HPV testing in first-void urine provides sensitivity for CIN2+ detection comparable with a smear taken by a clinician or a brush-based self-sample: cross-sectional data from a triage population

Assessment of HPV screening modalities within primary care: a systematic review

Introduction

Most cervical cancer precancerous lesions are associated with high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) subtypes. Early detection through screening is crucial for preventing and managing HPV-related diseases. HPV Self-sample screening is a proposed method that can mitigate socioeconomic disparities, reduce embarrassment and costs of screening. This can possibly reduce the overall disease burden.

Methods

A search strategy was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Embase. Data extraction was performed using a standardized form to collect detailed information on study characteristics, participant demographics, and various outcomes. The quality and risk of bias in the articles were assessed using the Critical Appraisal skills programme (CASP) checklist, and the Cochrane Risk of Bias (ROB) tool.

Results

Our review consistently found that HPV self-sampling is comparable to clinician-collected samples in terms of HPV detection rates and sensitivity, supporting the idea that HPV self-sampling can be a viable alternative for cervical cancer screening. Across the studies, self-sampling showed comparable or greater effectiveness to clinician-collected samples in detecting HPV in individuals. Specificity was comparable between both methods, with clinician-collected sampling slightly outperforming HPV self-sampling in some cases. Moreover when analyzing the negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) across the studies, it was evident that there was little difference between clinician-collected sampling and HPV self-sampling. 64.3% favored self-sampling over clinician-collected sampling due to increased comfort and privacy. Overall, the evidence suggests that self-sampling is an effective, patient-preferred, and cost-efficient alternative to clinician-collected sampling, particularly in under-screened populations.

Equivalent Clinical Accuracy of Human Papillomavirus DNA Testing Using Cobas 4800 and 6800 Human Papillomavirus Systems in Paired Urine and Cervical Samples

The use of urine for cervical cancer screening is gaining international attention, although more data on the relative clinical accuracy of validated human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA tests on urine versus cervical samples are needed. This study primarily seeks to evaluate the clinical performance of Roche cobas 4800 and 6800 HPV Systems in first-void urine, collected at home, compared with clinician-collected cervical samples. Paired first-void urine (index test) and cervical samples (comparator test) from 499 females enrolled at five Belgian colposcopy clinics were analyzed with cobas HPV Systems. Colposcopy and histology of biopsies were used as reference test (trial registration number: NCT03064087). Sample processing protocols and clinical thresholds proposed by the manufacturer for cervical samples were also applied for first-void urine. In the total study population, HPV testing on first-void urine was similarly sensitive [ratiocervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2+ (CIN2+), 0.98; 95% CI, 0.93-1.02] and specific for cobas 4800 HPV (ratio< CIN2, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.91-1.10) and cobas HPV for use on the cobas 6800 System (ratioCIN2+, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.91-1.02; ratio< CIN2, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.93-1.09) compared with cervical samples (P ≥ 0.05). Good to excellent HPV test agreements between paired samples were observed (κ = 0.68 to 0.87). In summary, HPV testing using cobas 4800 and 6800 HPV Systems was as accurate on first-void urine as on cervical samples collected by a clinician.

Optimization and analytical validation of the Allplex HPV28 genotyping assay for use in first-void urine samples

Despite first-void urine (FVU) being increasingly recognized as a credible specimen for human papillomavirus (HPV) detection, there is a lack of well-validated testing methods providing full quantitative genotyping required for vaccine impact monitoring from FVU samples. The Allplex HPV28 assay, capable of individually detecting 28 HPV genotypes, presents a promising method. We aimed to evaluate its genotype-specific performance on FVU samples, following optimization of FVU preanalytics. We selected 701 FVU samples collected using a Colli-Pee device (20 mL, with UCM), enriched for HPV-positivity (n = 630) based on previous testing with GP5+/6+-PCR-based reverse line blot (GP5+/6+ RLB) and E7-MPG after Amicon filtration (AF). We first evaluated the comparability and agreement of Allplex HPV28 genotype-specific positivity according to different preanalytics. Subsequently, we conducted the genotype-specific comparison of Allplex HPV28 with GP5+/6+ RLB AF and E7-MPG AF. No significant differences in HPV positivity by Allplex HPV28 testing were observed when comparing pre-centrifuged versus non-centrifuged DNA extraction, nor when comparing manual versus automated DNA extraction. Good genotype-specific agreement was observed between Allplex HPV28 and GP5+/6+ RLB AF, with Allplex HPV28 being slightly more sensitive for all 28 HPV genotypes (average Allplex HPV28:GP5+/6+ RLB AF ratio 1.729). Compared to E7-MPG AF, Allplex HPV28 exhibited lower sensitivity for all 21 overlapping HPV genotypes (average Allplex HPV28:E7-MPG AF ratio 0.588). The findings of this study, combined with practical considerations for real-world implementation, support the use of Allplex HPV28 testing after automated or manual DNA extraction without the requirement for pre-centrifugation, for HPV studies based on FVU samples, most notably those for vaccine impact monitoring on HPV prevalence.IMPORTANCEThis study provides the first analytical validation of the Allplex HPV28 genotyping assay for use in first-void urine samples, offering a reliable, non-invasive, and practical alternative to cervical samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) detection. It demonstrates a validated approach that supports the assay's potential application in real-world settings, including low- and middle-income countries, where non-invasive and widely acceptable sampling methods are crucial for maximizing population coverage and representativity. Given the urgent need for accurate and practical tools to monitor HPV vaccination impact, these findings offer a timely and impactful contribution to the field.

Home-based urinary HPV self-sampling for the detection of cervical cancer precursor lesions: attitudes and preferences from Belgian females participating in the CASUS study

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer (CC) is the fourth most common cancer globally in females, caused by oncogenic infections with high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) strains. Successful CC screening programs strongly depend on the participation rate of the target population. Nevertheless, it remains challenging to reach under screened populations. The CASUS study aimed to develop a complete CC screening solution based on first-void urine (FVU) self-sampling. Here we report on the usability perceptions and preferences from females that participated in the CASUS study by collecting FVU as a liquid biopsy.

METHODS

Females self-collected FVU samples at home the day before colposcopy using the Colli-Pee® UCM FV-5010, a FVU collection device prefilled with 3 mL of UCM preservative, collecting a total volume of 10mL. Afterwards, they completed a questionnaire expressing their usability perceptions and preferences regarding the device.

RESULTS

A total of 332 females (26-70y) were enrolled in the CASUS study of which 210 completed the questionnaire. Overall, 66.6% of females preferred FVU self-sampling over a physician taken cervical sample (PTS) (32.9%) for their next CC screening. Out of 159 women who reported prior experience with a urine cup, 79.2% expressed a preference for using the Colli-Pee® UCM FV-5010, while 20.8% favored the traditional urine cup. Additionally, 96.6% of females found Colli-Pee® UCM FV-5010 easy to use and 97.1% would use the device again. A total of 208 valid System Usability Score (SUS) scores were received with an average of 86.17 ± 1.03 Standard Error of Mean (SEM).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study show that the majority of females in this referral cohort would prefer to self-collect a FVU sample at-home over a PTS for their next CC screening. Moreover, Colli-Pee® UCM FV-5010 was considered an easy-to-use and well-accepted self-sampling device for CC screening in a Belgian colposcopy referral population. From a future perspective, these results highlight the possibility of home-based FVU self-sampling as a liquid biopsy in CC screening where under screened populations could be approached more easily.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The CASUS study was registered in http://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov (identifier: NCT04530201).

Urine high-risk human papillomavirus testing as an alternative to routine cervical screening: A comparative diagnostic accuracy study of two urine collection devices using a randomised study design trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the sensitivity of human papillomavirus (HPV) tested urine to detect high-grade cervical precancer (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ [CIN2+]) using two urine collection devices.

DESIGN

Randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

St Mary's Hospital, Manchester, UK.

POPULATION

Colposcopy attendees with abnormal cervical screening; a total of 480 participants were randomised. Matched urine and cervical samples were available for 235 and 230 participants using a first-void urine (FVU)-collection device and standard pot, respectively.

METHODS

Urine was self-collected and mixed with preservative - randomised 1:1 to FVU-collection device (Novosanis Colli-pee® 10 mL with urine conservation medium [UCM]) or standard pot. Matched clinician-collected cervical samples were taken before colposcopy. HPV testing used Roche cobas® 8800. A questionnaire evaluated urine self-sampling acceptability.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measured sensitivity of HPV-tested urine (FVU-collection device and standard pot) for CIN2+ detection. Secondary outcomes compared HPV-tested cervical and urine samples for CIN2+ and evaluated the acceptability of urine self-sampling.

RESULTS

Urine HPV test sensitivity for CIN2+ was higher with the FVU-collection device (90.3%, 95% CI 83.7%-94.9%, 112/124) than the standard pot (73.4%, 95% CI 64.7%-80.9%, 91/124, p = 0.0005). The relative sensitivity of FVU-device-collected urine was 0.92 (95% CI 0.87-0.97, pMcN = 0.004) compared with cervical, considering that all women were referred after a positive cervical HPV test. Urine-based sampling was acceptable to colposcopy attendees.

CONCLUSIONS

Testing of FVU-device-collected urine for HPV was superior to standard-pot-collected urine in colposcopy attendees and has promising sensitivity for CIN2+ detection. General population HPV testing of FVU-device-collected urine will establish its clinical performance and acceptability as an alternative to routine cervical screening.

Patient preference and acceptability of self-sampling for cervical screening in colposcopy clinic attenders: A cross-sectional semi-structured survey

Low vaginal self-sampling has been pioneered as an important development to improve uptake of cervical screening globally. Limited research is available in specific patient groups in the UK exploring views around self-sampling to detect high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) DNA. Therefore, we explored patient views to support development of a novel point-of-care self-sampling cervical cancer screening device, by undertaking a cross-sectional semi-structured questionnaire survey to explore preferences, acceptability, barriers and facilitators around self-sampling. Patients attending a colposcopy clinic, 25-64 years old, were invited to participate after having carried out a low vaginal self-sample using a regular flocked swab. Participants self-completed an anonymous 12-point questionnaire. Quantitative data were analysed in MS Excel and Graphpad Prism, and qualitative data with Nvivo. We recruited 274 patients with a questionnaire response rate of 76%. Acceptability of self-sampling was high (95%, n = 187/197; Cronbachs-α = 0.778). Participants were asked their choice of future screening method: a) low vaginal self-sampling, b) healthcare professional collected vaginal swab, c) cervical brush sample with healthcare professional speculum examination, or d) no preference. Preferences were: a) 37% (n = 74/198), b) 19% (n = 37/198); c) 9% (n = 17/198), and d) 35% (n = 70/198), showing no single option as a strong preference. Key motivators were: Test simplicity (90%, n = 170/190), speed (81%, n = 153/190) and less pain (65%, n = 123/190). Barriers included lack of confidence taking the sample (53%, n = 10/19), resulting in preference for a healthcare professional sample (47%, n = 9/19). Whilst self-sampling showed high acceptability, lack of strong preference for screening method may reflect that respondents attending colposcopy are already engaged with screening and have differing perception of cervical cancer risk. This group appear less likely to 'switch' to self-sampling, and it may be better targeted within primary and community care, focusing on under-screened populations. Any shift in this paradigm in the UK requires comprehensive education and support for patients and providers.

A comparison of the carbon footprint of alternative sampling approaches for cervical screening in the UK: A descriptive study

OBJECTIVE

To understand whether self-sampling can reduce carbon emissions (CO2 e) from the NHS cervical screening programme (NHSCSP) by comparing the carbon footprint of three sampling strategies: routine cervical sampling, vaginal self-sampling and first-void (FV) urine collection.

DESIGN

Descriptive study.

SETTING

National Health Service (NHS), United Kingdom (UK).

POPULATION OR SAMPLE

Patients aged 25-64 years eligible for cervical screening in the UK.

METHODS

A carbon footprint analysis was undertaken for three cervical screening sampling approaches, from point of invitation to screening through to preparation for transport to the laboratory for HPV testing. A combination of primary and secondary data were used, with a bottom-up approach applied to collection of primary data.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We report CO2 e per sampling approach, which is the unit used to express carbon footprint and harmonise the contributions of greenhouse gases with different global warming potentials.

RESULTS

The total carbon footprint of routine cervical sampling is 3670 g CO2 e. By comparison, vaginal self-sampling had a total carbon footprint of 423 g CO2 e, and FV urine sampling 570 g CO2 e. The largest share of emissions for routine sampling was attributable to the carbon footprint associated with an appointment in a primary care setting, which totalled 2768 g CO2 e.

CONCLUSIONS

Routine cervical sampling is up to 8.7-fold more carbon-intensive than self-sampling approaches with equivalent effectiveness. We found negligible differences in the carbon footprint of alternative self-sampling methods, supporting the need for an informed choice of screening options for participants, which includes sharing information on their environmental impacts.

Concentration strategies for spiked and naturally present biomarkers in non-invasively collected first-void urine

BACKGROUND

First-void urine (FVU) provides a non-invasive method for collecting a wide range of biomarkers found in genital tract secretions. To optimize biomarker collection in FVU, this study investigated the impact of naturally present and supplemented precipitating agents: uromodulin (UMOD) and polyethylene glycol (PEG), on the concentration of human papillomavirus (HPV) pseudovirions (PsV), cell-free DNA (cfDNA), and cellular genomic DNA (gDNA) through centrifugation.

METHODS

FVU samples from ten healthy female volunteers, along with a control sample, were spiked with seal herpesvirus 1 (PhHV-1) DNA, HPV16 plasmid DNA, and HPV16 PsV with an enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP) reporter. The samples were subjected to various concentration protocols involving PEG precipitation, low-speed centrifugation (5 min at 1000×g), and medium-speed centrifugation (1 h at 3000×g). Subsequently, quantitative PCR (qPCR) was used to assess cellular and cell-free glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) DNA, cell-free PhHV-1 and HPV16 DNA, and PsV (EGFP) DNA. In addition, UMOD levels were measured.

RESULTS

The findings revealed that PEG significantly increased the concentration of cfDNA and gDNA in the pellet after centrifugation, with the most pronounced effect observed for cfDNA. Moreover, low-speed centrifugation without PEG effectively depleted cellular gDNA while preserving cfDNA in the supernatants. Pseudovirions were consistently pelleted, even with low-speed centrifugation, and a positive but not significant effect of PEG on PsV (EGFP) DNA yield in the pellet was observed. Additionally, a significant correlation was observed between UMOD and GAPDH, HPV16, and PsV (EGFP) DNA quantities in the pellet. Furthermore, large variations among the FVU samples were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

With this study, we provide novel insights into how various biomarker precipitation protocols, including both the properties of FVU and the use of PEG as a precipitating agent, influence the concentration of cfDNA, cellular gDNA, and pseudovirions.

Comparison of diagnostic accuracy and acceptability of self-sampling devices for human Papillomavirus detection: A systematic review

Objective

Cervical cancer screening coverage remains low in many countries worldwide. Self-sampling approach for cervical cancer screening has a good potential to improve the screening coverage. This study aims to compare different types of HPV self-sampling devices for cervical cancer screening to identify the most accurate and acceptable device(s).

Methods

A systematic review was performed on data extracted from all studies specific to HPV self-sampling devices by searching relevant articles in PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and EBSCO published from 2013 to October 2023. The study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022375682).

Results

Overall, 70 papers met the eligibility criteria for this systematic review and were included in the analysis: 22 studies reported self-sampling devices diagnostic accuracy, 32 studies reported self-sampling devices acceptability and 16 studies reported both (accuracy and acceptability). The most popular self-sampling devices were Evalyn Brush, FLOQ Swab, Cervex-Brush, and Delphi Screener. Out of overall 38 studies analyzing self-sampling devices' diagnostic accuracy, 94.7% of studies reported that self-collected specimens provided sensitivity and specificity comparable with clinician-collected samples; acceptability of Evalyn Brush, FLOQ Swab, Delphi Screener, and Colli-Pee, varied between 84.2% and 100%.

Conclusion

The self-sampling approach has a good potential to increase cervical cancer screening coverage. Evalyn Brush, Cervex-Brush, FLOQ Swab, and Delphi Screener self-sampling devices for HPV detection were the most commonly utilized and found to be the most accurate, and patient-acceptable. HPV detection accuracy using these self-sampling devices had no significant difference compared to the sampling performed by healthcare providers.

Testing for Human Papillomaviruses in Urine, Blood, and Oral Specimens: an Update for the Laboratory

Twelve high-risk alpha human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes cause approximately 690,000 cancer cases annually, with cervical and oropharyngeal cancer being the two most prominent types. HPV testing is performed in laboratory settings for various applications of a clinical, epidemiological, and research nature using a range of clinical specimens collected by clinicians or by individuals (self-collected specimens). Here, we reflect on the importance and justification of using the right test for the right application and provide practical updates for laboratories either participating in or anticipating involvement in HPV testing in three specimen types, namely, urine, blood, and oral specimens, which are considered "alternative" specimens by many. In addition to clinician-collected cervical samples and self-collected cervicovaginal samples, first-void urine is emerging as a credible specimen for HPV-based cervical cancer screening, triage of HPV screen-positive women, monitoring HPV vaccine impact, and HPV testing in groups for which a less invasive sample is preferred. Detection of cell-free DNA (including HPV DNA) in blood has great promise for the early detection of HPV-attributable oropharyngeal cancer (HPV-AOC) and potentially other HPV-driven cancers and as an adjunct prognostic marker in long-term tumor surveillance, including treatment response. The moderate sensitivity of HPV testing in oral rinses or swabs at HPV-AOC diagnosis prevents its use in HPV-AOC secondary prevention but represents a promising prognostic tool in HPV-AOC tertiary prevention, where the HPV persistence in oral rinses throughout treatment may predict early HPV-AOC recurrences and/or the development of secondary HPV-AOC. The increasing sophistication of specific collection devices designed for alternative samples and the enhanced precision of novel molecular technologies are likely to support the evolution of this field and catalyze potential translation into routine practice.

Widening the offer of human papillomavirus self-sampling to all women eligible for cervical screening: Make haste slowly

Self-collection of samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing has the potential to increase the uptake of cervical screening among underscreened women and will likely form a crucial part of the WHO's strategy to eliminate cervical cancer by 2030. In high-income countries with long-standing, organised cervical screening programmes, self-collection is increasingly becoming available as a routine offer for women regardless of their screening histories, including under- and well-screened women. For these contexts, a validated microsimulation model determined that adding self-collection to clinician collection is likely to be cost-effective on the condition that it meets specific thresholds relating to (1) uptake and (2) sensitivity for the detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+). We used these thresholds to review the 'early-adopter' programme-level evidence with a mind to determine how well and how consistently they were being met. The available evidence suggested some risk to overall programme performance in the situation where low uptake among underscreened women was accompanied by a high rate of substituting clinician sampling with self-collection among well-screened women. Risk was further compounded in a situation where the slightly reduced sensitivity of self-sampling vs clinician sampling for the detection of CIN2+ was accompanied with lack of adherence to a follow-up triage test that required a clinician sample. To support real-world programmes on their pathways toward implementation and to avoid HPV self-collection being introduced as a screening measure in good faith but with counterproductive consequences, we conclude by identifying a range of mitigations and areas worthy of research prioritisation.

Urine biomarkers in cancer detection: A systematic review of preanalytical parameters and applied methods

The aim of this review was to explore the status of urine sampling as a liquid biopsy for noninvasive cancer research by reviewing used preanalytical parameters and protocols. We searched two main health sciences databases, PubMed and Web of Science. From all eligible publications (2010-2022), information was extracted regarding: (a) study population characteristics, (b) cancer type, (c) urine preanalytics, (d) analyte class, (e) isolation method, (f) detection method, (g) comparator used, (h) biomarker type, (i) conclusion and (j) sensitivity and specificity. The search query identified 7835 records, of which 924 unique publications remained after screening the title, abstract and full text. Our analysis demonstrated that many publications did not report information about the preanalytical parameters of their urine samples, even though several other studies have shown the importance of standardization of sample handling. Interestingly, it was noted that urine is used for many cancer types and not just cancers originating from the urogenital tract. Many different types of relevant analytes have been shown to be found in urine. Additionally, future considerations and recommendations are discussed: (a) the heterogeneous nature of urine, (b) the need for standardized practice protocols and (c) the road toward the clinic. Urine is an emerging liquid biopsy with broad applicability in different analytes and several cancer types. However, standard practice protocols for sample handling and processing would help to elaborate the clinical utility of urine in cancer research, detection and disease monitoring.

Study to determine efficacy of urinary HPV 16 & HPV 18 detection in predicting premalignant and malignant lesions of uterine cervix

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate clinical performance and diagnostic accuracy of urinary HPV for non-invasive screening of high-grade precancerous and cancerous cervical lesions in a visual inspection under acetic acid (VIA) -positive cohort.

METHOD

The study included 180 women aged 35-65 years, who were VIA positive in a colposcopy clinic. All participants had the initial stream of a random urine sample tested for the presence of high-risk HPV (hrHPV) types 16 and 18 and acetowhite lesions were biopsied per protocol. Concordance analysis was conducted to assess agreement between detection of hrHPV in urine and the presence of premalignant and malignant lesions in cervix on histopathology. Measures of diagnostic accuracy were estimated to evaluate the performance of urinary HPV against histopathology (reference standard).

RESULTS

Substantial agreement between urinary HPV detection and histopathology was found (Cohen's κ is 0.696, P ≤ 0.001), with an agreement in 88.9% of the cases and disagreement in 11.1%. The diagnostic performance of urinary HPV in predicting the presence of a high-grade precancerous or cancerous lesion was as follows: sensitivity 67%, specificity 97%, positive predictive value 89%, and negative predictive value 88.8%.

CONCLUSION

HPV DNA detection from urine has good concordance with the histopathology for detection of precancerous and cancerous lesions of the cervix. Further studies on optimization of urine sampling and processing techniques are warranted.

Evaluation of BD Onclarity™ HPV Assay on Self-Collected Vaginal and First-Void Urine Samples as Compared to Clinician-Collected Cervical Samples: A Pilot Study

The accuracy of available HPV molecular assays on self-samples needs to be evaluated as compared to clinician-collected samples. This pilot study aimed to investigate the BD Onclarity™ HPV assay on vaginal and first-void urine samples. Sixty-four women referred to colposcopy for cervical dysplasia performed a vaginal self-collection and provided a first-void urine sample, after informed consent. A cervical specimen was collected during the clinician examination. All samples were tested using BD Onclarity™ HPV assay on the BD Viper™ LT System. Overall positive agreement (OPA) between cervical and self-sample results was evaluated using Cohen's kappa value (κ). Using a clinical cut-off of 38.3 Ct for HPV 16 and 34.2 Ct for other HR genotypes, compared to cervical sample, the self-collected vaginal sample OPA was 85.9%, and κ = 0.699. Without a clinical cut-off, the OPA was 95.3%, and the κ = 0.890. Data obtained comparing cervical and urine samples showed an OPA of 87.5% with a κ = 0.79 using a clinical cut-off, and an OPA of 90.6% with a κ = 0.776 without a clinical cut-off. Data showed a substantial agreement between both self-collected and clinician-collected samples. A specific clinical cut-off analysis should be considered based on type of sample analysed.

Analytical and clinical performance of extended HPV genotyping with BD Onclarity HPV Assay in home-collected first-void urine: A diagnostic test accuracy study

BACKGROUND

Urine collection is a non-invasive self-sampling method offering the prospect of reaching women un(der)-screened for cervical cancer. The VALHUDES research framework was designed to address the lack of clinical accuracy data for high-risk (hr)HPV testing using urine samples.

OBJECTIVES

Here, we report on the analytical and clinical accuracy of hrHPV testing on first-void urine, collected at home, using an extended HPV genotyping assay.

STUDY DESIGN

Paired first-void urine (Colli-Pee with UCM, Novosanis; index test) and clinician-collected cervical samples (Cervex-Brush, Rovers in PreservCyt Solution, Hologic; comparator test) were collected from 492 women aged 19 to 72 years attending colposcopy (reference test, with histology if indicated) (VALHUDES; NCT03064087). Extended HPV genotyping was performed on paired samples with the BD Onclarity HPV Assay. Cut-offs defined for cervical samples were also applied for first-void urine.

RESULTS

HrHPV testing in first-void urine was similarly sensitive for both CIN2+ (ratio 1.00; 95% CI: 0.93-1.07) and CIN3 (ratio 0.98; 95% CI: 0.88-1.08), and marginally less specific for <CIN2 (ratio 0.92; 95% CI: 0.84-0.996) compared to cervical samples. HPV test agreement between sample pairs expressed as Cohen's Kappa (κ) was moderate to excellent for overall hrHPV and individual genotypes (or groups) (κ=0.56-0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

BD Onclarity HPV Assay on first-void urine has similar clinical sensitivity and somewhat lower specificity to detect cervical precancer to testing on clinician-collected cervical samples.

Experiences and preferences towards collecting a urine and cervicovaginal self-sample among women attending a colposcopy clinic

•

In a colposcopy referral population, the majority of women consider self-collection of a urine sample and a cervicovaginal self-sample acceptable and easy to collect in a home-based setting.

•

Urine collection is worth investigating as a potential screening method to possibly improve attendance rates in cervical cancer screening.

The effectiveness of cervical cancer screening is hampered by low attendance rates. The collection of a urine sample is hypothesized to engage non-attenders in cervical cancer screening. The aim of this prospective cohort study was to evaluate experiences of women on urine collection and cervicovaginal self-sampling in a home-based setting and preferences for future cervical cancer screening. This study included 140 women, with a median age of 40 years, who were planned for a large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) procedure. All women collected a urine sample using conventional urine cups and a cervicovaginal self-sample prior to the LLETZ in a home-based setting. Following sample collection, women filled in a questionnaire. Results showed that the instructions of urine collection and cervicovaginal self-sampling were considered clear (95%, 95%CI: 88–98; 92%, 95%CI: 83–96, respectively). Women considered urine collection compared to cervicovaginal self-sampling to be more acceptable (p < 0.001), and to provide more reliable results (p < 0.001). The three highest reported preferred sampling methods for future cervical cancer screening were: urine collection (n = 39, 28%, 95%CI: 19–39), clinician-taken cervical scrape (n = 32, 23%, 95%CI: 15–34), and equal preference for urine collection, clinician-taken cervical scrape and cervicovaginal self-sampling (n = 30, 21%, 95%CI: 14–32). In conclusion, urine collection and cervicovaginal self-sampling are acceptable sampling methods, considered easy to collect in a home-based setting, and moreover, considered trustworthy. Although these results are promising, more research is required to determine if urine collection also lowers the barrier for non-attendees and, thereby, increases the attendance rates of cervical cancer screening.

Clinical Performance of the Full Genotyping Agena MassARRAY HPV Assay Using SurePath Screening Samples within the VALGENT4 Framework

The clinical performance evaluation of the novel MassARRAY human papillomavirus (MA-HPV) assay was performed using Danish SurePath cervical cancer screening samples under the fourth Validation of HPV Genotyping Tests (VALGENT) framework. The MA-HPV assay is a mass array-based assay that individually detects 14 oncogenic HPV genotypes and five nononcogenic types. The MA-HPV assay was validated using the VALGENT4 panel, which constitutes 997 consecutive samples from a screening population in addition to 297 disease-enriched samples with abnormal cytology findings. The clinical accuracy of the MA-HPV assay for sensitivity and specificity was assessed relative to that of the general primer 5+/6+ PCR enzyme immunoassay (GP-EIA), by a noninferiority test. The type-specific concordance of the MA-HPV assay was assessed as well. The relative sensitivity of the MA-HPV assay for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia ≥2 or ≥3 was 1.02 (95% CI, 0.98-1.05) and 1.01 (95% CI, 0.99-1.04), respectively. The sensitivity of the MA-HPV was noninferior to that of the GP-EIA (P = 0.0001), whereas the specificity of the MA-HPV was inferior (0.89; 95% CI, 0.85-0.91; P > 0.99). The MA-HPV assay is a clinical sensitive assay with a lower clinical specificity compared with the GP-EIA. The assay in its current form seems more suited to play a role where specificity is of lesser importance but where high sensitivity is paramount.

HPV AND DNA METHYLATION TESTING IN URINE FOR CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA AND CERVICAL CANCER DETECTION

BACKGROUND

Biomarker detection in urine offers a potential solution to increase effectiveness of cervical cancer screening programs by attracting non-responders. In this prospective study, the presence of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV DNA) and the performance of DNA methylation analysis was determined for the detection of cervical cancer and high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2/3) in urine, and compared to paired cervicovaginal self-samples and clinician-taken cervical scrapes.

METHODS

A total of 587 samples were included from 113 women with cervical cancer, 92 women with CIN2/3, and 64 controls. Samples were tested for hrHPV DNA and five methylation markers. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression and leave-one-out cross-validation were used to determine the methylation marker performance for CIN3 and cervical cancer (CIN3+) detection in urine. Agreement between samples was determined using Cohen's kappa statistics and the Spearman correlation coefficients.

RESULTS

HrHPV presence was high in all sample types, 79% to 92%. Methylation levels of all markers in urine significantly increased with increasing severity of disease. The optimal marker panel (ASCL1/LHX8) resulted in an AUC of 0.84 for CIN3+ detection in urine, corresponding to an 86% sensitivity at a 70% predefined specificity. At this threshold 96%(109/113) of cervical cancers, 68%(46/64) of CIN3 and 58%(14/24) of CIN2 were detected. Between paired samples, a strong agreement for HPV16/18 genotyping and a fair to strong correlation for methylation was found.

CONCLUSION

HrHPV DNA and DNA methylation testing in urine offers a promising solution to detect cervical cancer and CIN2/3 lesions, especially for women currently unreached by conventional screening methods.

Diagnostic Test Accuracy of First-Void Urine Human Papillomaviruses for Presence Cervical HPV in Women: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

First-void urine usually contains exfoliated cells of the debris and mucus from the female genital organs and cervix, i.e., high concentration of human papillomavirus deoxyribonucleic acid (HPV DNA). We conducted a meta-analysis of published data and determined an accuracy of HPV detection in first-void urine compared to the women’s cervix. According to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we carried out a comprehensive literature search. Eligible articles published from 2011 until 2021 were gathered by searching Embase, PubMed and Cochrane Library Central databases. The patient selection, index test, standard test, and patient flow were the factors involved in quality evaluation. A meta-analysis of 15 studies (3412 women) based on 5054 potential records was conducted. Pooled sensitivity for high-risk HPV detection in urine of 78% (70–84%) and specificity of 89% (81–94%) were calculated. Any HPV detection in urine of 87% (74–94%) and 91% (83–96%) were pooled sensitivity and specificity, respectively. HPV 16 and 18 had a pooled sensitivity of 77% (76–77%) and specificity of 98% (98–98%). Meta-analysis indicated variations between the pooled specificities and sensitivities. In meta-regression analysis, a heterogeneity in accuracy by using covariates (bias in patient selection, purpose, sample timing, storage temperature and HPV detection method) were not detected. Our meta-analysis demonstrates the accuracy of detection of HPV in urine for the presence of cervical HPV. Although progress is continuously made in urinary HPV detection, further studies are needed to evaluate and to improve the accuracy of the first-void urine test in order to be comparable with other screening methods.

Accuracy of human papillomavirus tests on self-collected urine versus clinician-collected samples for the detection of cervical precancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

The human papillomavirus (HPV) test is an effective screening tool to prevent cervical cancer. Urinary sampling for HPV detection improves the accessibility and participation of screening services and reduces the cost and burden on physicians. The clinical accuracy of urinary HPV test has yet to be determined via meta-analysis. This study assessed the clinical accuracy of these tests to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 or worse.

Methods

Relevant studies were identified using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Research eligibility was based on the clinical accuracy of HPV test on clinician-collected samples as a comparator test, and urine as an index test. The reference standard was the presence of CIN2 or worse. The pooled absolute, relative sensitivity, and specificity of the urinary HPV test versus clinician-collected samples were assessed using a bivariate model.

Results

The pooled sensitivity of urinary HPV test was significantly lower than that of clinician-collected samples (ratio=0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.78–0.91). However, some polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based HPV test such as GP5+/6+ (relative sensitivity=0.98, 95% CI=0.91–1.05), SPF10 (relative sensitivity=0.98, 85% CI=0.88–1.08) and non GP5+/6+ PCR (relative sensitivity=1.00, 95% CI=0.88–1.14) showed similar sensitivity in both the urine and clinician-collected samples.

Conclusion

Our findings indicate that HPV test with some PCR-based assay on urine versus clinician-collected samples demonstrate similar clinical accuracy to detect CIN2 or worse. It suggests that urinary HPV test may present itself as a decent alternative screening tool for the detection of cervical pre-cancer.

Trial Registration

PROSPERO identifier: CRD42021227901

Some polymerase chain reaction-based human papillomavirus (HPV) tests showed similar accuracy in urine and cervical samples. Signal amplification or messenger RNA HPV test on urine is less sensitive than cervical test. High-risk HPV assays is the only significant factor to affect test accuracy. Urinary HPV test may be an alternative option for cervical cancer screening.

CoCoss-Trial: Concurrent Comparison of Self-Sampling Devices for HPV-Detection

High-risk human papillomavirus (hr-HPV) infection of the cervicovaginal tract is known to be the major cause of cervical cancer. Similar to various other countries, Germany introduced an organized combined screening including cytology and HPV testing in 2020. The participation rate was around 70% in the past. Self-testing for hr-HPV infections could be an option to increase the participation rate. Two dry vaginal self-sampling devices and a device for the self-collection of first-void urine were evaluated in combination with a PCR-based hr-HPV test regarding their clinical performance (sensitivity for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, CIN 2+). A cervical smear taken by a clinician during colposcopy was used as reference. This open prospective multicenter trial recruited patients referred to the two participating colposcopy clinics (Hannover Medical School and IZD Hannover, Germany) with abnormal results from cervical cancer screening from 05/2020 to 11/2020. All patients received three CE-certified self-sampling devices (FLOQSwabs, COPAN, Italy; Evalyn Brush, Rovers Medical Devices, the Netherlands; Colli-Pee FV-5000, Novosanis, Wijnegem, Belgium) with instructions to read and apply at home in a pre-specified alternating order without medical assistance. HPV testing was performed after adequate preservation and DNA extraction. Histological results from colposcopy or cervical excisional surgery after self-sampling were used as the gold-standard. The data of 65 patients were analyzed. All invasive cancer cases and over 90% of the CIN 3 lesions were found to be hr-HPV positive with all three self-collection devices. All devices were considered easy to use without any difficulties following the written instructions. Hr-HPV testing of self-collected first-void urine and dry vaginal self-samples showed a high sensitivity for CIN 3+ comparable to that of a clinician-taken smear. Self-sampling was well accepted as it is convenient and easy to use.

Eliminating Cervical Cancer: Progress and Challenges for High-income Countries

In 2020, the World Health Organization launched a major initiative to eliminate cervical cancer globally. The initiative is built around the three key pillars of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, cervical screening and treatment, with associated intervention targets for the year 2030. The '90-70-90' targets specify that 90% of adolescent girls receive prophylactic HPV vaccination, 70% of adult women receive a minimum twice-in-a-lifetime cervical HPV test and 90% receive appropriate treatment for preinvasive or invasive disease. Modelling has shown that if these targets are met, the elimination of cervical cancer, defined as fewer than four cases per 100 000 women per annum, will be achieved within a century. Many high-income countries are well positioned to eliminate cervical cancer within the coming decades, but few have achieved '90-70-90' and many challenges must still be addressed to deliver these critical interventions effectively. This review considers the current status of cervical cancer control in relation to each of the three elimination pillars in high-income countries and discusses some of the developments that will assist countries in reaching these ambitious targets by 2030.

Cervical cancer screening using HPV tests on self-samples: attitudes and preferences of women participating in the VALHUDES study

Background

Interventions to reach women who do not participate regularly in screening may reduce the risk of cervical cancer. Self-collection of a vaginal specimen has been shown to increase participation. The relative clinical accuracy of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing on first-void urine (with Colli-Pee) and on vaginal self-samples versus on cervical clinician-collected samples is being investigated in the VALHUDES trial. The current study assesses attitudes and experiences regarding self-sampling among women enrolled in VALHUDES.

Methods

Questionnaires from 515 women (age 25–64 years [N = 498]; < 25 [N = 10], age ≥ 65 [N = 3], enrolled between December 2017 - January 2020) referred to colposcopy because of previous cervical abnormalities and enrolled in VALHUDES (NCT03064087) were analysed.

Results

Of the 515 participants, nearly all women confirmed that self-sampling may help in reaching under-screened women (93%). Nevertheless, 44% of the participants stated before starting collection that a clinician-collected sample is more effective than a self-collected sample. After self-sampling, the large majority of women (> 95%) declared that instructions for self-collection were clear, that collection was easy, and that they were confident about having performed the procedure correctly, for both urine and vaginal collection. However, a proportion of women found self-sampling unpleasant (9.5% [49/515] for urine collection; 18.6% [96/515] and 15.5% [80/515] for vaginal sampling with cotton swabs or plastic brushes, respectively). For their next screening round, 57% would prefer self-sampling whereas 41% opted for collection by a clinician. Among women preferring self-sampling, 53% would choose for urine collection, 38% for vaginal self-collection and 9% had no preference. Age did not modify preferences.

Conclusion

We conclude that both urine and vaginal self-sampling are well accepted by women, with a preference for urine sampling. Although the large majority of women are confident in their ability to perform self-sampling, four to five over ten women preferred specimen collection by a clinician.

Trial registration

The study VALHUDES was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT03064087).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13690-021-00667-4.

How Much Does HIV Positivity Affect the Presence of Oral HPV? A Molecular Epidemiology Survey

HIV-positive people showed a high oral prevalence of HPV-DNA and have a greater incidence of head and neck carcinomas compared to general population. We performed a molecular survey evaluating the presence of HPV-DNA in saliva of HIV-positive and HIV-negative subjects in order to quantify the risk represented by HIV-positivity. The sample was made up by 102 subjects: 40 HIV-positive, 32 HIV-negative with sexual risk behaviors (SRB) and 30 HIV-negative without risk factors. DNA was extracted from cellular pellets and HPV detection and genotyping were performed by PCR assays. In the HIV-positive group (of which 58.3% declared SRB) 33.33% of the sample were HPV-positive (33.33% to high-risk genotypes, 25.0% to low-risk genotypes and 41.66% to other genotypes). In the HIV-negative SRB group, HPV-positive subjects were 37.04% (60.0% to high risk genotypes, 20.0% to low risk genotypes, and 20.0% to other genotypes). Finally, in the control group, the HPV-positive subjects were 7.14% (50% to high-risk genotypes and 50% to low-risk genotypes). In the HIV group, concerning the HPV positivity, there was no significant difference between subjects with and without SRBs. In summary, we found a high oral HPV-DNA detection in HIV+ group, showing a strong relationship between HIV and HPV.

Performance of an affordable urine self-sampling method for human papillomavirus detection in Mexican women

INTRODUCTION

Urine self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening is a non-invasive method that offers several logistical advantages and high acceptability, reducing barriers related to low screening coverage. This study developed and evaluated the performance of a low-cost urine self-sampling method for HPV-testing and explored the acceptability and feasibility of potential implementation of this alternative in routine screening.

METHODS

A series of sequential laboratory assays examined the impact of several pre-analytical conditions for obtaining DNA from urine and subsequent HPV detection. Initially, we assessed the effect of ethylaminediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) as a DNA preservative examining several variables including EDTA concentration, specimen storage temperature, time between urine collection and DNA extraction, and first-morning micturition versus convenience sample collection. We further evaluated the agreement of HPV-testing between urine and clinician-collected cervical samples among 95 women. Finally, we explored the costs of self-sampling supplies as well as the acceptability and feasibility of urine self-sampling among women and healthcare workers.

RESULTS

Our results revealed higher DNA concentrations were obtained when using a 40mM EDTA solution, storing specimens at 25°C and extracting DNA within 72 hrs. of urine collection, regardless of using first-morning micturition or a convenience sampling. We observed good agreement (Kappa = 0.72) between urine and clinician-collected cervical samples for HPV detection. Furthermore, urine self-sampling was an affordable method (USD 1.10), well accepted among cervical cancer screening users, healthcare workers, and decision-makers.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest urine self-sampling is feasible and appropriate alternative for HPV-testing in HPV-based screening programs in lower-resource contexts.

Clinical and analytical evaluation of the RealTime High Risk HPV assay in Colli-Pee collected first-void urine using the VALHUDES protocol

OBJECTIVE

Urine self-sampling has gained increasing interest for cervical cancer screening. In contrast to analytical performance, little information is available regarding the clinical accuracy for high-risk Human Papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing on urine.

METHODS

VALHUDES is a diagnostic test accuracy study comparing clinical accuracy to detect high-grade cervical precancer (CIN2+) of HPV testing on self-collected compared to clinician-collected samples (NCT03064087). Disease outcome was assessed by colposcopy and histology. The Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV assay performance was evaluated on Colli-Pee collected first-void urine with cervical outcomes as comparator.

RESULTS

As no assay cut-off for urine has been clinically validated, we used the predefined cut-off for cervical samples (CN ≤ 32). Using this cut-off, hrHPV testing was similarly sensitive (relative sensitivity 0.95; 95% CI: 0.88-1.01) and specific (relative specificity 1.03; 95% CI: 0.95-1.13) for detection of CIN2+ compared to testing cervical samples. In the subgroup of women of 30 years and older, similar relative sensitivity (0.97; 95% CI: 0.89-1.05) and specificity (1.02; 95% CI: 0.93-1.12) was found. Additionally, an exploratory cut-off (CN ≤ 33.86) was defined which further improved sensitivity and analytical test performance.

CONCLUSION

HrHPV-DNA based PCR testing on home-collected first-void urine has similar accuracy for detecting CIN2+ compared to cervical samples taken by a clinician.

Triage of human papillomavirus infected women by methylation analysis in first-void urine

Host cell DNA methylation analysis in urine provides promising triage markers for women diagnosed with a high-risk (HR) human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. In this study, we have investigated a panel of six host cell methylation markers (GHSR, SST, ZIC1, ASCL1, LHX8, ST6GALNAC5) in cervicovaginal secretions collected within the first part of the urine void (FVU) from a referral population. Cytology, histology, and HPV DNA genotyping results on paired FVU and cervical samples were available. Urinary median methylation levels from HR-HPV (n = 93) positive women were found to increase for all markers with severity of underlying disease. Significantly elevated levels were observed for GHSR and LHX8 in relation to high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2 +; n = 33), with area under de curve values of 0.80 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.59–0.92) and 0.76 (95% CI 0.58–0.89), respectively. These findings are the first to support the assertion that methylation analysis of host cell genes is feasible in FVU and holds promise as molecular, triage strategy to discern low- from high-grade cervical disease in HR-HPV positive women. Molecular testing on FVU may serve to increase cervical cancer screening attendance in hard-to-reach populations whilst reducing loss to follow-up and await further optimization and validation studies.

A Randomized Comparison of Different Vaginal Self-sampling Devices and Urine for Human Papillomavirus Testing-Predictors 5.1

BACKGROUND

Human papillomavirus (HPV)-based screening is rapidly replacing cytology as the cervical screening modality of choice. In addition to being more sensitive than cytology, it can be done on self-collected vaginal or urine samples. This study will compare the high-risk HPV positivity rates and sensitivity of self-collected vaginal samples using four different collection devices and a urine sample.

METHODS

A total of 620 women referred for colposcopy were invited to provide an initial stream urine sample collected with the Colli-Pee device and take two vaginal self-samples, using either a dry flocked swab (DF) and a wet dacron swab (WD), or a HerSwab (HS) and Qvintip (QT) device. HPV testing was performed by the BD Onclarity HPV Assay.

RESULTS

A total of 600 vaginal sample pairs were suitable for analysis, and 505 were accompanied by a urine sample. Similar positivity rates and sensitivities for CIN2+ and CIN3+ were seen for DF, WD, and urine, but lower values were seen for QT and HS. No clear user preferences were seen between devices, but women found urine easiest to collect, and were more confident they had taken the sample correctly. The lowest confidence in collection was reported for HS.

CONCLUSIONS

Urine, a DF swab, and WD swab all performed well and were well received by the women, whereas the Qvintip and HerSwab devices were less satisfactory.

IMPACT

This is the first study to compare five self-sampling methods in the same women taken at the same time. It supports wider use of urine or vaginal self-sampling for cervical screening.

Impact of Collection Volume and DNA Extraction Method on the Detection of Biomarkers and HPV DNA in First-Void Urine

The potential of first-void (FV) urine as a non-invasive liquid biopsy for detection of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA and other biomarkers has been increasingly recognized over the past decade. In this study, we investigated whether the volume of this initial urine stream has an impact on the analytical performance of biomarkers. In parallel, we evaluated different DNA extraction protocols and introduced an internal control in the urine preservative. Twenty-five women, diagnosed with high-risk HPV, provided three home-collected FV urine samples using three FV urine collection devices (Colli-Pee) with collector tubes that differ in volume (4, 10, 20 mL). Each collector tube was prefilled with Urine Conservation Medium spiked with phocine herpesvirus 1 (PhHV-1) DNA as internal control. Five different DNA extraction protocols were compared, followed by PCR for GAPDH and PhHV-1 (qPCR), HPV DNA, and HBB (HPV-Risk Assay), and ACTB (methylation-specific qPCR). Results showed limited effects of collection volume on human and HPV DNA endpoints. In contrast, significant variations in yield for human endpoints were observed for different DNA extraction methods (p < 0.05). Additionally, the potential of PhHV-1 as internal control to monitor FV urine collection, storage, and processing was demonstrated.

Clinical performance and acceptability of self-collected vaginal and urine samples compared with clinician-taken cervical samples for HPV testing among women referred for colposcopy. A cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

To increase effectiveness of the cervical cancer screening program, self-sampling can be an option. Both self-collected vaginal samples (SCV) and urine samples may be useful alternatives to clinician-taken cervical samples (CS).

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Colposcopy clinic.

PARTICIPANTS

Women (n=305) referred to colposcopy after abnormal cervical screening result or conditions like postcoital bleeding.

INTERVENTION

All women self-collected a urine and a vaginal sample prior to colposcopy, where a CS and biopsies were taken. All samples were tested for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) using the Cobas HPV assay. The gold standard was histology diagnoses (CIN2+/CIN3+) from biopsies obtained at the same examination.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Absolute and relative sensitivity and specificity of HPV testing on SCV and urine to detect CIN2+/CIN3+ compared with the CS.

SECONDARY OUTCOME

The acceptability by women of self-sampling.

RESULTS

Both the vaginal and urine sample were comparable to the CS in identifying severe intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+/CIN3+). Absolute sensitivity ranged from 93% for urine samples to 96% for SCV for detecting CIN2+, which is comparable to the sensitivity of CS (overlapping 95% CI).The relative sensitivity for detecting CIN2+ was 1.00 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.04) for SCV and 0.96 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.03) for urine samples. At CIN3+, the relative sensitivity was 1.00 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.08) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.07) for SCV and urine samples, respectively. There were no statistical differences between the self-collected samples and the CS (McNemar's test >0.05). The relative specificity was also similar (1.03 (95% CI 0.95 to 1.12) for SCV and 0.98 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.09) for urine samples) (McNemar's test >0.05).The acceptability of self-sampling was evaluated by questionnaire. The women found the instructions on sample collection easy to understand and were positive about self-sampling with a preference for the urine sample.

CONCLUSION

Self-sampling by SCV and urine is a clinically safe alternative to CS with a high degree of acceptability.

Epidemiology and Burden of Human Papillomavirus and Related Diseases, Molecular Pathogenesis, and Vaccine Evaluation

Diagnosed in more than 90% of cervical cancers, the fourth deadliest cancer in women, human papillomavirus (HPV) is currently the most common pathogen responsible for female cancers. Moreover, HPV infection is associated with many other diseases, including cutaneous and anogenital warts, and genital and upper aerodigestive tract cancers. The incidence and prevalence of these pathologies vary considerably depending on factors including HPV genotype, regional conditions, the study population, and the anatomical site sampled. Recently, features of the cervicovaginal microbiota are found to be associated with the incidence of HPV-related diseases, presenting a novel approach to identify high-risk women through both blood and cervical samples. Overall, the HPV repartition data show that HPV infection and related diseases are more prevalent in developing countries. Moreover, the available (2-, 4-, and 9-valent) vaccines based on virus-like particles, despite their proven effectiveness and safety, present some limitations in terms of system development cost, transport cold chain, and oncogenic HPV variants. In addition, vaccination programs face some challenges, leading to a considerable burden of HPV infection and related diseases. Therefore, even though the new (9-valent) vaccine seems promising, next-generation vaccines as well as awareness programs associated with HPV vaccination and budget reinforcements for immunization are needed.

Urine collection in cervical cancer screening - analytical comparison of two HPV DNA assays

Background

To reach non-participants, reluctant to undergo clinician-based cervical cancer screening and vaginal self-sampling, urine collection for high-risk human papillomavirus detection (hrHPV) may be valuable. Using two hrHPV DNA assays, we evaluated the concordance of hrHPV positivity in urine samples in comparison with vaginal self-samples and cervical cytology samples taken by the general practitioner (GP). We also studied women’s acceptance of urine collection and preferences towards the different sampling procedures.

Methods

One hundred fifty paired self-collected urine and vaginal samples and GP-collected cervical cytology samples were obtained from 30 to 59-year-old women diagnosed with ASC-US within the Danish cervical cancer screening program. After undergoing cervical cytology at the GP, the women collected first-void urine and vaginal samples at home and completed a questionnaire. Each sample was hrHPV DNA tested by the GENOMICA CLART® and COBAS® 4800 assays. Concordance in hrHPV detection between sample types was determined using Kappa (k) statistics. Sensitivity and specificity of hrHPV detection in urine was calculated using cervical sampling as reference.

Results

With the COBAS assay, urine showed good concordance to the vaginal (k = 0.66) self-samples and cervical samples (k = 0.66) for hrHPV detection. The corresponding concordance was moderate (k = 0.59 and k = 0.47) using CLART. Compared to cervical sampling, urinary hrHPV detection had a sensitivity of 63.9% and a specificity of 96.5% using COBAS; compared with 51.6 and 92.4% for CLART. Invalid hrHPV test rates were 1.8% for COBAS and 26.9% for CLART. Urine collection was well-accepted and 42.3% of the women ranked it as the most preferred future screening procedure.

Conclusions

Urine collection provides a well-accepted screening option. With COBAS, higher concordance between urine and vaginal self-sampling and cervical sampling for hrHPV detection was found compared to CLART. Urinary hrHPV detection with COBAS is feasible, but its accuracy may need to be improved before urine collection at home can be offered to non-participants reluctant to both cervical sampling and vaginal self-sampling.

Non-invasive Assessment of Vaccine-Induced HPV Antibodies via First-Void Urine

The potential of first-void (FV) urine as a non-invasive method to monitor human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination has been reported, mainly focusing on urine as a sample to assess HPV DNA. Besides HPV DNA, vaccine-induced HPV antibodies originating from cervicovaginal secretions were recently shown to be detectable in FV urine as well. This presents a novel opportunity for non-invasive sampling to monitor HPV antibody status in women participating in large epidemiological studies and HPV vaccine trials. The simultaneous assessment of both HPV infection and immunogenicity on a non-invasive, readily obtained sample is particularly attractive.

Self-Collection for Cervical Screening Programs: From Research to Reality

In 2018, there were an estimated 570,000 new cases of cervical cancer globally, with most of them occurring in women who either had no access to cervical screening, or had not participated in screening in regions where programs are available. Where programs are in place, a major barrier for women across many cultures has been the requirement to undergo a speculum examination. With the emergence of HPV-based primary screening, the option of self-collection (where the woman takes the sample from the vagina herself) may overcome this barrier, given that such samples when tested using a PCR-based HPV assay have similar sensitivity for the detection of cervical pre-cancers as practitioner-collected cervical specimens. Other advantages of HPV-based screening using self-collection, beyond the increase in acceptability to women, include scalability, efficiency, and high negative predictive value, allowing for long intervals between negative tests. Self-collection will be a key strategy for the successful scale up of cervical screening programs globally in response to the WHO call for all countries to work towards the elimination of cervical cancer as a public health problem. This review will examine self-collection for HPV-based cervical screening including the collection devices, assays and possible routine laboratory processes considering how they can be utilized in cervical screening programs.

Detection of high-risk human papillomavirus RNA in urine for cervical cancer screening with HPV 16 & 18/45 genotyping

Objective

To detect high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) messenger-RNA (mRNA) in urine samples, compare their concordance with cervical samples including HPV 16 & 18/45 genotyping, and to determine the utility in detecting ≥ CIN 2 lesions.

Methods

A cohort of 189 non-pregnant patients (age ≥ 25) was recruited in three groups: Group 1 with abnormal pap-smears and hrHPV positivity, Group 2 with normal pap-smears and hrHPV positivity, and Group 3 with normal pap-smears and hrHPV negativity. Urine samples were tested for hrHPV-mRNA and subsequent hrHPV-mRNA genotype if positive. High-risk HPV detection and genotyping were performed using Aptima assays which are validated for cervical HPV testing. Colposcopy results from groups 1 & 2 were analyzed.

Results

The sensitivity of urine hrHPV-mRNA detection was 31.5% while the specificity and PPV were above 95% (96.9% & 95.1% respectively) (p < 0.001). The kappa agreement with cervical samples was fair (0.22, p = 0.04). The sensitivity and specificity of urine hrHPV-mRNA genotyping were 20.0% & 100% respectively (p < 0.001) with 100% genotype-specific concordance. The kappa agreement with cervical samples was fair (0.25, p = 0.16). For urine hrHPV-mRNA detection of ASC-H/HSIL when grouped by age ≥ 30, the sensitivity and specificity were 45.4% & 63.9% respectively (p = 0.009). For urine hrHPV-mRNA detection of ≥ CIN 2 for all ages, the sensitivity and specificity were 45.5% & 75.0% respectively (p = 0.03).

Conclusion

Using the Aptima Assay, urine hrHPV-mRNA detection is suboptimal for cervical cancer screening but given the high specificity, it has the potential to identify high-grade lesions (≥ CIN 2). Urine hrHPV-mRNA genotyping via this modality is not beneficial in triage settings of normal or abnormal cytology to determine the need for colposcopy.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Acceptability of Urine and Cervico-Vaginal Sample Self-Collection for HPV-Based Cervical Cancer Screening

Background: We compared women's acceptability of urine and cervico-vaginal sample self-collection for high-risk (oncogenic) human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing and assessed whether acceptability varied across racial/ethnic groups. Methods: As part of a test accuracy study of urine-based hrHPV testing, we recruited a convenience sample of women 25-65 years of age at two colposcopy clinics in North Carolina between November 2016 and January 2019. After self-collection of urine and cervico-vaginal samples, women completed a questionnaire on the acceptability of the sample collection methods. We coded open-ended questions inductively. All results are presented stratified by racial/ethnic group. Results: We included 410 women (119 Hispanic, 115 non-Hispanic Black, 154 non-Hispanic White, and 22 women with other racial identities). Most women (79%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 76%-83%) had positive feelings about urine-based hrHPV testing. Women generally preferred urine (78%, 95% CI = 74%-82%) over cervico-vaginal self-collection (18%, 95% CI = 14%-22%), but the degree differed by racial/ethnic group, increasing from 75% in non-Hispanic Black to 82% in Hispanic women (p = 0.011). Most women reported at least one positive aspect of urine (89%) and cervico-vaginal self-collection (85%) for hrHPV testing with the most common positive aspect being easy sample collection, although 16% of women were concerned about performing the cervico-vaginal self-collection correctly. Conclusions: Self-collection for hrHPV-based cervical cancer screening is highly acceptable to women across different racial/ethnic groups in the United States, and most women in our study would be more likely to attend future cervical cancer screening appointments if screening were urine based. Urine-based hrHPV testing is a promising approach to improve cervical cancer screening coverage.

Methylation analysis in urine fractions for optimal CIN3 and cervical cancer detection

INTRODUCTION

Urine sampling is an interesting solution for CIN3 and cervical cancer detection. Urine can be separated in different fractions: full void urine, urine sediment and urine supernatant. We aimed to determine which urine fraction is most competent for CIN3 and cervical cancer detection by methylation analysis.

METHODS

Urine samples (27 controls, 30 CIN3 and 17 cervical cancer) were processed into 3 fractions and tested for 5 methylation markers (ASCL1, GHSR, LHX8, SST, ZIC1). We determined Spearman correlation coefficients between fractions, compared methylation levels and calculated AUCs for CIN3 and cancer detection.

RESULTS

In general strong correlations (r > 0.60) were found between urine fractions. Methylation levels increased significantly with severity of underlying disease in all urine fractions. CIN3 and controls differed significantly for 2 markers in full void urine, 4 markers in urine sediment and 1 marker in urine supernatant, with AUCs of 0.55-0.79. Comparison of cancer to controls was highly significant for all markers in all fractions, yielding AUCs of 0.87-0.99.

CONCLUSION

Methylation analysis performs excellent in all urine fractions for cervical cancer detection. Our results indicate the potential of CIN3 detection by urinary methylation analysis, and demonstrate that urine sediment performs best to detect CIN3.

Test Accuracy of Human Papillomavirus in Urine for Detection of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia

The objective was to assess the diagnostic test accuracy of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing of self-collected urine and cervicovaginal samples for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+). We recruited a convenience sample of women 25 to 65 years of age who were undergoing clinically indicated colposcopy at two medical centers in North Carolina between November 2016 and January 2019. Women with normal cytology results and positive hrHPV results were also recruited. Urine samples, self-collected cervicovaginal samples, provider-collected cervical samples, and cervical biopsy samples were obtained from all enrolled women. Samples were tested for hrHPV DNA using the Onclarity assay (Becton Dickinson, Sparks, MD). Biopsy samples were histologically graded as CIN2+ or Collapse

Key Words

• HPV testing
• cervical intraepithelial neoplasia
• diagnostic test accuracy
• human papillomavirus
• self-collection
• urine

Collapse

MESH Headings

• Adult
• Aged
• Biopsy
• Colposcopy
• DNA, Viral/urine
• Early Detection of Cancer
• Female
• Humans
• Middle Aged
• North Carolina
• Papillomaviridae/genetics
• Papillomaviridae/isolation & purification
• Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis
• Papillomavirus Infections/pathology
• Polymerase Chain Reaction
• Sensitivity and Specificity
• Specimen Handling
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology
• Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/diagnosis
• Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/virology

Collapse

Grants

• P30 AI050410 NIAID NIH HHS
• P30 ES025128 NIEHS NIH HHS
• U54 CA156733 NCI NIH HHS
• Swiss Cancer Research foundation
• HHS | National Institutes of Health (NIH)

Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Eliane Rohner Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
Lisa Rahangdale Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
Busola Sanusi Department of Biostatistics, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
Andrea K Knittel Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
Laurence Vaughan Becton, Dickinson and Company, Sparks, Maryland, USA
Kirsty Chesko Becton, Dickinson and Company, Sparks, Maryland, USA
Brian Faherty Becton, Dickinson and Company, Sparks, Maryland, USA
Samantha E Tulenko Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
John W Schmitt Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA
LaHoma S Romocki Department of Public Health Education, North Carolina Central University, Durham, North Carolina, USA
Vijay Sivaraman Department of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, North Carolina Central University, Durham, North Carolina, USA
Julie A E Nelson Department of Microbiology and Immunology, School of Medicine, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
Jennifer S Smith Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA

Collapse

Cervical cancer detection by DNA methylation analysis in urine

Urine samples provide a potential alternative to physician-taken or self-collected cervical samples for cervical screening. Screening by primary hrHPV testing requires additional risk assessment (so-called triage) of hrHPV-positive women. Molecular markers, such as DNA methylation, have proven most valuable for triage when applied to cervical specimens. This study was set out to compare hrHPV and DNA methylation results in paired urine and cervical scrapes, and to evaluate the feasibility of DNA methylation analysis in urine to detect cervical cancer. Urine samples (n = 41; native and sediment) and paired cervical scrapes (n = 38) from cervical cancer patients, and urine from 44 female controls, were tested for hrHPV and 6 methylation markers. Results on native urine and sediment were highly comparable. A strong agreement was found between hrHPV testing on urine and scrapes (kappa = 0.79). Also, methylation levels in urine were moderately to strongly correlated to those detected in scrapes (r = 0.508-0.717). All markers were significantly increased in urine from cervical cancer patients compared to controls and showed a good discriminatory power for cervical cancer (AUC = 0.744-0.887). Our results show a good agreement of urine-based molecular analysis with reference cervical samples, and suggest that urine-based DNA methylation testing may provide a promising strategy for cervical cancer detection.

Detecting cervical precancer and reaching underscreened women by using HPV testing on self samples: updated meta-analyses

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) assays on self samples and the efficacy of self sampling strategies to reach underscreened women.

DESIGN

Updated meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline (PubMed), Embase, and CENTRAL from 1 January 2013 to 15 April 2018 (accuracy review), and 1 January 2014 to 15 April 2018 (participation review).

REVIEW METHODS

Accuracy review: hrHPV assay on a vaginal self sample and a clinician sample; and verification of the presence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) by colposcopy and biopsy in all enrolled women or in women with positive tests. Participation review: study population included women who were irregularly or never screened; women in the self sampling arm (intervention arm) were invited to collect a self sample for hrHPV testing; women in the control arm were invited or reminded to undergo a screening test on a clinician sample; participation in both arms was documented; and a population minimum of 400 women.

RESULTS

56 accuracy studies and 25 participation trials were included. hrHPV assays based on polymerase chain reaction were as sensitive on self samples as on clinician samples to detect CIN2+ or CIN3+ (pooled ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.97 to 1.02). However, hrHPV assays based on signal amplification were less sensitive on self samples (pooled ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 0.89). The specificity to exclude CIN2+ was 2% or 4% lower on self samples than on clinician samples, for hrHPV assays based on polymerase chain reaction or signal amplification, respectively. Mailing self sample kits to the woman's home address generated higher response rates to have a sample taken by a clinician than invitation or reminder letters (pooled relative participation in intention-to-treat-analysis of 2.33, 95% confidence interval 1.86 to 2.91). Opt-in strategies where women had to request a self sampling kit were generally not more effective than invitation letters (relative participation of 1.22, 95% confidence interval 0.93 to 1.61). Direct offer of self sampling devices to women in communities that were underscreened generated high participation rates (>75%). Substantial interstudy heterogeneity was noted (I²>95%).

CONCLUSIONS

When used with hrHPV assays based on polymerase chain reaction, testing on self samples was similarly accurate as on clinician samples. Offering self sampling kits generally is more effective in reaching underscreened women than sending invitations. However, since response rates are highly variable among settings, pilots should be set up before regional or national roll out of self sampling strategies.

Human papillomavirus detection in urine: Effect of a first-void urine collection device and timing of collection

Great interest has been directed towards the use of first-void (FV) urine as a liquid biopsy for high-risk HPV DNA testing. The aim of this study was to investigate the potential effect of a first generation FV urine collection device on the detection of HPV DNA and to assess if the concentration of HPV DNA varies between FV urine collected in the morning and those collected later during the day. In this prospective cohort study, 33 self-reported HPV-positive women participated. An FV urine sample was collected by these women in the morning (first urine of the day) and another sample was collected later that day for four consecutive days using two different collection methods; i.e., the Colli-Pee^® and a standard urine cup. Samples were collected at home and returned at ambient temperature to the laboratory by postal mail. HPV DNA testing was conducted with the Riatol qPCR HPV genotyping assay. Based on the combined generalized linear mixed model used, there was no significant impact of the timing of collection (morning versus later during the day) on copies of HPV DNA, whereas Colli-Pee^® collected samples show higher HPV concentrations than cup collected samples. However, at high concentrations of hDNA, the benefit of the Colli-Pee^® disappeared.

VALHUDES: A protocol for validation of human papillomavirus assays and collection devices for HPV testing on self-samples and urine samples

BACK GROUND

Systematic reviews have concluded that hrHPV DNA testing using target-amplification tests is as accurate on vaginal self-samples as on clinician-taken specimens for the detection of cervical precancer. However, insufficient evidence is available for specific HPV assay/self-sample device combinations.

OBJECTIVES

The VALHUDES protocol is designed as a diagnostic test accuracy study that aims to compare the clinical sensitivity and specificity of particular hrHPV assay(s) on vaginal self-samples and first-void-urine, collected in agreement with standardized protocols, with hrHPV testing on matched clinician-taken samples.

STUDY DESIGN

Five hundred enrolled women referred to a colposcopy clinic are invited to collect a first-void urine sample and one or more vaginal self-samples with particular devices before collection of a cervical sample by a clinician. Sample sets are subsequently analysed in a laboratory accredited for HPV testing. Disease verification for all enrolled patients is provided by colposcopy combined with histological assessment of biopsies.

RESULTS

A first VALHUDES study has started in Belgium in December 2017 with enrolment from four colposcopy centres. The following assays are foreseen to be evaluated: RealTime High Risk HPV assay (Abbott), cobas-4800 and -6800 (Roche), Onclarity (BD), Xpert HPV (Cepheid) and Anyplex II HPV HR (Seegene).

CONCLUSION

Given empirical evidence that the relative accuracy of HPV-testing on self- vs clinician-samples is robust across clinical settings, the VALHUDES protocol offers a framework for validation of HPV assay/self-sample device combinations that can be translated to a primary screening setting.

Human papillomavirus genotype and viral load agreement between paired first-void urine and clinician-collected cervical samples

The performance and acceptability of first-void urine as specimen for the detection of HPV DNA in a Belgian referral population was evaluated using an optimized sample collection and processing protocol. One hundred ten first-void urine and cervical samples were collected from 25- to 64-year-old women who were referred for colposcopy (January-November 2016). Paired samples were analyzed by the Riatol qPCR HPV genotyping assay. Acceptability data were gathered through questionnaires (NCT02714127). A higher high-risk HPV DNA prevalence was observed in first-void urine (n = 76/110) compared to cervical samples (n = 73/110), with HPV31 and HPV16/31 being most prevalent correspondingly. For both any and high-risk HPV DNA, good agreement was observed between paired samples (Cohen's Kappa of 0.660 (95% CI: 0.486-0.833) and 0.688 (95% CI: 0.542-0.835), respectively). In addition, significant positive correlations in HPV copies (per microliter of DNA extract) between paired samples were observed for HPV16 (rs = 0.670; FDR (false discovery rate)-adjusted p = 0.006), HPV18 (rs = 0.893; FDR-adjusted p = 0.031), HPV31 (rs = 0.527; FDR-adjusted p = 0.031), HPV53 (rs = 0.691; FDR-adjusted p = 0.017), and HPV68 (rs = 0.569; FDR-adjusted p = 0.031). First-void urine sampling using a first-void urine collection device was preferred over a clinician-collected cervical sample. And mostly, first-void urine sampling at home was favored over collection at the clinic or the general practitioner's office. First-void urine sampling is a highly preferred, non-invasive method that ensures good agreement in HPV DNA (copies) with reference cervical samples. It is particularly interesting as a screening technique to reach non-participants, and its clinical performance should be further evaluated.

Self-sampling with HPV mRNA analyses from vagina and urine compared with cervical samples

BACKGROUND

In order to increase coverage in the organized cervical screening program, self-sampling with HPV analyses has been suggested.

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to compare human papillomavirus (HPV) mRNA detection in vaginal and urine self-collected samples with clinician-taken cervical samples and the corresponding clinician-taken histological specimens.

STUDY DESIGN

Self-collected vaginal, urine and clinician-taken cervical samples were analyzed from 209 women with the Aptima mRNA assay (Hologic Inc, MA, USA). Cervical cytology, colposcopy, biopsy and/or the loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) were performed in every examination.

RESULTS

The sensitivity of the HPV mRNA test in detecting high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL)/adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS)/cancer cases was as follows: for the vaginal self-samples 85.5% (95% CI; 75.0-92.8), the urinary samples 44.8% (95% CI; 32.6-57.4), and for routine cytology 81.7% (95% CI; 70.7-89.9). For the clinician-taken cervical HPV samples the sensitivity of the HPV mRNA test in detecting HSIL/AIS/cancer was 100.0% (95% CI; 94.9-100.0). The specificity of the HPV mRNA was similar for the clinician-taken cervical HPV samples and the self-samples: 49.0% vs. 48.1%. The urinary HPV samples had a specificity of 61.9% and cytology had a specificity of 93.3%.

CONCLUSION

The sensitivity of the Aptima HPV mRNA test in detecting HSIL/AIS/cancer from vaginal self-samples was similar to that of routine cytology. The Aptima HPV mRNA vaginal self-sampling analysis may serve as a complement in screening programs.

Candidate biomarkers in the cervical vaginal fluid for the (self-)diagnosis of cervical precancer

Purpose

Despite improvement in vaccines against human papilloma virus (HPV), the causative agent of cervical cancer, screening women for cervical precancer will remain indispensable in the coming 30–40 years. A simple test that could be performed at home or at a doctor’s practice and that informs the woman whether she is at risk would significantly help make a broader group of patients who aware that they need medical treatment. Cervical vaginal fluid (CVF) is a body fluid that is very well suited for such a test.

Methods

Narrative review of cervical (pre)cancer candidate biomarkers from cervicovaginal fluid, is based on a detailed review of the literature. We will also discuss the possibilities that these biomarkers create for the development of a self-test or point-of-care test for cervical (pre)cancer.

Results

Several DNA, DNA methylation, miRNA, and protein biomarkers were identified in the cervical vaginal fluid; however, not all of these biomarkers are suited for development of a simple diagnostic assay.

Conclusions

Proteins, especially alpha-actinin-4, are most suited for development of a simple assay for cervical (pre)cancer. Accuracy of the test could further be improved by combination of several proteins or by combination with a new type of biomarker, e.g., originating from the cervicovaginal microbiome or metabolome.