The next generation of cervical cancer screening programs: Making the case for risk-based guidelines

European consensus statement on expert colposcopy

BACKGROUND

Following the publication of the European consensus statement on standards for essential colposcopy in 2020, the need for standards relating to more complex and challenging colposcopy practice was recognised. These standards relate to colposcopy undertaken in patients identified through cervical screening and tertiary referrals from colposcopists who undertake standard colposcopy only. This set of recommendations provides a review of the current literature and agreement on care for recognised complex cases. With good uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) immunisation, we anticipate a marked reduction in cervical disease over the next decade. Still, the expert colposcopist will continue to be vital in managing complex cases, including previous cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)/complex screening histories and multi-zonal disease.

AIMS

To provide expert guidance on complex colposcopy cases through published evidence and expert consensus.

MATERIAL & METHODS

Members of the EFC and ESGO formed a working group to identify topics considered to be the remit of the expert rather than the standard colposcopy service. These were presented at the EFC satellite meeting, Helsinki 2021, for broader discussion and finalisation of the topics.

RESULTS & DISCUSSION

The agreed standards included colposcopy in pregnancy and post-menopause, investigation and management of glandular abnormalities, persistent high-risk HPV+ with normal/low-grade cytology, colposcopy management of type 3 transformation zones (TZ), high-grade cytology and normal colposcopy, colposcopy adjuncts, follow-up after treatment with CIN next to TZ margins and follow-up after treatment with CIN with persistent HPV+, and more. These standards are under review to create a final paper of consensus standards for dissemination to all EFC and ESGO members.

Moving forward-the 2019 ASCCP Risk-Based Management Consensus Guidelines for Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Tests and Cancer Precursors and beyond: implications and suggestions for laboratories

The 2019 ASCCP Risk Based Management Consensus Guidelines for prevention of cervical cancer promote clinical management recommendations aligned with our increased understanding of HPV biology and cervical carcinogenesis. They employ HPV-based testing as the basis for risk estimation, allow for personalized risk-based management by incorporating knowledge of current results with prior results, and streamline incorporation of new test methods as they are validated. They continue to support the principles of "equal management for equal risk" and "balancing harms and benefits" adopted in the 2012 version of the guidelines. These updated guidelines will be able to adjust for decreasing CIN3+ risks as more patients who received HPV vaccination reach screening age. Pathology organizations were closely involved in the development of these guidelines. Herein the pathologists who served as representatives to the 2019 ASCCP guidelines steering committee and workgroups, summarize the changes that are relevant to laboratories, pathologists, and cytotechnologists. Prior relevant screening and reporting recommendations that have not been widely and/or inconsistently adopted by laboratories are also discussed and considerations for modification of laboratory practices offered.

A study of the risks of CIN3+ detection after multiple rounds of HPV testing: Results of the 15-year cervical cancer screening experience at Kaiser Permanente Northern California

Many countries are transitioning to HPV testing for cervical cancer screening, despite a lack of long-term experience. To anticipate multi-round screening performance, we analyzed 15-year HPV testing results at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC). We evaluated HPV test result patterns among women aged 30-64 undergoing triennial HPV/cytology cotesting at KPNC during 2003-2018. We calculated incidence rates and proportion of CIN3+ diagnoses associated with the most frequent HPV testing patterns overall and stratified by age. From 2003 to 2018, a total of 1,361,581 women had a valid HPV test result, and 7,087 were diagnosed with CIN3+. Incidence rates of CIN3+ after HPV positivity were lowest when HPV detection was new and highest in women with prevalent infections (770 vs. 13,910/100,000 person-years). Repeat test negativity reduced subsequent incidence rates of CIN3+ to extremely low levels (18/100,000 person-years following four consecutive negative results). For mixed patterns of positivity/negativity, the recency and frequency of positive tests were associated with increased rates of CIN3+ diagnosis. Most CIN3+ cases (76%) were diagnosed in women who were positive at baseline (the first known positive HPV result); 16% were attributed to apparent newly detected infections and 3% to possible reappearing infections. These results corroborate previous findings that current HPV positivity, particularly when prevalent rather than new, is associated with the highest rates of CIN3+. In a screening program implementing HPV testing, most CIN3+ is detected at the first HPV positive test.