Image-guided ThinPrep Papanicolaou tests and cotesting with high-risk human papillomavirus in women aged 30 years and older in a low-risk private practice population

Three-year risk of high-grade CIN for women aged 30 years or older who undergo baseline Pap cytology and HPV co-screening

BACKGROUND

Papanicolaou (Pap) cytology and high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA cotesting for women aged ≥30 years are recommended for the prevention of cervical cancer. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy of this cotesting for predicting the risk of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3 (CIN3) during a 3-year follow-up period.

METHODS

A retrospective database search identified women aged ≥30 years who had baseline HPV and Pap cytology cotesting results in 2007 or 2008 and for whom 3-year follow-up results were available. The cumulative 3-year risks of developing CIN-3 were calculated.

RESULTS

The 3-year follow-up data after baseline Pap/HPV cotesting were available for 1986 women (mean age, 53 years). Of the 1668 women who had a baseline Pap-negative (Pap-)/HPV- cotesting result, 1561 (93.6%) had a follow-up Pap cytology result that was negative for intraepithelial lesions or malignancy. Of the 1530 women who had follow-up Pap/HPV cotesting, 1504 (98.3%) had a Pap-/HPV- result. The 3-year cumulative risk of developing CIN-3 was found to be highest for women with a baseline Pap-positive (Pap+)/HPV+ cotesting result (12.5%); the risk of CIN-3 was lower in those with a Pap-/HPV+ result (1.5%; P = .0032) or a Pap-/HPV- result (0.06%; P<.0001). The 3-year cumulative risk of CIN-3 was found to be significantly greater for women with an HPV+ result (4.8%) compared with those with an HPV- result (0.06%; P<.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Pap cytology and HPV cotesting are valuable for stratifying CIN-3 risk. Pap cytology and HPV co-screening at a 3-year screening interval appears to carry a low risk of CIN-3 for women who have a baseline Pap-/HPV- cotesting result. Cancer Cytopathol 2017;125:644-51. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Human papillomavirus testing versus repeat cytology for triage of minor cytological cervical lesions

BACKGROUND

Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) and low-grade squamous intra-epithelial lesions (LSIL) are minor lesions of the cervical epithelium, detectable by cytological examination of cells collected from the surface of the cervix of a woman.Usually, women with ASCUS and LSIL do not have cervical (pre-) cancer, however a substantial proportion of them do have underlying high-grade cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia (CIN, grade 2 or 3) and so are at increased risk for developing cervical cancer. Therefore, accurate triage of women with ASCUS or LSIL is required to identify those who need further management.This review evaluates two ways to triage women with ASCUS or LSIL: repeating the cytological test, and DNA testing for high-risk types of the human papillomavirus (hrHPV) - the main causal factor of cervical cancer.

OBJECTIVES

Main objective To compare the accuracy of hrHPV testing with the Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) assay against that of repeat cytology for detection of underlying cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) or grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) in women with ASCUS or LSIL. For the HC2 assay, a positive result was defined as proposed by the manufacturer. For repeat cytology, different cut-offs were used to define positivity: Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse (ASCUS+), low-grade squamous intra-epithelial lesions or worse (LSIL+) or high-grade squamous intra-epithelial lesions or worse (HSIL+).Secondary objective To assess the accuracy of the HC2 assay to detect CIN2+ or CIN3+ in women with ASCUS or LSIL in a larger group of reports of studies that applied hrHPV testing and the reference standard (coloscopy and biopsy), irrespective whether or not repeat cytology was done.

SEARCH METHODS

We made a comprehensive literature search that included the Cochrane Register of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (through PubMed), and EMBASE (last search 6 January 2011). Selected journals likely to contain relevant papers were handsearched from 1992 to 2010 (December). We also searched CERVIX, the bibliographic database of the Unit of Cancer Epidemiology at the Scientific Institute of Public Health (Brussels, Belgium) which contains more than 20,000 references on cervical cancer.More recent searches, up to December 2012, targeted reports on the accuracy of triage of ASCUS or LSIL with other HPV DNA assays, or HPV RNA assays and other molecular markers. These searches will be used for new Cochrane reviews as well as for updates of the current review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies eligible for inclusion in the review had to include: women presenting with a cervical cytology result of ASCUS or LSIL, who had undergone both HC2 testing and repeat cytology, or HC2 testing alone, and were subsequently subjected to reference standard verification with colposcopy and colposcopy-directed biopsies for histologic verification.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The review authors independently extracted data from the selected studies, and obtained additional data from report authors.Two groups of meta-analyses were performed: group I concerned triage of women with ASCUS, group II concerned women with LSIL. The bivariate model (METADAS-macro in SAS) was used to assess the absolute accuracy of the triage tests in both groups as well as the differences in accuracy between the triage tests.

MAIN RESULTS

The pooled sensitivity of HC2 was significantly higher than that of repeat cytology at cut-off ASCUS+ to detect CIN2+ in both triage of ASCUS and LSIL (relative sensitivity of 1.27 (95% CI 1.16 to 1.39; P value < 0.0001) and 1.23 (95% CI 1.06 to 1.4; P value 0.007), respectively. In ASCUS triage, the pooled specificity of the triage methods did not differ significantly from each other (relative specificity: 0.99 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.03; P value 0.98)). However, the specificity of HC2 was substantially, and significantly, lower than that of repeat cytology in the triage of LSIL (relative specificity: 0.66 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.75) P value < 0.0001).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

HPV-triage with HC2 can be recommended to triage women with ASCUS because it has higher accuracy (significantly higher sensitivity, and similar specificity) than repeat cytology. When triaging women with LSIL, an HC2 test yields a significantly higher sensitivity, but a significantly lower specificity, compared to a repeat cytology. Therefore, practice recommendations for management of women with LSIL should be balanced, taking local circumstances into account.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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