of 276 women were diagnosed with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse (CIN2+), 197 with CIN3 or worse (CIN3+), and 70 with cervical cancer. Moreover, 10.15% (20/197) women who were CIN3+ were identified as cytology-negative, while 8.63% (17/197) were HR-HPV negative (P>0.05). The cumulative risk rate for HPV–/cytology– was 0.836 (95% CI, 0.424–1.648) in CIN3+ cases. Strategy 4 yielded the highest sensitivity for CIN2+ or CIN3+ and the lowest positive predictive value for CIN2+ or CIN3+ among the four screening strategies.

Conclusion

The Cervista HR-HPV test can provide a reliable and sensitive clinical reference for the cervical cancer primary screen.

Comparison of the analytical and clinical performance of five tests for the detection of human papillomavirus genital infection

HPV-based screening provides greater protection against cervical cancer (CC) than cytology-based strategies. Currently, several molecular diagnostic assays for the detection of human papillomavirus (HPV) are available. In this study, we analyzed 5 different HPV testing and genotyping techniques (Hybrid Capture 2 [HC2; Qiagen, Hilden, Germany], AnyplexTMII HPV28 [Anyplex; Seegene, Seoul, Korea], Linear Array [Roche, Branchburg, NJ, USA], GP5+/6+ PCR-EIA-RH [Labo Bio-medical Products, Rijswijk, The Netherlands] and CLART2 [Genomica, Madrid, Spain]) in 295 women referred to the hospital Colposcopy Clinic from 2007 to 2008 due to positive HPV test results or an abnormal Pap test. DNA extraction for HPV genotyping was performed in cervical sample specimens after Pap test and HPV detection by HC2. The inclusion criteria were: (1) adequate cervical sampling with sufficient material for the Pap test and HPV detection and genotyping, and (2) colposcopically-directed biopsy and/or endocervical curettage. HC2 showed the highest sensitivity for high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion and CC (HSIL+) detection (96.1%), but all the HPV genotyping tests showed a higher specificity. (Anyplex 86.8%; Linear Array 86.0%; GP5+/6+ 78.8%; CLART2 76.5%). The agreement between HC2 results and the other techniques was similar: 82.4%, kappa=0.650 for Anyplex; 83.4%, kappa=0.670 for Linear Array, 79.93%, kappa=0.609 for GP5+/6+ and 82.4%, kappa=0.654 for CLART2. HPV 16 and/or 18 infection was a risk factor for underlying HSIL+ in the univariate analysis. Anyplex showed the highest risk of underlying HSIL+ after positive HPV 16 and/or 18 tests (OR 31.1; 95% CI 12.1-80.0).

Current and Emerging Molecular Tests for Human Papillomavirus-Related Neoplasia in the Genomic Era

Laboratory tests have a key role in preventing human papillomavirus (HPV)-driven carcinomas and in guiding therapeutic interventions. An understanding of the virology, immunology, and carcinogenesis of HPV is essential for choosing appropriate diagnostic test modalities and developing new and even more effective cancer prevention strategies. HPV infects basal epithelial cells on multiple surfaces and induces carcinoma primarily in the cervix and the oropharynx. HPV types are stratified as high risk or low risk based on their carcinogenic potential. During oncogenesis, HPV interferes with cell cycle regulation and incites DNA damage responses that thwart apoptosis and enable mutations to accumulate. Such mutations are an adverse effect of innate and adaptive antiviral immune responses that up-regulate DNA-editing enzymes, with natural selection of cells having a chromosomally integrated viral genome lacking expression of viral proteins targeted by the immune system. Infected cancers share a similar mutation signature, reflecting the effect of apolipoprotein B mRNA-editing catalytic polypeptide enzyme DNA-editing enzymes. It is feasible that genomic tests for characteristic mutations or methylation signatures, along with tests for dysregulated HPV gene expression, add value in predicting behavior of premalignant lesions. Furthermore, these tumor markers in cell-free DNA of plasma or body fluids may one day assist in early detection or monitoring cancer burden during treatment.

Clinical validation of the PCR-reverse dot blot human papillomavirus genotyping test in cervical lesions from Chinese women in the Fujian province: a hospital-based population study

Objective

To determine the clinical significance of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-reverse dot blot (RDB) human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping assay in cervical cancer screening.

Methods

A total of 10,442 women attending the Fujian Provincial Maternity and Children's Health Hospital were evaluated using the liquid-based cytology (thinprep cytologic test [TCT]) and the PCR-RDB HPV test. Women with HPV infection and/or abnormal cytology were referred for colposcopy and biopsy. For HPV DNA sequencing, 120 specimens were randomly selected. Pathological diagnosis was used as the gold standard.

Results

Using the PCR-RDB HPV test, overall HPV prevalence was 20.57% (2,148/10,442) and that of high-risk (HR)-HPV infection was 18.68% (1,951/10,442). There was 99.2% concordance between HPV PCR-RDB testing and sequencing. In this studied population, the most common HR-HPV types were HPV-16, -52, -58, -18, -53, -33, and -51, rank from high to low. HPV-16, -18, -58, -59, and -33 were the top 5 prevalent genotypes in cervical cancer but HPV-16, -18, -59, -45, and -33 were the top 5 highest risk factors for cancer (odds ratio [OR]=34.964, 7.278, 6.728, 6.101, and 3.658; all p<0.05, respectively). Among 10,442 cases, 1,278 had abnormal cytology results, of which, the HR-HPV positivity rate was 83.02% (1,061/1,278). To screen for cervical cancer by PCR-RDB HPV testing, when using CIN2+, CIN3+, and cancer as observed endpoints, the sensitivity was 90.43%, 92.61%, and 94.78% and the negative predictive value (NPV) was 99.06%, 99.42%, and 99.78%, respectively. PCR-RDB HPV and TCT co-testing achieved the highest sensitivity and NPV.

Conclusion

For cervical cancer screening, the PCR-RDB HPV test can provide a reliable and sensitive clinical reference.

Molecular approaches for HPV genotyping and HPV-DNA physical status

Persistent infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes is the leading cause of cervical cancer development. To this end several studies have focused on designing molecular assays for HPV genotyping, which are considered as the gold standard for the early diagnosis of HPV infection. Moreover, the tendency of HPV DNA to be integrated into the host chromosome is a determining event for cervical oncogenesis. Thus, the establishment of molecular techniques was promoted in order to investigate the physical status of the HPV DNA and the locus of viral insertion into the host chromosome. The molecular approaches that have been developed recently facilitate the collection of a wide spectrum of valuable information specific to each individual patient and therefore can significantly contribute to the establishment of a personalised prognosis, diagnosis and treatment of HPV-positive patients. The present review focuses on state of the art molecular assays for HPV detection and genotyping for intra-lesion analyses, it examines molecular approaches for the determination of HPV-DNA physical status and it discusses the criteria for selecting the most appropriate regions of viral DNA to be incorporated in HPV genotyping and in the determination of HPV-DNA physical status.

Human Papillomavirus Laboratory Testing: the Changing Paradigm

High-risk human papillomaviruses (HPVs) cause essentially all cervical cancers, most anal and oropharyngeal cancers, and some vaginal, vulvar, and penile cancers. Improved understanding of the pathogenesis of infection and the availability of newer tests are changing the approach to screening and diagnosis. Molecular tests to detect DNA from the most common high-risk HPVs are FDA approved for use in conjunction with cytology in cervical cancer screening programs. More-specific tests that detect RNA from high-risk HPV types are now also available. The use of molecular tests as the primary screening tests is being adopted in some areas. Genotyping to identify HPV16 and -18 has a recommended role in triaging patients for colposcopy who are high-risk HPV positive but have normal cytology. There are currently no recommended screening methods for anal, vulvar, vaginal, penile, or oropharyngeal HPV infections. HPV testing has limited utility in patients at high risk for anal cancer, but p16 immunohistochemistry is recommended to clarify lesions in tissue biopsy specimens that show moderate dysplasia or precancer mimics. HPV testing is recommended for oropharyngeal squamous cell tumors as a prognostic indicator. Ongoing research will help to improve the content of future guidelines for screening and diagnostic testing.

A Single-Arm, Proof-Of-Concept Trial of Lopimune (Lopinavir/Ritonavir) as a Treatment for HPV-Related Pre-Invasive Cervical Disease

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer is the most common female malignancy in the developing nations and the third most common cancer in women globally. An effective, inexpensive and self-applied topical treatment would be an ideal solution for treatment of screen-detected, pre-invasive cervical disease in low resource settings.

METHODS

Between 01/03/2013 and 01/08/2013, women attending Kenyatta National Hospital's Family Planning and Gynaecology Outpatients clinics were tested for HIV, HPV (Cervista®) and liquid based cervical cytology (LBC-ThinPrep®). HIV negative women diagnosed as high-risk HPV positive with high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) were examined by colposcopy and given a 2 week course of 1 capsule of Lopimune (CIPLA) twice daily, to be self-applied as a vaginal pessary. Colposcopy, HPV testing and LBC were repeated at 4 and 12 weeks post-start of treatment with a final punch biopsy at 3 months for histology. Primary outcome measures were acceptability of treatment with efficacy as a secondary consideration.

RESULTS

A total of 23 women with HSIL were treated with Lopimune during which time no adverse reactions were reported. A maximum concentration of 10 ng/ml of lopinavir was detected in patient plasma 1 week after starting treatment. HPV was no longer detected in 12/23 (52.2%, 95%CI: 30.6-73.2%). Post-treatment cytology at 12 weeks on women with HSIL, showed 14/22 (63.6%, 95%CI: 40.6-82.8%) had no dysplasia and 4/22 (18.2%, 95%CI: 9.9-65.1%) were now low grade demonstrating a combined positive response in 81.8% of women of which 77.8% was confirmed by histology. These data are supported by colposcopic images, which show regression of cervical lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate the potential of Lopimune as a self-applied therapy for HPV infection and related cervical lesions. Since there were no serious adverse events or detectable post-treatment morbidity, this study indicates that further trials are clearly justified to define optimal regimes and the overall benefit of this therapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN Registry 48776874.

Evaluation of The Cervista HPV A9 group In Screening Patients for Cervical Cancer

Objective

To exploit the prevalence of HPV genotypes 52/58 in a Chinese population, we evaluated algorithms that the use the Cervista Assay A9 group for primary cervical cancer screening.

Methods

The SHENCCAST II trial database was re-analyzed, focussing on the A9 pool of the Cervista HR-HPV Assay. Results for the detection CIN2+ and CIN3+ were correlated with a genotyping assay (MALDI-TOF) and cervical cytology to explore various screening algorithms.

Results

This analysis included 8,556 women with a mean age of 38.9. CIN 2+ rates were 2.7% (233/8556); CIN 3+ rates were 1.7% (141/8556). Overall HPV infection rates were 11.1% (950/8556) for Cervista, in which A5/A6, A7 and A9 groups were 26.5% (227/950), 22.9% (218/950) and 67.8% (644/950), respectively. The HPV A9 group is highly predictive of high-grade cervical lesions (CIN2+ OR = 103.61, CIN3+ OR = 128.059). Sensitivity and specificity for Cervista A9 group for CIN 2+ was 85.4% and 94.7%, and for CIN 3+ 89.4% and 93.8% respectively. Cervista A9 Assay followed by triage cytology for non-A9 positives has sensitivity and specificity for CIN2+ of 91.5% of 93.5%, and for CIN 3+ 94.3% and 92.6%.

Conclusion

Using the Cervista A9 as the primary screen instead of the full Cervista assay, the percentage referred to colposcopy would decrease from 11.1% to 8.8% and percentage requiring cytology would decrease from 11.1% to 3.6%. Sensitivity of detecting CIN 2+(91.5%), CIN3+(94.3%) would remain similar to the complete Cervista HR-HPV assay for CIN 2+(93.1%), CIN3+(95.0%).

Clinical validation of the Cervista HPV HR test according to the international guidelines for human papillomavirus test requirements for cervical cancer screening

This study demonstrates that both the clinical sensitivity and specificity of the Cervista HPV HR test for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) detection are not inferior to those of the Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) test. The intra- and interlaboratory reproducibilities of Cervista were 92.0% (kappa, 0.83) and 90.4% (kappa, 0.80), respectively. The Cervista HPV HR test fulfills all the international HPV test requirements for cervical primary screening purposes.

Prevalence of high risk human papillomavirus infection with different cervical cytological features among women undergoing health examination at the National Cancer Institute, Thailand

High-risk (HR) human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is important in cervical cancer screening for triage colposcopy. The objective of the study was to evaluate the prevalence of HR HPV infection with different cervical cytological features among women undergoing health examination. A total of 2,897 women were retrospectively evaluated between May 2011 to December 2011. DNA was extracted from residual specimens collected during routine liquid-based cytology tests at the National Cancer Institute. Overall, HR HPV prevalence was 9.3% including 1.6% of HPV-16 and 0.4% of HPV-18. Of all 270 HPV positive samples, 211 (78.1% were HR-HPV non 16/18; 47 (17.4%) were HPV-16 and 12 (4.4%) were HPV-18. The prevalence of HPV infection was similar in all age groups, although a higher rate was observed in women age 31-40 years. Among women with normal cytology, HR HPV positive were found in 6.7%. In abnormal cytology, HR HPV were found 46.7% in atypical squamous cells (ASC), 54.8% in low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL) and 80.0% in high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL). HPV-16 was detected in 8.6%, 6.4% and 12.0% of ASC, LSIL and HSIL, respectively. The results of this study provide baseline information on the HPV type distribution, which may be useful for clinicians to decide who should be monitored or treated more aggressively.

Comparing the Cervista HPV HR test and Hybrid Capture 2 assay in a Dutch screening population: improved specificity of the Cervista HPV HR test by changing the cut-off

The diagnostic performance of the widely-used Cervista HPV HR test was compared to the Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) test in a Dutch population-based cervical cancer screening program. In 900 scrapings of women with normal cytomorphology, specificity was 90% (95%CI: 87.84–91.87) for the Cervista HPV HR test and 96% (95%CI: 94.76–97.37) for the HC2 test with 93% agreement between both tests (κ = 0.5, p<0.001). The sensitivity for CIN2+ using 65 scrapings of women with histological-confirmed CIN2+ was 91% (95%CI: 80.97–96.51) for the Cervista HPV HR test and 92% (95%CI: 82.94–97.43) for the HC2 test with 95% agreement between both tests (κ = 0.7, p<0.001). Fifty-seven of 60 HC2 negative/Cervista positive cases tested HPV-negative with PCR-based HPV assays; of these cases 56% were defined as Cervista triple-positive with FOZ values in all 3 mixes higher than the second cut-off of 1.93 (as set by manufacturer). By setting this cut-off at 5.0, specificity improved significantly without affecting sensitivity. External validation of this new cut-off at 5.0 in triple-positive scrapings of women selected from the SHENCCASTII database revealed that 22/24 histological normal cases now tested HPV-negative in the Cervista HPV HR test, while CIN2+ lesions remained HPV-positive. The intra-laboratory reproducibility of the Cervista HPV HR test (n = 510) showed a concordance of 92% and 93% for cut-off 1.93 and 5.0 (κ = 0.83 and κ = 0.84, p<0.001) and inter-laboratory agreement of the Cervista HPV HR test was 90% and 93% for cut-off 1.93 and 5.0 (κ = 0.80 and κ = 0.85, p<0.001). In conclusion, the specificity of the Cervista HPV HR test could be improved significantly by increasing the second cut-off from 1.93 to 5.0, without affecting the sensitivity of the test in a population-based screening setting.

Triage of women with negative cytology and positive high-risk HPV: an analysis of data from the SHENCCAST II/III studies

OBJECTIVES

To determine a management strategy for women testing negative with cervical cytology and positive for high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV).

METHODS

Using the data from the large population-based Shenzhen Cervical Cancer Screening Trials II and III (SHENCCAST II/III), we compared the risk for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or cancer (CIN 3+) in women with negative cytology but testing positive for HR-HPV DNA using Cervista HPV HR or matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF), followed by secondary screening with type-specific Cervista HPV-16/18 or MALDI-TOF. The study aim was to seek the most sensitive and specific triage assay for referral for colposcopy.

RESULTS

A total of 8,556 women had complete data. The proportion of women with negative cytology and positive HR-HPV by Cervista HR-HPV (5.30%, 453/8,556) was slightly lower than that of women with negative cytology and HR-HPV-positive tests by MALDI-TOF (5.82%, 499/8,556, p = .015). The proportion of women having negative cervical cytology and a positive HR-HPV by Cervista HR who have HPV-16 and/or -18 by Cervista HPV-16/18 (11.8%, 53/448) was less than that of women with a negative cervical cytology and positive HR-HPV by MALDI-TOF who have HPV-16 and/or -18 by MALDI-TOF (19.4%, 97/499, p = .001). The proportion of CIN 3+ within negative cervical cytology and positive HR-HPV that were HPV-16 and/or -18 for the Cervista 16/18 assay (61.5%, 8/13) was similar to that for the MALDI-TOF 16/18 assay (66.7%, 10/15, p = 0.8).

CONCLUSIONS

In the cytology-negative HR-HPV-positive population, Cervista 16/18 as the HPV detection method would refer 11.8% of women for colposcopy and diagnose 61.5% of the CIN 3+, while MALDI-TOF16/18 would refer 19.4% and diagnose 66.7% of the CIN 3+. Cervista HPV-16/18 seems to be the superior triage test. However, in resource-limited settings, an assay that includes 16/18 genotyping in the primary result (rather than a second test) may be more cost efficient.

Comparison of commercial hybridization and automated transcription-mediated amplification modalities for detection of high-risk human papillomavirus nucleic acid

Assessment of 4,056 cytology collections by Cervista HPV HR and APTIMA HPV yielded 88.7% concordance, with increased detection by Cervista in patients with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) and patients negative for intraepithelial lesions and malignancy (NILM) (P ≤ 0.02). Both assays detected ≥91.7% of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN2+) lesions. A total of 262 specimens demonstrated luminescence within all three Cervista oligonucleotide mixtures (triple positive). APTIMA HPV and PCR-based microarray confirmed triple-positive results at rates of 7.3% and 5.9%, respectively.

Understanding HPV tests and their appropriate applications

Greater understanding of the role played by human papillomavirus (HPV) in the causation of disease has led to the development of an increasing number of HPV tests with different characteristics. The bewildering choice facing healthcare professionals and providers is daunting. Clearly, HPV testing is no longer simply of research interest, but can provide information that can be used for individual patient management and at the population level for cervical screening and vaccine surveillance. This review aims to provide the background to the development of HPV tests, to explain the different technologies and to discuss the challenges of the application of these optimally in the varied contexts of disease management. Few HPV tests are approved for clinical use and it is important that clinicians understand which test can be utilized, in what circumstances, with what specimens and the meaning of the report issued. HPV testing is no longer applicable only to cervical disease, and we have suggested additional areas, such as the oropharynx, in which HPV testing services might be implemented in the near future. New tests will continue to emerge and we have identified some of the indirect measures of HPV activity, or biomarkers, that could help in the risk stratification of HPV infection and associated disease. The challenges relating to the optimal application of the various HPV technologies are compounded by the lack of evidence regarding their performance in vaccinated populations. Currently published work, including modelling studies, has been undertaken in non-immunized populations. We therefore end by addressing the issues regarding appropriate strategies and tests for immunized populations.

High-Risk Human Papillomavirus DNA Detected in Primary Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Urinary Bladder

Context.—We reported previously that more than one-third (37%) of primary bladder squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs) demonstrate diffuse p16 immunoreactivity independent of gender. This observation made us question whether p16 overexpression in bladder carcinoma is due to human papillomavirus (HPV)–dependent mechanisms.

Objectives.—To determine whether the presence of high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) DNA could be detected in these tumor cells.

Design.—Fourteen cases of primary bladder SCC, which were positive for p16 by immunohistochemistry, were probed for the detection of HR-HPV by in situ hybridization and the signal amplification Invader assay. Samples positive for detection of HR-HPV by Invader assay were amplified by using HR-HPV type-specific primers, and amplification products were DNA sequenced.

Results.—Detection of HR-HPV by the in situ hybridization method was negative in all cases (0 of 14). However, in 3 of 14 cases (21.4%), the presence of HR-HPV DNA was detected with the Cervista HPV HR Invader assay, which was followed by identification of genotype. All positive cases were confirmed by using HR-HPV type-specific amplification followed by DNA sequencing. Identified HR-HPV genotypes included HPV 16 (2 cases) and HPV 35 (1 case).

Conclusions.—High-risk HPV DNA is detectable in a subset of primary bladder SCCs. Based on the well-documented carcinogenic potential of HR-HPV, there is a necessity for additional studies to investigate the role of HR-HPV in bladder carcinogenesis.

Comparative study of the cervista and hybrid capture 2 methods in detecting high-risk human papillomavirus in cervical lesions

High-risk human papillomavirus (HR HPV) testing is important for the follow-up of patients with cytological abnormalities. This study was undertaken to compare the clinical value of the Cervista and hybrid capture 2 (HC2) tests for detection of HR HPV in cervical lesions. Overall 439 cervical specimens with abnormal cytology and 22 normal cervical specimens were subjected to the Cervista and HC2 tests. HPV positivity and its predictive value for high-grade cervical lesions were assessed. The Cervista and HC2 tests showed comparable HR HPV detection rates in women with all cytological and histological diagnoses, with a positive and negative percent agreement of 90.8% and 64.5%, respectively. The two methods had a same sensitivity of 90% in detecting CIN II or greater cervical lesions, while the specificity for the Cervista test and HC2 assay was 47% and 43%, respectively. The positive rate for the Cervista assay probe set A9 increased with the histological severity, ranging from 25.0% in normal specimens to 69.5% in high-grade lesions. In conclusion, the clinical performance for the Cervista test is as excellent as the HC2 test in detecting HR HPV and predicting high-grade cervical lesions.

Human papillomavirus detection: testing methodologies and their clinical utility in cervical cancer screening

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a well-studied etiologic agent for cervical cancer dysplasia and neoplasia. HPV E6 and E7 viral proteins drive oncogenesis by blocking the activity of pRB and p53, respectively. Consensus screening guidelines focus on appropriate use of both cervical cytology and HPV testing to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with cervical cancer. HPV testing is indicated for women aged 21 to 64 years with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) on cytology. In women aged 30 to 64, testing is also indicated for routine screening in conjunction with cervical cytology. Various methods are available for HPV detection and several Food and Drug Administration-approved assays are on the market using either signal or target amplification methodologies. Most of the approved tests target DNA, but tests for mRNA detection are also available. Recently, assays for type specific detection of HPV types 16 and 18 have been Food and Drug Administration approved, and the use of genotyping has been incorporated into management algorithms. HPV testing can be performed on liquid-based cytology samples and options for automation are available making the introduction of HPV testing into many pathology laboratories possible.

High-risk HPV DNA testing and HPV-16/18 genotyping: what is the clinical application?

OBJECTIVE

There are currently 2 tests approved for clinical use that nonspecifically detect the presence of multiple oncogenic or high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) types. One HPV genotyping test is also available for use that specifically detects the presence of high-risk HPV types 16 and 18. The purpose of this review was to evaluate the clinical performance of these HPV DNA tests and the utility of the tests within current screening recommendations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The sensitivity and specificity of currently available HPV DNA tests to detect the presence of precancerous high-grade cervical lesions are reviewed. Appropriate test usage is discussed in the context of the natural history of HPV infection.

RESULTS

Molecular testing for the presence of high-risk HPV is more sensitive but less specific than cytologic testing for the detection of high-grade cervical lesions. Current patient management guidelines recommend the use of high-risk HPV DNA testing to triage women 21 years or older with equivocal cytology results and in conjunction with cytology for cervical screening in women 30 years or older. The HPV-16/18 genotyping test may be used in women 30 years or older with negative cytology and positive high-risk HPV DNA test results to determine the need for colposcopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Although infection with high-risk HPV is highly prevalent in adult females, most infections are transient and do not require intervention. Clinical application of appropriate age-adjusted use of HPV DNA testing and its use in conjunction with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance cytology will avoid unnecessary follow-up procedures.

Comparison of the Seeplex HPV4A ACE and the Cervista HPV assays for the detection of HPV in hybrid capture 2 positive media

Objective

To validate the efficacy of Seeplex HPV4A ACE for the detection of high-risk (HR) human papillomavirus (HPV) and HPV 16 and/or HPV 18 genotypes as compared to the PCR method and the Cervista HPV assays in cervical swab samples.

Methods

Besides liquid-based cytology, additional 97 cervical swab samples were collected for HPV genotyping by HPV4A ACE, Cervista HPV assays, and PCR method. To check the statistical differences, we also conducted the paired proportion test, Cohen's κ statistic, and a receiver operating characteristic curve.

Results

Seeplex HPV4A ACE and the Cervista HPV HR showed substantial agreement with PCR for detection of HR HPVs (88.3%, κ=0.767 and 81.7%, κ=0.636, respectively). Seeplex HPV4A ACE also showed substantial agreement with the Cervista HPV 16/18 test (89.5%, κ=0.628). Additionally, the sensitivity and specificity of Seeplex HPV4A ACE and Cervista HPV HR were 91.4% vs. 84.5% and 73.4%, vs. 72.7%, respectively, when those higher than low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions were regarded as abnormalities. HPV genotyping for HPV 16/18 detected cervical intraepithelial neoplasias (CINs) better than HR HPV tests (66.7% vs. 24.6% by HPV4A ACE, 52.6% vs. 25.9% by Cervista HPV assays in CIN II or more, relatively).

Conclusion

Seeplex HPV4A ACE is an effective method as the PCR and the Cervista HPV assays for the detection of HR HPVs and for genotyping of HPV 16 and 18.

A new PCR-based mass spectrometry system for high-risk HPV, part II: clinical trial

This was a population-based clinical trial of a polymerase chain reaction-based multiplex high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) assay using mass spectrometry (MassARRAY [Sequenom, San Diego, CA] matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry system [MALDI-TOF]). Participants were 10,000 women between the ages of 25 and 59 years in Guangdong Province, China (SHENCCAST II Study). All women collected a self-sample (tested with Cervista [Hologic, Marlborough, MA] and MALDI-TOF) followed by a clinician-collected cervical sample (for cytology, Hybrid Capture 2 [HC2; Qiagen, Gaithersburg, MD], Cervista, and MALDI-TOF). Patients with any abnormal result were asked to return for colposcopy and biopsies. This analysis included the data for 8,556 women. The sensitivity values for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 3 or worse for a direct cervical sample were 97.9%, 95.1%, and 94.3 for HC2, Cervista, and MALDI-TOF, respectively (P > .05). The sensitivity for CIN 3 or worse for a self-collected sample tested with MALDI-TOF was also 94.3%, which was similar to a clinician-obtained endocervical sample assayed with the 3 HR-HPV assays. MALDI-TOF combined with a self-collected sample provides a highly sensitive, high-throughput, low-cost-per-case assay for mass screening.

Cervista HR and HPV 16/18 assays vs hybrid capture 2 assay: outcome comparison in women with negative cervical cytology

Sensitive and specific assays for human papillomavirus (HPV) are essential for patient management. In this study, we directly compared the efficacy of the Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2; Qiagen, Valencia, CA) and Cervista assays (Hologic, Madison, WI). Consecutive cervical cytology specimens (n = 601) were tested using HC2, Cervista HR, and Cervista HPV 16/18 with analysis of only cytology-negative cases (n = 533). Results indicated no significant difference (P = .458) in prevalence rates between HC2 (7.5%) and Cervista HR (8.5%). The Cervista 16/18 prevalence was 1.6%. The negative percentage of agreement was 95.1% (468/492) vs a 70% (28/40) positive percentage of agreement. No false-negative results were detected by the Cervista internal DNA control. Our data show 29 discordant positive results (12 HC2 and 17 Cervista HR), suggesting some women with negative cytology may be triaged for unnecessary follow-up with either assay. For clinical screening, Cervista HR and HC2 are comparable and, by extension, should provide excellent negative predictive value for histologically relevant disease.

Assessment of an extraction protocol to detect the major mastitis-causing pathogens in bovine milk

Despite all efforts to control its spread, mastitis remains the most costly disease for dairy farmers worldwide. One key component of better control of this disease is identification of the causative bacterial agent during udder infections in cows. Mastitis is complex, however, given the diversity of pathogens that must be identified. Development of a rapid and efficient bacterial species identification tool is thus necessary. This study was conducted to demonstrate the feasibility of bacterial DNA extraction for the automated molecular detection of major mastitis-causing pathogens directly in milk samples to complement traditional microbiological identification. Extraction and detection procedures were designed and optimized to achieve detection in a respectable time frame, at a reasonable cost, and with a high throughput capacity. The following species were identified: Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Streptococcus uberis, Streptococcus agalactiae, Streptococcus dysgalactiae, and Klebsiella spp. (including Klebsiella oxytoca and Klebsiella pneumoniae). The detection procedure includes specific genomic DNA amplification by multiplex PCR for each species, separation by capillary electrophoresis, and laser-assisted automated detection. The specificity of the primers was assessed with a panel of bacteria representing mastitis-negative control species. The extraction protocol comprised multiple steps, starting with centrifugation for fat removal, followed by heating in the presence of a cation exchange resin to trap divalent ions. The analytical sensitivity was 100 cfu/mL for milk samples spiked with Staph. aureus, Strep. dysgalactiae, and E. coli, with a tendency for K. pneumoniae. The detection limit was 500 cfu/mL for Strep. uberis and Strep. agalactiae. The overall diagnostic sensitivity (95.4%) and specificity (97.3%) were determined in a double-blind randomized assay by processing 172 clinical milk samples with microbiological characterization as the gold standard. When the physical nature of the milk samples was too altered, DNA purification with a magnetic bead-based system was used. Of the apparent false-positive samples, 5 were identified by specific microbiological analysis as true-positive Staph. aureus co-infections, with further confirmation by ribosomal 16S sequencing. The proposed methodology could, therefore, become an interesting tool for automated PCR detection of major mastitis pathogens in dairy cattle.

Improved sensitivity of vaginal self-collection and high-risk human papillomavirus testing

Self-collected vaginal specimens tested for high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) have been shown to be less sensitive for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or cancer (≥CIN 3) than physician-collected endocervical specimens. To increase the sensitivity of self-collected specimens, we studied a self-sampling device designed to obtain a larger specimen from the upper vagina (POI/NIH self-sampler) and a more sensitive polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based HR-HPV assay. Women (10,000) were screened with cervical cytology and HR-HPV testing of vaginal self-collected and endocervical physician-collected specimens. Women were randomly assigned to use either a novel self-collection device (POI/NIH self-sampler) or conical-shaped brush (Qiagen). The self-collected and clinician-collected specimens were assayed by Cervista (Hologic) and the research only PCR-based matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight (MALDI-TOF). Women with any abnormal screening test underwent colposcopy and biopsy. Women (8,556), mean age of 38.9, had complete data; 1.6% had ≥ CIN 3. For either HR-HPV assay, the sensitivity was similar for the two self-collection devices. Tested with Cervista, the sensitivity for ≥CIN 3 of self-collected specimens was 70.9% and for endocervical specimens was 95.0% (p = 0.0001). Tested with MALDI-TOF, the sensitivity for ≥CIN 3 of self-collected specimens was 94.3% and for endocervical specimens was also 94.3% (p = 1.0). A self-collected sample using a PCR-based assay with the capability of very high throughput has similar sensitivity as a direct endocervical specimen obtained by a physician. Large population-based screening "events" in low-resource settings could be achieved by promoting self-collection and centralized high-throughput, low-cost testing by PCR-based MALDI-TOF.

Looking ahead: a case for human papillomavirus testing of self-sampled vaginal specimens as a cervical cancer screening strategy

Even in the era of highly effective human papillomavirus (HPV) prophylactic vaccines, substantial reduction in worldwide cervical cancer mortality will only be realized if effective early detection and treatment of the millions of women already infected and the millions who may not receive vaccination in the next decade can be broadly implemented through sustainable cervical cancer screening programs. Effective programs must meet three targets: (i) at least 70% of the targeted population should be screened at least once in a lifetime, (ii) screening assays and diagnostic tests must be reproducible and sufficiently sensitive and specific for the detection of high-grade precursor lesions (i.e., CIN21), and (iii) effective treatment must be provided. We review the evidence that HPV DNA screening from swabs collected by the women in their home or village is sufficiently sound for consideration as a primary screening strategy in the developing world, with sensitivity and specificity for detection of CIN21 as good or better than Pap smear cytology and VIA. A key feature of a self-collected HPV testing strategy (SC-HPV) is the move of the primary screening activities from the clinic to the community. Efforts to increase the affordability and availability of HPV DNA tests, community education and awareness, development of strong partnerships between community advocacy groups, health care centers and regional or local laboratories, and resource appropriate strategies to identify and treat screen-positive women should now be prioritized to ensure successful public health translation of the technologic advancements in cervical cancer prevention.

Performance evaluation of manual and automated (MagNA pure) nucleic acid isolation in HPV detection and genotyping using Roche Linear Array HPV Test

Nucleic acids of human papillomavirus (HPV) isolated by manual extraction method (AmpliLute) and automated MagNA pure system were compared and evaluated with cytohistological findings in 253 women. The concordance level between AmpliLute and MagNA was very good 93.3% (κ = 0.864, P < .0001). Overall HPVpositivity detected by AmpliLute was 57.3% (30.4% as single and 27% as multiple infections) in contrast to MagNA 54.5% (32% and 23%, resp.). Discrepant results observed in 25 cases: 11 MagNA(−)/AmpliLute(+), 10 of which had positive histology; 5 MagNA(+)/AmpliLute(−) with negative histology; 8 MagNA(+)/AmpliLute(+): in 7 of which AmpliLute detected extra HPV genotypes and 1 MagNA(invalid)/AmpliLute(+) with positive histology. Both methods performed well when compared against cytological (area under curve (AUC) of AmpliLute 0.712 versus 0.672 of MagNA) and histological diagnoses (AUC of AmpliLute 0.935 versus 0.877 of MagNA), with AmpliLute showing a slightly predominance over MagNA. However, higher sensitivities, specificities, and positive/negative predictive values were obtained by AmpliLute.

Rate of detection of high-risk HPV with two assays in women ≥ 30 years of age

BACKGROUND

High-risk (HR) human papillomavirus (HPV) prevalence rates, as determined by the Cervista(®) HPV HR test, in women aged ≥30 years in a routine screening population have not been studied.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this study was to estimate HR HPV prevalence in women negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy (NILM) cytology using the CERVISTA HPV HR test. The study also compared HR HPV prevalence rates in women aged ≥30 years and NILM cytology using the CERVISTA HPV HR and Hybrid Capture(®) 2 (hc2) tests.

STUDY DESIGN

A multi-center study was conducted to analyze HR HPV prevalence rates using the CERVISTA HPV HR test from residual ThinPrep(®) specimens. HR HPV positive rates were determined for hc2; percent agreement between the CERVISTA HPV HR and the hc2 tests were reported.

RESULTS

HR HPV prevalence rates among women with NILM cytology were not statistically different between the CERVISTA HPV HR and hc2 tests (6.92% [98/1417] versus 5.93% [84/1417], respectively; P>0.05). The overall percent agreement between the tests was 95.3% (1351/1417; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 94.1-96.3; κ=0.61, 95% CI: 0.53-0.70). There were no statistically significant differences between tests across age groups or investigational sites. For both tests, there was a statistically significant decrease in HR HPV positive results as age increases (CERVISTA HPV HR, P=0.0009; hc2, P<0.0001).

DISCUSSION

There is no statistically significant difference between HR HPV prevalence rates obtained with the CERVISTA HPV HR and hc2 tests in women aged ≥30 years with NILM cytology.

A population-based clinical trial comparing endocervical high-risk HPV testing using hybrid capture 2 and Cervista from the SHENCCAST II Study

Our objective was to directly compare the accuracy of the high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) assays, Hybrid Capture 2 (hc2; Qiagen, Gaithersburg, MD) and Cervista (Hologic, Bedford, MA), in diagnosing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 3 or worse (cancer). A population-based, cross-sectional study (The Shenzhen Cervical Cancer Screening Trial II) was conducted in Guangdong Province in China. Three high-risk HPV assays, self and direct cervical sampling and cytology, were studied. Abnormal results on any of 6 study tests (33%) resulted in referral to colposcopy. At colposcopy, every patient had at least 5 cervical biopsy specimens obtained. For 8,556 women between the ages of 25 and 59 years (mean, 38.9 years), the rate for CIN 3 or worse was 1.6% (141/8,556). The sensitivity (confidence interval) values for CIN 3 or worse were 97.9% (94.0%-99.6%) and 95.1% (90.0%-98.0%) for hc2 and Cervista, respectively (P > .05). The specificity (confidence interval) values were 87.8% (87.1%-88.5%) and 90.3% (89.6%-90.9%), respectively (P < .05). Differences in accuracy in diagnosing CIN 3 or worse with the hc2 and Cervista tests are minor and result from the decisions made in selecting the cut points.

Age-stratified performance of the Cervista HPV 16/18 genotyping test in women with ASC-US cytology

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of the Cervista HPV 16/18 genotyping test for detection of human papilloma virus (HPV) 16 and 18 in cervical cytology specimens in women stratified by age.

METHODS

In a multicenter, prospective clinical study, ThinPrep specimens were tested for the presence of HPV 16 and 18 using the HPV 16/18 genotyping test. Genotyping results from women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or greater cytology were compared with local colposcopy and/or histology results. Sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predictive values (NPV and PPV) were determined.

RESULTS

The prevalence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2(+) in subjects positive for HPV 16/18 was 6.6% and 4.1% for women <30 and ≥30 years of age, respectively. The sensitivity of the test was 70.0% (95% CI: 54.6-81.9) and 66.7% (95% CI: 46.7-82.0) in women <30 and ≥30 years, respectively. The NPV was 95.5% (95% CI: 93.4-97.6) in women <30 years and 96.6% (95% CI: 94.8-98.5) in women ≥30 years. Specificity was higher in women ≥30 years (79.9%; 95% CI: 74.9-84.2) than women <30 years (61.9%; 95% CI: 57.1-66.4). The PPV was 15.2% (95% CI: 12.7-19.1) in women <30 years and 21.9% (95% CI: 17.0-30.7) in women ≥30 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The performance of the Cervista HPV 16/18 genotyping test for predicting ≥CIN 2 is what would be expected across the key ≥CIN 2 age strata.

IMPACT

HPV 16/18 genotyping may help further stratify women with a greater potential to develop cervical cancer.

Human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervical cancer screening: practical aspects in developing countries

Cervical cancer is the second most common cancer in women worldwide, and the most common cause of death from cancer in women in the developing world. Cervical cancer represents the only gynecologic cancer that can be prevented through regular screening. Although there are established screening programs in the Western world that have effectively reduced the burden of cervical cancer, these programs have relied on insensitive screening technologies that depend on the long preinvasive phase of cervical carcinogenesis. The developing world faces specific additional challenges in implementing a successful cervical cancer screening program. The association between cervical cancers and human papillomavirus (HPV) make testing for the presence of HPV DNA a valuable screening tool. This review focuses on practical aspects of the implementation and delivery of HPV testing as the primary cervical cancer screening strategy in the developing world, and attempts to offer some solutions to the real-world challenges faced in these regions.

Methods for HPV detection in exfoliated cell and tissue specimens

Given the causal involvement of high-risk human papillomaviruses (HPVs) in cervical cancer and a subset of squamous cell carcinomas of other anogenital regions as well as the oropharynx, much attention has been focused on the development and application of HPV detection assays. HPV detection assays are almost exclusively based on the detection of viral nucleic acids, mostly viral DNA. The HPV detection methods that are nowadays in use can broadly be subdivided into target amplification methods and signal amplification methods. In this review, several principles of various methodologies are explained and examples of some commonly used HPV detection assays are given. In addition, attention is paid to the use of HPV assays for detecting clinically meaningful HPV infections, i.e. infections related to (pre)cancerous lesions, e.g. cervical cancer screening purposes. For the latter, it is important that HPV tests are clinically validated according to validation strategies as outlined in guidelines.

Significance of human papillomavirus genotyping with high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia treated by a loop electrosurgical excision procedure

OBJECTIVE

This study was conducted to determine whether the human papillomavirus (HPV) genotype by the HPV DNA chip test (HDC) is predictive of residual or recurrent high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2-3 following a loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP).

STUDY DESIGN

Between January 2001-February 2007, 672 patients with CIN2-3 were treated by a LEEP and followed up with cytology, the hybrid capture II assay, and the HDC.

RESULTS

A total of 37 (5.5%) patients developed a recurrence, and those who developed a recurrence tested positive for the same high-risk (HR) HPV genotype before and after the LEEP. The same HR-HPV genotype by the HDC during the follow-up had a sensitivity and negative predictive value of 100% for detecting residual/recurrent disease. Persistent HPV-16 and HPV-18 were significantly associated with recurrent CIN2-3 (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Persistent infection with the same HR-HPV genotype, especially HPV-16 and HPV-18, should be considered a risk factor for developing residual/recurrent CIN2-3.

Models of cervical screening in the era of human papillomavirus vaccination

Epidemiologic and economic evaluation using simulation modelling can support complex policy decisions, and is an important tool in predicting the future interaction between human papillomavirus vaccination and cervical screening. Several categories of screening program evaluation are of interest, including: (1) changes to screening considered over the short term, over which the effects of vaccination should be confined to the youngest age groups (<30 years old); (2) the medium and long-term effect of vaccination on the screening program; and (3) changes to screening in context of vaccination. This review considers some of the policy questions in each category and discusses the modelling implications, with particular focus on the Australian context.

Evaluation of a newly developed GenoArray human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping assay and comparison with the Roche Linear Array HPV genotyping assay

Persistent infection with high-risk types of human papillomavirus (HPV) is a necessary step in the development of cervical cancer. The incorporation of HPV detection into cervical screening programs may improve the ability to identify women at risk of cervical cancer. We recently evaluated the performance characteristics of a newly developed HPV detection assay, the GenoArray (GA) genotyping assay, for the detection of HPV infections by comparing it with the commercial Roche Linear Array (LA) HPV genotyping assay. The GA assay has an analytical sensitivity for the detection of HPV types 16 (HPV-16) and HPV-18 of as few as 10 to 50 copies, and its reproducibility is adequate. The GA and LA assays showed no significant difference in the rates of detection of genotypes detected by both HPV genotyping assays and oncogenic genotypes, and the interassay agreement was excellent. The GA and LA assays revealed either concordant or compatible genotyping results for 97.5% of the samples and discordant results for only eight (2.5%) samples. Compatible results were also observed for the detection of single or multiple HPV infections and the detection of most of the genotypes. The GA assay also demonstrated good clinical performance characteristics when the comparisons were carried out with clinical subgroups of samples from patients with normal cytologies, low-grade or high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, and cancers. Therefore, the GA assay appears to be highly sensitive and specific for the genotyping of HPV. It has the advantage that it specifically detects HPV-52, which overcomes a limitation of the LA assay, and hence, it has potential value for use for genotyping, especially in regions where HPV-52 has a high prevalence.

A comparative review of laboratory-developed tests utilizing Invader HPV analyte-specific reagents for the detection of high-risk human papillomavirus

BACKGROUND

Testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) has emerged as an important component of cervical cancer screening and disease management. Analytic performance (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy) and clinical relevance are important criteria by which any new test must be reviewed.

OBJECTIVE

This paper compares laboratory-developed tests, utilizing Invader analyte-specific reagents (ASRs) for the detection of oncogenic HPV DNA, to the Digene Hybrid Capture 2 test (HC2). In addition to accurately identifying the presence or absence of HPV, genotyping has emerged as an important consideration for risk stratification and patient management. This paper reviews all current relevant Invader HPV literature to explain how these results shape our current understanding of the topic.