Defining Optimal Triage Strategies for hrHPV Screen-Positive Women-An Evaluation of HPV 16/18 Genotyping, Cytology, and p16/Ki-67 Cytoimmunochemistry

Comparison of HPV-positive triage strategies combining extended genotyping with cytology or p16/ki67 dual staining in the Italian NTCC2 study

BACKGROUND

Each high-risk HPV genotype has different oncogenic potential, and the risk of CIN3+ varies according to genotype. We evaluated the performance of different strategies of HPV-positivity triage combining cytology, p16/ki67 dual staining (DS), and extended genotyping.

METHODS

Samples from 3180 consecutive women from the NTCC2 study (NCT01837693) positive for HPV DNA at primary screening, were retrospectively analyzed by the BD Onclarity HPV Assay, which allows extended genotyping. Genotypes were divided into three groups based on the risk of CIN3+. HPV DNA-positive women were followed up for 24 months or to clearance.

FINDINGS

Combining the three groups of genotypes with cytology or DS results we identify a group of women who need immediate colposcopy (PPV for CIN3+ from 7.8 to 20.1%), a group that can be referred to 1-year HPV retesting (PPV in those HPV-positive at retesting from 2.2 to 3.8), and a group with a very low 24-month CIN3+ risk, i.e. 0.4%, composed by women cytology or DS negative and positive for HPV 56/59/66 or 35/39/68 or negative with the Onclarity test, who can be referred to 3-year retesting.

INTERPRETATION

Among the baseline HPV DNA positive/cytology or DS negative women, the extended genotyping allows to stratify for risk of CIN3+, and to identify a group of women with a risk of CIN3+ so low in the next 24 months that they could be referred to a new screening round after 3 years.

FUNDING

Italian Ministry of Health (grant number RF-2009-1536040). Hologic-Genprobe, Roche Diagnostics, and Becton & Dickinson provided financial and non-financial support.

Correlation between P16/Ki67 in cervical cytology and diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2-3 in Thai women infected with high-risk types of human papillomavirus

OBJECTIVES

The addition of p16/Ki-67 dual immunostaining to human papilloma virus (HPV) screening tests has been shown to increase the detection rate of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of p16/Ki67 dual staining in the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 (CIN2+) in women with high-risk HPV infection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted between August 2017 and August 2019 at the Chulabhorn Hospital in Bangkok, Thailand. Women aged 20-70 years who underwent co-testing and tested positive for high-risk (HR) HPV (N = 215) were invited to participate in the study. P16/Ki67 testing was performed on residual cytological materials. Colposcopic biopsies were performed on all patients, and the results were correlated with positive or negative p16/Ki-67 test results.

RESULTS

The sensitivity and specificity of p16/Ki-67 dual staining in the detection of CIN2+ in the women with HR HPV infection were 74.4 % and 63.4 %, respectively. Compared with liquid-based cytology (LBC), p16/Ki67 cytology had similar sensitivity (p = 1.000) and specificity (p = 0.561) to LBC for detecting CIN2+.

CONCLUSION

In this study, p16/Ki67 dual staining in HPV triage demonstrated a test performance similar to that of LBC.

Performance of Human Gene EPB41L3 and HPV 16/18 Viral DNA Methylation to Triage hrHPV-Positive Women

More evidence from population-based cohort studies is required to confirm the application of methylation-based biomarkers in real-world settings. The cross-sectional and 24-month cumulative triage performance of a novel methylation assay targeting the host gene EPB41LE and HPV16/18 DNA L1/L2 regions among hrHPV-positive women was evaluated based on a population-based cohort study from China. Overall methylation positivity was 12.4% among hrHPV-positive women. Methylation-positive women had significantly higher risks of hrHPV persistence at 12M and 24M follow-up (RR12M = 1.9, 95%CI: 1.5-2.6 and RR24M = 1.7, 95%CI: 1.2-2.5). For CIN2+, cross-sectional triage sensitivity of methylation was similar to HPV16/18 (70.6% vs. 64.7%, pexact = 1.000), but was lower than cytology (94.1%), although not significantly (pexact = 0.213). The specificity (91.2%) of methylation was significantly higher than other triage methods (p < 0.001 for all). The longitudinal sensitivity of methylation over 24M follow-up was 56.0%, lower (but not significantly so) than HPV16/18 (64.0%, pexact = 0.688) and cytology (76.0%, pexact = 0.125). Methylation testing showed high positive predictive values for CIN2+ (41.4% at baseline, 50.0% at 24-month), while the CIN2+ risk of methylation negative women (cNPV) remained considerable (2.5% at baseline, 6.9% at 24-month). Study findings indicate that methylation has better specificity and predictive values for the presence or development of cervical precancer and might therefore be considered for the strategy of HPV screening and methylation triage followed by immediate treatment of triage-positive women and delayed follow-up of hrHPV-positive/methylation-negative women.

The Role of p16/Ki67 Dual Staining in Cervical Cancer Screening

Cervical cancer screening has enabled a decrease in the incidence and mortality of cervical cancer. Various screening modalities have been studied to date. In many countries, screening is still based on cervical cytology, where cervical cells obtained either on glass or in a liquid medium are examined under a microscope. However, the fact that the vast majority of cervical cancers are a result of persistent infection with high-risk human papillomaviruses (hr-HPV) has led to the implementation of primary HPV screening in many countries. Taking into consideration the fact that the majority of HPV infections are transient and do not cause cervical precancer, effective triage methods are needed to prevent an increase in colposcopy referrals. Among these, the most extensively investigated are HPV genotyping, HPV methylation, and p16/Ki67 dual staining. In this manuscript, we briefly summarize the current knowledge regarding different screening strategies for the prevention of cervical cancer, with a focus on p16/Ki67 dual staining. In addition, we provide an explanation regarding the rationale for the use of various screening modalities based on the molecular biology of cervical cancer and cervical precancerous lesions.

Overview of organisational methods of primary cervical lesion screening programmes that use human papillomavirus testing

Many factors need to be considered when planning and managing a screening programme for the early detection of cervical cancer (CC). A non-systematic international review of the organisation of CC screening using high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV-HR) testing, aimed at identifying the organisational methods of these programmes, was conducted with a view to supporting the future of the French system in the context of the transition to HPV-HR testing. In countries where HPV testing has been implemented or planned, the initial reflection process has provided an opportunity to rethink the previous (cytological) screening organisation. Despite considerable differences between countries, a nationally or regionally centralised organisational model appears to be the preferred option in most countries. This model is based on a national/regional structure tasked with all invitations, reminders, follow-up and coordination, centralised laboratories integrating both biology and pathology laboratories, and a unified information system integrated with routine health management tools used by health practitioners and nurses. Besides quality considerations, grouped purchasing makes it possible to implement a public procurement policy that includes price negotiations with suppliers. Discussions around the introduction of HPV testing have resulted in most countries reviewing or creating information systems and quality assurance processes. While the WHO seems to recommend the systematic use of vaginal self-sampling, very few countries have considered this option. More and more countries are planning to implement vaginal self-sampling, but no clear organisational model has emerged from the countries where it has been implemented to date.

Evaluation of CIN2/3 Lesion Regression in GynTect® DNA Methylation-Marker-Negative Patients in a Longitudinal Study

Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2/3 has a high spontaneous regression rate, especially among women ≤29 years of age. To reduce overtreatment, reliable prognostic biomarkers would be helpful. The main aim of this study was to analyze the negative predictive value of the methylation marker panel GynTect® for lesion regression. In this prospective, multicenter, longitudinal observational proof-of-concept study, women aged ≤29 years with histologically confirmed CIN2 (n = 24) or CIN3 (n = 36) were closely monitored without treatment for up to 24 or 12 months, respectively. The outcome was either regression, persistence, or progression of the lesion. For each patient, a single baseline sample (V0) for cytology, hrHPV detection and methylation analysis was taken. In a primary analysis, the negative predictive value (NPV) of a GynTect®-negative test result at V0 for regression was determined. We tested the null hypothesis NPV ≤ 70% against the alternative hypothesis NPV ≥ 90%. Twelve of the eighteen GynTect®-negative CIN2 patients showed regression (NPV = 67%, 90% CI 44-85%, p = 0.53). Of the 27 GynTect®-negative CIN3 lesions, 15 regressed (NPV = 56%, 90% CI 38-72%, p = 0.92). Although the majority of GynTect®-negative lesions regressed, the postulated NPV of ≥90% was not observed. Thus, the clinical relevance for an implementation of the GynTect® assay for patients undergoing watchful waiting remains questionable. Further studies with longer observation periods should be undertaken.

Human Papillomavirus: Challenges and Opportunities for the Control of Cervical Cancer

Viruses are the most abundant and genetically diverse entities on the planet, infect all life forms and have evolved with their hosts. To date, 263 viral species have been identified that infect humans, of which only seven are considered type I oncogenic. Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the main virus associated with cancer and is responsible for practically all cases of cervical carcinoma. Screening tests for early detection have been available since the 1960s. Undoubtedly, the entailment between knowledge of HPV biology and the natural history of cervical cancer has contributed to the significant advances that have been made for its prevention since the 21^st century, with the development of prophylactic vaccines and improved screening strategies. Therefore, it is possible to eradicate invasive cervical cancer as a worldwide public health problem, as proposed by the WHO with the 90-70-90 initiative based on vaccination coverage, screening, and treatment, respectively. In addition, the emerging knowledge of viral biology generates opportunities that will contribute to strengthening prevention and treatment strategies in HPV-associated neoplasms.

Performance of Cervical Screening a Decade Following HPV Vaccination: The Costa Rica Vaccine Trial

BACKGROUND

We investigated the impact of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination on the performance of cytology-based and HPV-based screening for detection of cervical precancer among women vaccinated as young adults and reaching screening age.

METHODS

A total of 4632 women aged 25-36 years from the Costa Rica HPV Vaccine Trial were included (2418 HPV-vaccinated as young adults and 2214 unvaccinated). We assessed the performance of cytology- and HPV-based cervical screening modalities in vaccinated and unvaccinated women to detect high-grade cervical precancers diagnosed over 4 years and the absolute risk of cumulative cervical precancers by screening results at entry.

RESULTS

We detected 95 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse (52 in unvaccinated and 43 in vaccinated women). HPV16/18/31/33/45 was predominant (69%) among unvaccinated participants, and HPV35/52/58/39/51/56/59/66/68 predominated (65%) among vaccinated participants. Sensitivity and specificity of cervical screening approaches were comparable between women vaccinated as young adults and unvaccinated women. Colposcopy referral rates were lower in the vaccinated group for HPV-based screening modalities, but the positive predictive value was comparable between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among women approaching screening ages, vaccinated as young adults, and with a history of intensive screening, the expected reduction in the positive predictive value of HPV testing, associated with dropping prevalence of HPV-associated lesions, was not observed. This is likely due to the presence of high-grade lesions associated with nonvaccine HPV types, which may be less likely to progress to cancer.

Clinical Performance of Triage Strategies for Hr-HPV-Positive Women; A Longitudinal Evaluation of Cytology, p16/K-67 Dual Stain Cytology, and HPV16/18 Genotyping

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the longitudinal performance of three options: HPV16/18 genotyping (HPV16/18), cytology (LBC), and p16/Ki-67 dual stain cytology (DS) for the triage of high-risk Human Papillomavirus-positive (Hr-HPV+) women within the cervical screening program in Scotland.

METHODS

Data were derived from a cohort of Hr-HPV+ women (n = 385) who participated in PaVDaG (Papillomavirus Dumfries and Galloway) study. Performance of triage strategies for detecting high-grade disease was assessed at 3 (in women <50 years) or 5 years (in women >50 years). Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and cNPV of each triage test were calculated for CIN2+ and CIN3+ when used singly or sequentially.

RESULTS

The sensitivity of LBC (≥ borderline), DS, and HPV 16/18 genotyping for the detection of CIN2+ was 62.7% (50.7-73.3), 77.7% (63.1-83.7), and 62.7% (50.7-73.3) with corresponding cNPVs of 10.9%, 8.4%, and 11.9%. The option with the highest sensitivity and lowest cNPV was HPV 16/18 genotyping followed by LBC of Hr-HPV other+ and then DS of the LBC negatives. This yielded sensitivity of 94.7% (86.2-98.3) and cNPV 2.7% for CIN2+. Triage performance was similar if women had tested Hr-HPV+ positive by vaginal self-sampling.

CONCLUSIONS

Two-step triage with HPV 16/18 genotyping before LBC (or DS) for Hr-HPV other+ women was associated with a lower risk of significant disease at follow-up compared with single triage approaches.

IMPACT

This study provides longitudinal performance data on triage strategies in Hr-HPV+ women and will be informative for the evolution of cervical screening programs that increasingly rely on molecular technologies.

Self-sampling as the principal modality for population based cervical screening: Five-year follow-up of the PaVDaG study

Self-sampling provides a powerful means to engage women in cervical screening. In the original Papillomavirus Dumfries and Galloway study (PaVDaG), we demonstrated cross-sectional similarity of high-risk human papillomavirus (Hr-HPV) testing on self-taken vaginal vs clinician-taken samples for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse (CIN2+). Few data exist on the longitudinal performance of self-sampling; we present longitudinal outcomes of PaVDaG. Routinely screened women provided a self-taken and a clinician-collected sample. Ninety-one percent of 5136 women from the original cohort completed a further screening round. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and complement of the negative predictive value of the Hr-HPV test on self-samples for detection of CIN2+ and CIN3+ up-to 5 years after testing were determined. Additionally, clinical accuracy of Hr-HPV testing on vaginal and clinician-collected samples was assessed. A total of 183 CIN2+ and 102 CIN3+ lesions were diagnosed during follow-up. Risk of CIN2+ and CIN3+ following an Hr-HPV negative self-sample was 0.6% and 0.2%, respectively, for up to 5 years after testing. The relative sensitivity for CIN3+ and specificity for ≤CIN1 of Hr-HPV testing on self-taken specimens was slightly lower vs clinician-collected samples: 0.95 (95% CI: 0.90-0.99; P^McN = .0625) and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.95-1.00; P^McN  = <.0000), respectively. The low risk of CIN2+ in women with Hr-HPV-self-sample(s) suggests, that the 3 to 5-year recall interval implemented in several cervical screening settings, based on clinician-taken samples, may be safe for self-samples. Future assessment will show if "universal" 5-year screening is appropriate for programs based on self-sampling.

Adjunctive testing by cytology, p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology or HPV16/18 E6 oncoprotein for the management of HPV16/18 screen-positive women

High-risk human papillomavirus type 16/18 (HPV16/18) genotyping is unable to accurately discriminate nonprogressive infections from those that will progress to cervical cancer. Our study aimed to assesses if additional testing either with liquid-based cytology (LBC) or the putative progression markers p16/Ki-67 and HPV16/18 E6 oncoprotein (E6) can improve the efficiency of HPV16/18 genotyping for triaging high-risk HPV (hrHPV)-positive women through better cancer risk stratification. Women attending colposcopy after positive HPV16/18 genotyping results within the Forwarding Research for Improved Detection and Access for Cervical Cancer Screening and Triage (FRIDA) hrHPV-based screening study in Tlaxcala, Mexico, underwent further testing with LBC, p16/Ki-67 dual-stained (DS) cytology and E6. We calculated measures of test performance for detecting histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+) and grade 3 or higher (CIN3+). A number of 475 (64.3%) of 739 HPV16/18-positive women had complete results for all tests. Triage positivity rates were 14.1%, 18.5% and 24.4%, for LBC, E6 and DS, respectively. Compared with LBC, DS had higher sensitivity (24.4% vs 60.0%) although lower specificity (87.0% vs 79.3%) for CIN3+ (P < .001), whereas E6 had a sensitivity of 37.8% and a specificity of 83.5%. No invasive cancer was missed by DS or E6, but 75% were in normal cytology. DS test was associated with nearly 75% reduction of colposcopy referrals compared with the direct referral of all HPV16/18-positive women, giving the least number of colposcopies (n = 4.3) per CIN3+ detected. We show that adjunctive testing of HPV16/18-positive women with DS may greatly reduce unnecessary colposcopy referrals within HPV-based screening employing HPV16/18 genotyping while retaining acceptable sensitivity for CIN2+ and CIN3+.

Effective methylation triage of HPV positive women with abnormal cytology in a middle-income country

The S5-methylation test, an alternative to cytology and HPV16/18 genotyping to triage high-risk HPV-positive (hrHPV+) women, has not been widely validated in low-middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared S5 to HPV16/18 and cytology to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia Grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and CIN3+ in hrHPV+ women selected from a randomized pragmatic trial of 2661 Colombian women with an earlier-borderline abnormal cytology. We included all hrHPV+ CIN2 and CIN3+ cases (n = 183) age matched to 183 Collapse

Key Words

• DNA methylation
• HPV test
• biomarkers
• cervical cancer
• triage

Collapse

MESH Headings

• Adult
• Aged
• Atypical Squamous Cells of the Cervix/pathology
• Atypical Squamous Cells of the Cervix/virology
• Colombia
• DNA Methylation
• Early Detection of Cancer/methods
• Female
• Genes, Viral/genetics
• Humans
• Middle Aged
• Papillomavirus Infections/complications
• Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis
• Sensitivity and Specificity
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/pathology
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology
• Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/diagnosis
• Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/pathology
• Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/virology

Collapse

Grants

• 16891 Cancer Research UK
• 27046 Cancer Research UK
• C569/A10404 Cancer Research UK

Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Arianis Tatiana Ramírez Infection and Cancer Group, School of Medicine and Corporación Académica para el Estudio de Patologías Tropicales, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín, Colombia
Gloria Inés Sánchez Infection and Cancer Group, School of Medicine and Corporación Académica para el Estudio de Patologías Tropicales, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín, Colombia
Belinda Nedjai Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts and the London School of Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
María Cecilia Agudelo Infection and Cancer Group, School of Medicine and Corporación Académica para el Estudio de Patologías Tropicales, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín, Colombia
Adam R Brentnall Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts and the London School of Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
Kate Cuschieri Queen's Medical Research Institute of The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
Kelly Melisa Castañeda Infection and Cancer Group, School of Medicine and Corporación Académica para el Estudio de Patologías Tropicales, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín, Colombia
Jack Cuzick Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts and the London School of Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
Attila T Lorincz Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts and the London School of Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK

Collapse

Diagnostic accuracy of cervical cancer screening and screening-triage strategies among women living with HIV-1 in Burkina Faso and South Africa: A cohort study

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer screening strategies using visual inspection or cytology may have suboptimal diagnostic accuracy for detection of precancer in women living with HIV (WLHIV). The optimal screen and screen-triage strategy, age to initiate, and frequency of screening for WLHIV remain unclear. This study evaluated the sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of different cervical cancer strategies in WLHIV in Africa.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

WLHIV aged 25-50 years attending HIV treatment centres in Burkina Faso (BF) and South Africa (SA) from 5 December 2011 to 30 October 2012 were enrolled in a prospective evaluation study of visual inspection using acetic acid (VIA) or visual inspection using Lugol's iodine (VILI), high-risk human papillomavirus DNA test (Hybrid Capture 2 [HC2] or careHPV), and cytology for histology-verified high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+/CIN3+) at baseline and endline, a median 16 months later. Among 1,238 women (BF: 615; SA: 623), median age was 36 and 34 years (p < 0.001), 28.6% and 49.6% ever had prior cervical cancer screening (p < 0.001), and 69.9% and 64.2% were taking ART at enrolment (p = 0.045) in BF and SA, respectively. CIN2+ prevalence was 5.8% and 22.4% in BF and SA (p < 0.001), respectively. VIA had low sensitivity for CIN2+ (44.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 36.9%-52.7%) and CIN3+ (56.1%, 95% CI 43.3%-68.3%) in both countries, with specificity for ≤CIN1 of 78.7% (95% CI 76.0%-81.3%). HC2 had sensitivity of 88.8% (95% CI 82.9%-93.2%) for CIN2+ and 86.4% (95% CI 75.7%-93.6%) for CIN3+. Specificity for ≤CIN1 was 55.4% (95% CI 52.2%-58.6%), and screen positivity was 51.3%. Specificity was higher with a restricted genotype (HPV16/18/31/33/35/45/52/58) approach (73.5%, 95% CI 70.6%-76.2%), with lower screen positivity (33.7%), although there was lower sensitivity for CIN3+ (77.3%, 95% CI 65.3%-86.7%). In BF, HC2 was more sensitive for CIN2+/CIN3+ compared to VIA/VILI (relative sensitivity for CIN2+ = 1.72, 95% CI 1.28-2.32; CIN3+: 1.18, 95% CI 0.94-1.49). Triage of HC2-positive women with VIA/VILI reduced the number of colposcopy referrals, but with loss in sensitivity for CIN2+ (58.1%) but not for CIN3+ (84.6%). In SA, cytology high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or greater (HSIL+) had best combination of sensitivity (CIN2+: 70.1%, 95% CI 61.3%-77.9%; CIN3+: 80.8%, 95% CI 67.5%-90.4%) and specificity (81.6%, 95% CI 77.6%-85.1%). HC2 had similar sensitivity for CIN3+ (83.0%, 95% CI 70.2%-91.9%) but lower specificity compared to HSIL+ (42.7%, 95% CI 38.4%-47.1%; relative specificity = 0.57, 95% CI 0.52-0.63), resulting in almost twice as many referrals. Compared to HC2, triage of HC2-positive women with HSIL+ resulted in a 40% reduction in colposcopy referrals but was associated with some loss in sensitivity. CIN2+ incidence over a median 16 months was highest among VIA baseline screen-negative women (2.2%, 95% CI 1.3%-3.7%) and women who were baseline double-negative with HC2 and VIA (2.1%, 95% CI 1.3%-3.5%) and lowest among HC2 baseline screen-negative women (0.5%, 95% CI 0.1%-1.8%). Limitations of our study are that WLHIV included in the study may not reflect a contemporary cohort of WLHIV initiating ART in the universal ART era and that we did not evaluate HPV tests available in study settings today.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort study among WLHIV in Africa, a human papillomavirus (HPV) test targeting 14 high-risk (HR) types had higher sensitivity to detect CIN2+ compared to visual inspection but had low specificity, although a restricted genotype approach targeting 8 HR types decreased the number of unnecessary colposcopy referrals. Cytology HSIL+ had optimal performance for CIN2+/CIN3+ detection in SA. Triage of HPV-positive women with HSIL+ maintained high specificity but with some loss in sensitivity compared to HC2 alone.

Clinical relevance of partial HPV16/18 genotyping in stratifying HPV-positive women attending routine cervical cancer screening: a population-based cohort study

Objective

To evaluate partial HPV16/18 genotyping as a possible biomarker to select women attending HPV‐based cervical cancer screening at higher risk to be referred to colposcopy.

Design

Population‐based cohort study.

Setting

Organised cervical cancer screening programmes (Italy).

Population

Women with high‐risk HPV infection (period: 2015–2019).

Methods

We analysed the association between partial HPV16/18 genotyping, cytology triage and histologically confirmed diagnosis of high‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN3⁺) lesions.

Main outcome measures

Detection rate (DR) and positive predictive value (PPV) for histologically confirmed CIN3⁺ (any episode in the 2 years after baseline); sensitivity for CIN3⁺ and number of colposcopies needed for lesion detection.

Results

The study included 145 437 women screened with HPV testing by the clinically validated COBAS 4800 HPV assay (Roche). Overall, 9601 (6.6%) women were HPV⁺ at baseline; HPV16 and HPV18 were present in 1865 and 594 samples, respectively. The cumulative (baseline plus 1‐year repeat) cytology positivity was 42.8% and high‐grade cytology was significantly higher (P < 0.0001) among women with HPV16 infection at baseline (15.2%). The cumulative CIN3⁺ DR for women with HPV16, HPV18 and other HPV‐type infections was 9.8%, 3.4% and 1.8%, respectively.

Conclusions

Partial HPV16 genotyping may play a role in triage, whereas HPV18 seems to behave much more similarly to the other HPV types and does not provide additional stratification. HPV16 genotyping combined with high‐grade cytology can be envisaged as a triage biomarker in cervical screening to maximise CIN3⁺ detection while minimising colposcopy at baseline or 1‐year repeat.

Tweetable abstract

HPV16 genotyping combined with high‐grade cytology can be used as triage biomarker for CIN3⁺ in HPV‐positive women.

HPV16 genotyping combined with high‐grade cytology can be used as a triage biomarker for CIN3⁺ in HPV‐positive women.

Determinants of p16/Ki-67 adequacy and positivity in HPV-positive women from a screening population

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to describe the determinants of adequacy and positivity of the p16/Ki-67 assay in a human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive screening population enrolled within the New Technologies for Cervical Cancer 2 (NTCC2) study.

METHODS

ThinPrep slides were immunostained for p16/Ki-67; each slide had 3 reports from different laboratories. The authors included population-related, sampling-related/staining-related, and interpretation-related variables in the analyses. Adequacy and positivity proportions were stratified by variables of interest. Univariate and multivariate logistic models were used to identify determinants of adequacy and positivity.

RESULTS

In total, 3100 consecutive HPV-positive cases were analyzed. Because every slide was interpreted by 3 centers, 9300 reports were obtained, including 905 (9.7%) that were inadequate and 2632 (28.3%) that were positive. The percentage of cases in which all 3 reports were inadequate increased with increasing age of the women and with inadequate cytology. The highest percentage of adequacy in all 3 reports and of cases with all 3 reports positive was observed in specimens from women who had grade ≥2 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+), atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or more severe (ASC-US+) cytology, or mRNA positivity. The number of inadequate reports was significantly associated with increasing age, inadequate cytology, mRNA negativity, and scant cellularity. A positive p16/Ki-67 report was associated with an ASC-US+ result and with a positive mRNA result in cases both with and without CIN2+ but was associated with an HPV type 16 and/or 18 infection only in CIN2+ cases. The presence of CIN2+ was strongly associated with dual staining positivity.

CONCLUSIONS

The interpretation of p16/Ki-67 results may be influenced by several different variables, all of which are part of the steps in the procedure, and by the characteristics of the screened population.

Combined use of cytology, p16 immunostaining and genotyping for triage of women positive for high-risk human papillomavirus at primary screening

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is very sensitive for primary cervical screening but has low specificity. Triage tests that improve specificity but maintain high sensitivity are needed. Women enrolled in the experimental arm of Phase 2 of the New Technologies for Cervical Cancer randomized controlled cervical screening trial were tested for high-risk HPV (hrHPV) and referred to colposcopy if positive. hrHPV-positive women also had HPV genotyping (by polymerase chain reaction with GP5+/GP6+ primers and reverse line blotting), immunostaining for p16 overexpression and cytology. We computed sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) for different combinations of tests and determined potential hierarchical ordering of triage tests. A number of 1,091 HPV-positive women had valid tests for cytology, p16 and genotyping. Ninety-two of them had cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN2+) histology and 40 of them had CIN grade 3+ (CIN3+) histology. The PPV for CIN2+ was >10% in hrHPV-positive women with positive high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (61.3%), positive low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL+) (18.3%) and positive atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (14.8%) cytology, p16 positive (16.7%) and, hierarchically, for infections by HPV33, 16, 35, 59, 31 and 52 (in decreasing order). Referral of women positive for either p16 or LSIL+ cytology had 97.8% sensitivity for CIN2+ and women negative for both of these had a 3-year CIN3+ risk of 0.2%. Similar results were seen for women being either p16 or HPV16/33 positive. hrHPV-positive women who were negative for p16 and cytology (LSIL threshold) had a very low CIN3+ rate in the following 3 years. Recalling them after that interval and referring those positive for either test to immediate colposcopy seem to be an efficient triage strategy. The same applies to p16 and HPV16.

Laser-assisted rapid evaporative ionisation mass spectrometry (LA-REIMS) as a metabolomics platform in cervical cancer screening

Background

The introduction of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing as part of primary cervical screening is anticipated to improve sensitivity, but also the number of women who will screen positive. Reflex cytology is the preferred triage test in most settings but has limitations including moderate diagnostic accuracy, lack of automation, inter-observer variability and the need for clinician-collected sample. Novel, objective and cost-effective approaches are needed.

Methods

In this study, we assessed the potential use of an automated metabolomic robotic platform, employing the principle of laser-assisted Rapid Evaporative Ionisation Mass Spectrometry (LA-REIMS) in cervical cancer screening.

Findings

In a population of 130 women, LA-REIMS achieved 94% sensitivity and 83% specificity (AUC: 91.6%) in distinguishing women testing positive (n = 65) or negative (n = 65) for hrHPV. We performed further analysis according to disease severity with LA-REIMS achieving sensitivity and specificity of 91% and 73% respectively (AUC: 86.7%) in discriminating normal from high-grade pre-invasive disease.

Interpretation

This automated high-throughput technology holds promise as a low-cost and rapid test for cervical cancer screening and triage. The use of platforms like LA-REIMS has the potential to further improve the accuracy and efficiency of the current national screening programme.

Funding

Work was funded by the MRC Imperial Confidence in Concept Scheme, Imperial College Healthcare Charity, British Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, National Research Development and Innovation Office of Hungary, Waters corporation and NIHR BRC.

Evaluation of six methylation markers derived from genome-wide screens for detection of cervical precancer and cancer

Aim: To evaluate the triage performance of six host-cell DNA methylation markers derived from two genome-wide discovery screens for detection of cervical precancer (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3 [CIN]) and cancer. Materials & methods: Human papillomavirus-positive cervical scrapes of controls (≤CIN1; n = 352) and women diagnosed with CIN3 (n = 175) or cervical cancer (n = 50) were analyzed for methylation of ASCL1, LHX8, ST6GALNAC5, GHSR, SST and ZIC1. Results: Methylation levels increased significantly with disease severity (all markers p < 0.001). Three markers (ASCL1, LHX8, ZIC1) showed receiver operating characteristic curves with area under the curve >0.800 after leave-one-out cross-validation. Bi-marker panel ASCL1/LHX8 had highest area under the curve (0.882), and detected 83.4% of CIN3 and all cervical cancers at specificity of 82.4%. Conclusion: All six methylation markers showed an equivalent, high performance for the triage of human papillomavirus-positive women using cervical scrapes with complementarity between markers.

Evidence based appropriate triage strategies for implementing high risk HPV as primary technology in cervical cancer screening

Primary cervical cancer screening by HPV testing for high risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) is expected to replace cytology-based programs in many parts of the world. Its high sensitivity and negative predictive value permit longer screening intervals up to beyond five years. However, low positive predictive value can lead to unnecessary referrals and overtreatment since most hrHPV infections are transient and will not develop disease. Therefore risk stratification is needed to effectively triage and identify women among the hrHPV positives, who are at an increased risk of cervical (pre)cancer who need further diagnostic evaluation to decide on further management. Several triage strategies like HPV16/18 genotyping, p16/Ki67 dual staining and DNA methylation markers (CADM1, MAL and miR-124-2) have been evaluated to determine suitable triage options. Triage with p16/Ki-67 dual-stain provided better long-term risk stratification than cytology with significant reduction in cumulative 5 years CIN3+ risk in p16/Ki-67 negative women. DNA methylation assays have shown higher specificity than cytology and higher sensitivity than HPV16/18 genotyping with added advantages of reproducibility and application on self-collected samples. Based on current evidence, Pap cytology with or without additional HPV16/18 genotyping remains the most recommended triage strategies for primary HPV screening. Other strategies will need more longitudinal studies to provide evidence of risk reduction in test negative results. WHO recommends Visual Inspection with Acetic Acid (VIA) for triaging HPV-positive women in LMIC settings. An optimal triage strategy that can be integrated with primary HPV screening should be able to segregate and reassure the large majority of women who are at very low risk of cervical cancer.

The application of BMRT-HPV viral load to secondary screening strategies for cervical cancer

Objective

Evaluate the significance of BMRT HPV assay viral load and its performance for secondary screening.

Methods

BMRT-HPV reports type-specific viral loads/10,000 cells. We tested 1,495 physician collected, stored specimens from Chinese Multiple-center Screening Trial (CHIMUST), that were positive by Cobas, SeqHPV, and/or Cytology (≥LSIL); and 2,990 age matched, negatives in a nested case control study. We explored the relationship between BMRT HR-HPV viral load and cervical lesions, determined alternative CIN2+ cut-points by ROC curve, and evaluated BMRT HR-HPV for primary / secondary cervical cancer screening.

Results

The viral loads of HPV16/18, 12 other subtypes HR-HPV and 14 HR-HPV were statistically different in all grades of cervical lesions (P<0.05, among which HPV16, 33 and 58 showed the strongest relationship (P<0.01). The viral load of HR-HPV also increased with the grade of cervical lesions (P<0.05). The sensitivity for CIN2+ and CIN3+ of BMRT was comparable to Cobas (92.6% vs 94.3%, 100% vs 100%, P>0.05), specificity was higher than Cobas (84.8% vs 83.3%, 83.5% vs 82.0%, P<0.001). When using HPV16/18 viral load(log cut-point ≥3.2929), plus the viral-load of 12 other subtypes (log cut-point ≥3.9625) as secondary triage, compared with Cobas HPV16/18+ plus cytology ≥ASC-US as triage, the sensitivities for CIN2+ and CIN3+ were similar (P>0.05). However, the BMRT HR-HPV viral load combined with subtypes did not require cytology.

Conclusion

BMRT is as sensitive as Cobas4800 for primary cervical cancer screening. BMRT HR-HPV viral load combined with subtypes can be used as a secondary strategy for cervical cancer screening, especially for areas with insufficient cytological resources.

How to triage HPV positive cases: Results of four million females

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the Turkey's nationwide HPV DNA screening program on the basis of first 4 million screened women.

METHODS

Women over age 30 were invited for screening via HPV DNA and conventional cytology. Single visit screen strategy was used to collect for both screening and triage (extended genotyping and conventional pap-smear).

RESULTS

A total of 4,099,230 patients had attended to HPV DNA cancer screening. 4.39% were found to be HPV DNA positive. The most common HPV type was 16, followed by 51, 31, 52, 56 and 18 at all age intervals and geographic regions. Cytology results were reported as "normal" in (69.2%), "inadequate sampling" in (16.6%) and as "abnormal (≥ASC-US)" in the remaining. Current Turkish screening with HPV DNA (referral to colposcopy with HPV 16 or 18 or any smear abnormality ≥ASC-US) gives overall PPV of 24.3% for ≥CIN2. Only Pap-Smear triage revealed PPV of 26.4% for ≥ASC-US thresholds. Comparison of different triage methods for ≥CIN2+ according to different HPV genotype revealed a PPV of 32,6% for HPV 16; 15,3% for HPV 18. This figure was 34.4%, 19.3%, 15.3% and 14.0% for HPV 33, 31, 45 and 35; respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study involves the largest series in the world summarizing a real-world experience with primary HPV DNA screening and triage with a single visit. The results show the feasibility and applicability of such screening method in developing countries with acceptable colposcopy referral rates. Among triage tests, only pap-smear seems to be effective without a need for extended genotyping.

Interlaboratory concordance of p16/Ki-67 dual-staining interpretation in HPV-positive women in a screening population

BACKGROUND

p16/Ki-67 dual staining is a candidate biomarker for triaging human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive women. Reproducibility is needed for adopting a test for screening. This study assessed interlaboratory reproducibility in HPV-positive women.

METHODS

All women positive for HPV from the Italian New Technologies for Cervical Cancer 2 study, were included in this study. ThinPrep slides were immunostained for p16/Ki-67 in 4 laboratories and were interpreted in 7 laboratories. Each slide had 3 reports from different laboratories. Slides were classified as valuable or inadequate, and valuable slides were classified as positive (at least 1 double-stained cell) or negative. Interlaboratory reproducibility was evaluated with κ values.

RESULTS

Overall, we obtained 9300 reports for 3100 cases; 905 reports (9.7%) were inadequate. The overall adequacy concordance was poor (κ = 0.224; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.183-0.263). The overall positivity concordance was moderate (κ = 0.583; 95% CI, 0.556-0.610). Of the 176 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2+ (CIN-2+) lesions found in HPV DNA-positive women, 158 had a valid result: 107 were positive in all 3 reports (sensitivity for CIN-2+, 67.7%; 95% CI, 59.8%-74.9%), 23 were positive in 2 reports (sensitivity of the majority report, 82.3%; 95% CI, 75.4%-87.9%), and 15 were positive in 1 report (sensitivity of at least 1 positive result, 91.8%; 95% CI, 86.3%-95.5%). Thirteen CIN-2+ cases were negative in all 3 reports. The overall positivity concordance in CIN-2+ samples was κ = 0.487 (95% CI, 0.429-0.534), whereas in the non-CIN-2+ samples, it was κ = 0.558 (95% CI, 0.528-0.588).

CONCLUSIONS

The p16/Ki-67 assay showed poor reproducibility for adequacy and good reproducibility for positivity comparable to that of cervical cytology. Nevertheless, the low reproducibility does not affect the sensitivity for CIN-2+.

Performance of HPV Genotyping Combined with p16/Ki-67 in Detection of Cervical Precancer and Cancer Among HPV-Positive Chinese Women

Women with positive high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) need efficient triage testing to determine colposcopy referrals. Triage strategies of combining p16/Ki-67 with extended HPV genotyping were evaluated in this study. In total, 899 women attending cervical cancer screening program and 858 women referred to colposcopy from five hospitals were recruited. All the participants were tested by HPV assays and p16/Ki-67 dual staining. Colposcopy and biopsy were performed on women with any abnormal results. HPV genotypes were divided into four strata (HPV16/18, HPV31/33/58/52, HPV45/59/56/66, and HPV51/39/68/35) according to their risks for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse (CIN3+). The positive rates of four genotype strata among CIN3+ women were 3.47% (HPV51/39/68/35), 7.73% (HPV45/59/56/66), 14.7% (HPV31/33/58/52), and 78.1% (HPV16/18), respectively (P _trend < 0.001). The positive rates of p16/Ki-67 increased with the elevation of HPV risk hierarchical from 65.0% in HPV51/39/68/35-positive women to 88.0% in HPV16/18-positive women (P _trend < 0.001). p16/Ki-67 was an effective method for risk stratification of CIN2+ among HPV31/33/58/52- and HPV45/59/56/66-positive women [HPV31/33/58/52: OR for dual stain+ (OR_DS+) of 26.7 (16.8-42.4) and OR for dual stain- (OR_DS-) of 3.87(1.89-7.91); HPV45/59/56/66: OR_DS+ of 10.3(5.05-21.0) and OR_DS- of 1.27(0.38-4.26)]. The combination of HPV16/18 genotyping and p16/Ki-67 triage of HPV31/33/58/52/45/59/56/66-positive women resulted in a lower referral rate (40.1% vs. 41.3%; P < 0.001) as compared with triage of 12 other HPV-positive women with p16/Ki-67, although sensitivity and specificity levels for these two strategies were identical. Combining HPV extended genotyping and p16/Ki-67 can be considered as a promising strategy for cervical cancer screening and triage.

Bayesian analysis of baseline risk of CIN2 and ≥CIN3 by HPV genotype in a European referral cohort

Whereas HPV16 and HPV18 have been the focus in current risk-based cervical cancer screening algorithms using HPV genotype information, mounting evidence suggests that oncogenic HPV types such as HPV31, 33, 52 and 58 pose a ≥CIN3 risk equivalent to or greater than that of HPV18, and the combined risk of HPV31 and HPV33 rivals even HPV16 in women above 30 years of age. Here, we evaluate the baseline risk of CIN2 and CIN3 by genotype in a colposcopy referral population from Denmark and Italy. In total, 655 women were enrolled upon a referral to colposcopy after a positive screening sample. All samples were HPV analyzed using Onclarity HPV assay with extended genotyping and combined with the histology outcomes, a Bayesian probability modeling was used to determine the risk per genotype assessed. The combined data for this referral population showed that the ≥CIN2 risk of HPV16 was 69.1%, HPV31 at 63.3%, HPV33/58 at 52.7%, HPV18 at 46.6% and HPV52 at 40.8%. For ≥CIN3, the risks were 44.3%, 38.5%, 36.8%, 30.9% and 16.8% for HPV16, HPV31, HPV18, HPV33/58 and HPV52, respectively, indicating that the baseline risk of disease arising from HPV16 is, not surprisingly, the highest among the oncogenic HPV genotypes. We find that the HPV genotype-specific ≥CIN2 and ≥CIN3 risk-patterns are so distinct that, for example, 35/39/68 and 56/59/66 should be considered only for low intensive follow-up, thereby proposing active use of this information in triage strategies for screening HPV-positive women.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Conventional Cell Blocks Along with p16INK4 and Ki67 Biomarkers as Triage Tests in Resource-poor Organized Cervical Cancer Screening Programs

Background:

Liquid based cytology with dual biomarkers has improved sensitivity and specificity in detecting high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). In low resource settings, especially in organized camps, LBC is costly and immunohistochemistry on conventional pap smears is difficult to standardize with consumption of lots of reagents. In present study, to improve the accuracy of conventional pap smears and reduce the cost of biomarker testing, we evaluated conventional cell blocks (CCBs) preparations with biomarkers to detect high-grade CIN in resource-poor organized screening programs. We also studied feasibility of using CCB as primary screening test.

Material and Methods:

A total of 350 participants were included in the cross-sectional evaluation of the screening tests. A conventional Papanicolaou (Pap) smear was obtained, and another sample was then collected and placed in 10% neutral buffered formalin for CB preparation. All abnormal Pap tests and CBs were stained for the biomarkers p16INK4a and Ki67. Histopathology with p16INK4a expression was considered the gold standard. Diagnostic tests were compared using MacNemar’s test and receiver operating curves were plotted.

Results:

The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of CCB cytology, CB + p16 cytology and CB + p16Ki67 cytology for detecting CIN2+ lesions were 85.71%, 100%, 97.44%; 100%, 93.75%, 94.87%; and 85.71%, 100%, 97.44%, respectively. The Ki67 index could further categorize low grade lesions into lesions with low proliferative index and with high proliferative index (Pearson chi-square p value <0.001).

Conclusion:

If CB preparation is standardized, CCB cytology with biomarkers can have better diagnostic accuracy than conventional cytology, can classify low grade lesions likely to progress and can be used in field settings as primary screening test.

Budget impact analysis of cervical cancer screening in Portugal: comparison of cytology and primary HPV screening strategies

Background

Primary Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) testing is the currently recommended cervical cancer (CxCa) screening strategy by the Portuguese Society of Gynecology (SPG) clinical consensus. However, primary HPV testing has not yet been adopted by the Portuguese organized screening programs. This modelling study compares clinical benefits and costs of replacing the current practice, namely cytology with ASCUS HPV triage, with 2 comparative strategies: 1) HPV (pooled) test with cytology triage, or 2) HPV test with 16/18 genotyping and cytology triage, in organized CxCa screenings in Portugal.

Methods

A budget impact model compares screening performance, clinical outcomes and budget impact of the 3 screening strategies. A hypothetical cohort of 2,078,039 Portuguese women aged 25–64 years old women is followed for two screening cycles. Screening intervals are 3 years for cytology and 5 years for the HPV strategies. Model inputs include epidemiological, test performance and medical cost data. Clinical impacts are assessed with the numbers of CIN2–3 and CxCa detected. Annual costs, budget impact and cost of detecting one CIN2+ were calculated from a public healthcare payer’s perspective.

Results

HPV testing with HPV16/18 genotyping and cytology triage (comparator 2) shows the best clinical outcomes at the same cost as comparator 1 and is the most cost-effective CxCa screening strategy in the Portuguese context. Compared to screening with cytology, it would reduce annual CxCa incidence from 9.3 to 5.3 per 100,000, and CxCa mortality from 2.7 to 1.1 per 100,000. Further, it generates substantial cost savings by reducing the annual costs by €9.16 million (− 24%). The cost of detecting CIN2+ decreases from the current €15,845 to €12,795. On the other hand, HPV (pooled) test with cytology triage (comparator 1) reduces annual incidence of CxCa to 6.9 per 100,000 and CxCa mortality to 1.6 per 100,000, with a cost of €13,227 per CIN2+ detected with annual savings of €9.36 million (− 24%). The savings are mainly caused by increasing the length of routine screening intervals from three to five years.

Conclusion

The results support current clinical recommendations to replace cytology with HPV with 16/18 genotyping with cytology triage as screening algorithm.

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.

Reliable identification of women with CIN3+ using hrHPV genotyping and methylation markers in a cytology-screened referral population

Cervical screening aims to identify women with high‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesion/cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2‐3 (HSIL/CIN2‐3) or invasive cervical cancer (ICC). Identification of women with severe premalignant lesions or ICC (CIN3+) could ensure their rapid treatment and prevent overtreatment. We investigated high‐risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) detection with genotyping and methylation of FAM19A4/miR124‐2 for detection of CIN3+ in 538 women attending colposcopy for abnormal cytology. All women had an additional cytology with hrHPV testing (GP5+/6+‐PCR‐EIA+), genotyping (HPV16/18, HPV16/18/31/45), and methylation analysis (FAM19A4/miR124‐2) and at least one biopsy. CIN3+ detection was studied overall and in women <30 (n = 171) and ≥30 years (n = 367). Positivity for both rather than just one methylation markers increased in CIN3, and all ICC was positive for both. Overall sensitivity and specificity for CIN3+ were, respectively, 90.3% (95%CI 81.3–95.2) and 31.8% (95%CI 27.7–36.1) for hrHPV, 77.8% (95%CI 66.9–85.8) and 69.3% (95%CI 65.0–73.3) for methylation biomarkers and 93.1% (95%CI 84.8–97.0) and 49.4% (95%CI 44.8–53.9) for combined HPV16/18 and/or methylation positivity. For CIN3, hrHPV was found in 90.9% (95%CI 81.6–95.8), methylation positivity in 75.8% (95%CI 64.2–84.5) and HPV16/18 and/or methylation positivity in 92.4% (95%CI 83.5–96.7). In women aged ≥30, the sensitivity of combined HPV16/18 and methylation was increased (98.2%, 95%CI 90.6–99.7) with a specificity of 46.3% (95%CI 40.8–51.9). Combination of HPV16/18 and methylation analysis was very sensitive and offered improved specificity for CIN3+, opening the possibility of rapid treatment for these women and follow‐up for women with potentially regressive, less advanced, HSIL/CIN2 lesions.

What's new?

Reliable triage of women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) is of high priority as not all lesions progress to invasive carcinoma. Here the authors show that combining the methylation status of tumor suppressor genes FAM19A4 and miR124‐2 with genotyping for high‐risk human papillomavirus results in a highly sensitive and moderately specific triage strategy that identifies women with CIN lesions likely to need rapid treatment. The authors recommend clinical evaluation of the strategy in prospective studies.

Eurogin roadmap 2017: Triage strategies for the management of HPV-positive women in cervical screening programs

Cervical cancer screening will rely, increasingly, on HPV testing as a primary screen. The requirement for triage tests which can delineate clinically significant infection is thus prescient. In this EUROGIN 2017 roadmap, justification behind the most evidenced triages is outlined, as are challenges for implementation. Cytology is the triage with the most follow-up data; the existence of an HR-HPV-positive, cytology-negative group presents a challenge and retesting intervals for this group (and choice of retest) require careful consideration. Furthermore, cytology relies on subjective skills and while adjunctive dual-staining with p16/Ki67 can mitigate inter-operator/-site disparities, clinician-taken samples are required. Comparatively, genotyping and methylation markers are objective and are applicable to self-taken samples, offering logistical advantages including in low and middle income settings. However, genotyping may have diminishing returns in immunised populations and type(s) included must balance absolute risk for disease to avoid low specificity. While viral and cellular methylation markers show promise, more prospective data are needed in addition to refinements in automation. Looking forward, systems that detect multiple targets concurrently such as next generation sequencing platforms will inform the development of triage tools. Additionally, multistep triage strategies may be beneficial provided they do not create complex, unmanageable pathways. Inevitably, the balance of risk to cost(s) will be key in decision making, although defining an acceptable risk will likely differ between settings. Finally, given the significant changes to cervical screening and the variety of triage strategies, appropriate education of both health care providers and the public is essential.