Diagnostic accuracy of cervical cancer screening strategies for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+/CIN3+) among women living with HIV: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Field experience with the 8-HPV-type oncoprotein test for cervical cancer screening among HPV-positive women living with and without HIV in LMICs

Overexpression of HPV-oncoproteins E6 and E7 is necessary for HPV-driven cervical carcinogenesis. Hence, these oncoproteins are promising disease-specific biomarkers. We assessed the technical and operational characteristics of the 8-HPV-type OncoE6/E7 Cervical Test in different laboratories using cervical samples from HPV-positive women living with (WLWH) and without HIV. The 8-HPV-type OncoE6/E7 Test (for short: "OncoE6/E7 test") was performed in 2833 HIV-negative women and 241 WLWH attending multicentric studies in Latin America (ESTAMPA study), and in Africa (CESTA study). Oncoprotein positivity were evaluated at each testing site, according to HIV status as well as type-specific agreement with HPV-DNA results. A feedback questionnaire was given to the operators performing the oncoprotein test to evaluate their impression and acceptability regarding the test. The OncoE6/E7 test revealed a high positivity rate heterogeneity across all testing sites (I2: 95.8%, p < .01) with significant lower positivity in WLWH compared to HIV-negative women (12% vs 25%, p < .01). A similar HPV-type distribution was found between HPV DNA genotyping and oncoprotein testing except for HPV31 and 33 (moderate agreement, k = 0.57). Twenty-one laboratory technicians were trained on oncoprotein testing. Despite operators' concerns about the time-consuming procedure and perceived need for moderate laboratory experience, they reported the OncoE6/E7 test as easy to perform and user-friendly for deployment in resource-limited settings. The high positivity rate variability found across studies and subjectivity in test outcome interpretation could potentially results in oncoprotein false positive/negative, and thus the need for further refinements before implementation of the oncoprotein testing in screen-triage-and-treat approaches is warranted.

Human papillomavirus infection among adolescents living with HIV: a focus on prevention

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To highlight recent data on HPV infection and cervical precancerous lesions in adolescents with HIV, and priorities for primary and secondary HPV prevention.

RECENT FINDINGS

Incident and persistent high-risk HPV infections and cervical abnormalities are higher among young women with perinatally acquired HIV compared to their HIV-negative peers; data on HPV among males with perinatally acquired HIV are scarce. HPV vaccination is highly effective in preventing HPV-related disease, but antibody titers may decline in people with HIV. It remains unclear if emerging recommendations to reduce vaccine schedules from three doses to two or one dose are appropriate for children and adolescents with perinatally acquired HIV. Due to higher risks of HPV-related cancers, screening guidelines for cervical cancer differ in their frequency and age at initiation for women with HIV, but there are no recommendations for women with perinatally acquired HIV; nor for anal cancer screening for men with perinatally acquired HIV.

SUMMARY

Data on the effectiveness of reduced HPV vaccine schedules in children and adolescents with HIV are needed. Implementation research to guide strategies for vaccination, screening, and treatment should include children, adolescents, and young adults with perinatally acquired HIV to ensure they are not left behind.

Cervical Cancer Screening and Treatment Algorithms Using Human Papillomavirus Testing-Lessons Learnt from a South African Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

To report quantitative and qualitative results on cervical cancer human papillomavirus (HPV)-based screening and treatment algorithms, with/out triage with visual inspection after acetic acid (VIA), followed by ablative treatment (AT).

METHODS

Women 30 to 54 years old from Durban, South Africa were recruited, regardless of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status, randomized into one of two study arms and screened for HPV. VIA triage arm: HPV-positive women were triaged using VIA, biopsied and received AT if VIA positive and eligible; no triage arm: eligible HPV-positive women received AT. Women ineligible for AT were referred to colposcopy. Women were asked about side effects immediately and 1 week after AT. Retention to screening and treatment algorithms was compared between arms.

RESULTS

A total of 350 women [275 HIV-uninfected and 75 women living with HIV, (WLWH)] were allocated to receive HPV testing with VIA triage (n = 175) or no triage (n = 175). HPV prevalence was 28% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 23-33]; WLWH: 52% (95% CI = 40-64) versus HIV-uninfected: 21% (95% CI = 17-27; P < 0.05). Among women who underwent VIA triage with histologic diagnosis, 3/17 were VIA negative with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)2+; 14/18 were VIA positive with

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot demonstrated the feasibility of implementing screening and treatment algorithms, including performing triage and treatment in one visit; however, VIA triage did not reduce overtreatment and missed some precancerous lesions.

IMPACT

This study reports on implementation feasibility of two World Health Organization screening and treatment algorithms (with/out VIA triage). Although the retention to screening and treatment algorithms was high in both arms, the question of how best triaging HPV-positive women deserves further consideration, particularly for WLWH. See related In the Spotlight, p. 763.

Collapse

Key Words Collapse

MESH Headings

• Humans
• Female
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis
• Middle Aged
• Adult
• Algorithms
• South Africa/epidemiology
• Early Detection of Cancer/methods
• Pilot Projects
• Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis
• Papillomavirus Infections/virology
• Papillomaviridae/isolation & purification
• Triage/methods
• Colposcopy
• Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/virology
• Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/diagnosis
• Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/therapy
• Human Papillomavirus Viruses

Collapse

Grants

• 001 World Health Organization
• HRP Alliance for Research Capacity Strengthening (RCS)

Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Hannah M. Sebitloane Discipline of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Clinical Medicine, College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
Mathilde Forestier Early Detection, Prevention and Infections (EPR), International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France Department of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
Themba G. Ginindza Public Health Medicine, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa Cancer & Infectious Diseases Epidemiology Research Unit (CIDERU), College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
Wendy Dhlomo Discipline of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Clinical Medicine, College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
Eshia Moodley-Govender Discipline of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Clinical Medicine, College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
Teresa M. Darragh Department of Pathology, University of California, San Francisco, California
Armando Baena Early Detection, Prevention and Infections (EPR), International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
Rolando Herrero Early Detection, Prevention and Infections (EPR), International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France Agencia Costarricense de Investigaciones Biomedicas, San José, Costa Rica
Maribel Almonte Early Detection, Prevention and Infections (EPR), International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France Department of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland Department of Non-communicable Diseases, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
Nathalie Broutet Department of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
Hugo De Vuyst Early Detection, Prevention and Infections (EPR), International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France Department of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland

Collapse

The performance of single and combination test strategies using visual inspection, cytology, high-risk HPV DNA and HPV16/18 to screen South African women with and without HIV-infection

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer screening strategies should ideally be informed by population-specific data. Strategies recommended for secondary prevention, are often inadequately studied in populations with high cervical disease burdens. This report describes the test performance measured against CIN2 + /CIN3 + histology in HIV-positive women (HPW) and HIV-negative women (HNW) with the aim to determine the most effective strategies to identify South African women at risk.

METHODS

Primary screening using visual inspection, cytology and HPV DNA (cobas®) was performed in two South African provinces on 456 HPW and 639 HNW participating in the multicentric DiaVACCS trial. Histology was obtained for 91.7% screen-positive and 42.7% screen-negative participants, and unavailable histology was determined by multiple imputation to adjust for verification bias. Cross-sectional test performance was calculated for single and combination test strategies with and without intermediate risk categories using different cut-offs. Minimum acceptability for sensitivity and specificity, treatment and follow-up numbers were considered to evaluate strategies.

RESULTS

The only single test to reach acceptability in HPW was cytology (LSIL) [sensitivity 71.2%; specificity 90.5%; treatment 33.4%]; in HNW only HPV (hr) qualified [sensitivity 68.2%; specificity 85.2%; treatment 23.5%]. The universally best performing strategy which also resulted in smaller treatment numbers without intermediate risk group was primary HPV(hr), with treatment of both HPV(16/18) and cytology (ASCUS +) [HPW: sensitivity 73.6%; specificity 89.7%; treatment 34.7%. HNW: sensitivity 59.1%; specificity 93.6%; treatment 13.9%]. DNA testing for hrHPV (any) and hrHPV (16/18) was the best universally acceptable strategy with an intermediate risk category (early follow-up) in HPW [sensitivity 82.1%; specificity 96.4%; treatment 17.1%; follow-up 31.4%] and HNW [sensitivity 68.2%; specificity 96.7%; treatment 7.6%; follow-up 15.9%]. In comparison, using both HPV (16/18) and cytology (ASCUS +) as secondary tests in hrHPV positive women, decreased follow-up [HPW 13.8%, HNW 9.6%], but increased treatment [HPW 34.7%, HNW 13.9%].

CONCLUSION

Using hrHPV (any) as primary and both HPV16/18 and cytology as secondary tests, was universally acceptable without an intermediate risk group. Strategies with follow-up groups improved screening performance with smaller treatment numbers, but with effective management of the intermediate risk group as prerequisite.

Triage of HPV positivity in a high HIV prevalence setting: A prospective cohort study comparing visual triage methods and HPV genotype restriction in Botswana

OBJECTIVE

Guidelines for effective triage following positive primary high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) screening in low- and middle-income countries with high human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-prevalence have not previously been established. In the present study, we evaluated the performance of three triage methods for positive HPV results in women living with HIV (WLHIV) and without HIV in Botswana.

METHODS

We conducted baseline enrollment of a prospective cohort study from February 2021 to August 2022 in South-East District, Botswana. Non-pregnant women aged 25 or older with an intact cervix and no prior diagnosis of cervical cancer were systematically consented for enrollment, with enrichment of the cohort for WLHIV. Those who consented completed a questionnaire and then collected vaginal self-samples for HPV testing. Primary HPV testing for 15 individual genotypes was conducted using Atila AmpFire® HPV assay. Those with positive HPV results returned for a triage visit where all underwent visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), colposcopy, and biopsy. Triage strategies with VIA, colposcopy and 8-type HPV genotype restriction (16/18/31/33/35/45/52/58), separately and in combination, were compared using histopathology as the gold standard in diagnosing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 or worse (CIN2+).

RESULTS

Among 2969 women enrolled, 1480 (50%) tested HPV positive. The cohort included 1478 (50%) WLHIV; 99% were virologically suppressed after a mean of 8 years on antiretroviral therapy. In total, 1269 (86%) women had histopathology data for analysis. Among WLHIV who tested positive for HPV, 131 (19%) of 688 had CIN2+ compared with 71 (12%) of 581 in women without HIV. Screening by 8-type HPV genotype restriction was more sensitive as triage to detect CIN2+ in WLHIV 87.79% (95% CI: 80.92-92.85) and women without HIV 85.92% (95% CI: 75.62-93.03) when compared with VIA (WLHIV 62.31% [95% CI: 53.39-70.65], women without HIV 44.29% [95% CI: 32.41-56.66]) and colposcopy (WLHIV 70.77% [95% CI: 62.15-78.41], women without HIV 45.71% [95% CI: 33.74-58.06]). However, 8-type HPV genotype restriction had low specificity in WLHIV of 30.88% (95% CI: 27.06-34.90) and women without HIV 37.06% (95% CI: 32.85-41.41). These results were similar when CIN3+ was used as the outcome. When combining 8-type HPV genotype restriction with VIA as the triage strategy, there was improved specificity to detect CIN2+ in WLHIV of 81.65% (95% CI: 78.18-84.79) but dramatically reduced sensitivity of 56.15% (95% CI: 47.18-64.84).

CONCLUSIONS

Eight-type HPV genotype restriction is a promising component of effective triage for HPV positivity. However, novel triage strategies in LMICs with high HIV prevalence may be needed to avoid the trade-off between sensitivity and specificity with currently available options.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

This study is registered on Clinicaltrials.gov no. NCT04242823, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04242823.

Optical imaging for screening and early cancer diagnosis in low-resource settings

Low-cost optical imaging technologies have the potential to reduce inequalities in healthcare by improving the detection of pre-cancer or early cancer and enabling more effective and less invasive treatment. In this Review, we summarise technologies for in vivo widefield, multi-spectral, endoscopic, and high-resolution optical imaging that could offer affordable approaches to improve cancer screening and early detection at the point-of-care. Additionally, we discuss approaches to slide-free microscopy, including confocal imaging, lightsheet microscopy, and phase modulation techniques that can reduce the infrastructure and expertise needed for definitive cancer diagnosis. We also evaluate how machine learning-based algorithms can improve the accuracy and accessibility of optical imaging systems and provide real-time image analysis. To achieve the potential of optical technologies, developers must ensure that devices are easy to use; the optical technologies must be evaluated in multi-institutional, prospective clinical tests in the intended setting; and the barriers to commercial scale-up in under-resourced markets must be overcome. Therefore, test developers should view the production of simple and effective diagnostic tools that are accessible and affordable for all countries and settings as a central goal of their profession.

Benefits and harms of cervical screening, triage and treatment strategies in women living with HIV

To support a strategy to eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem, the World Health Organisation (WHO) reviewed its guidelines for screening and treatment of cervical pre-cancerous lesions in 2021. Women living with HIV have 6-times the risk of cervical cancer compared to women in the general population, and we harnessed a model platform ('Policy1-Cervix-HIV') to evaluate the benefits and harms of a range of screening strategies for women living with HIV in Tanzania, a country with endemic HIV. Assuming 70% coverage, we found that 3-yearly primary HPV screening without triage would reduce age-standardised cervical cancer mortality rates by 72%, with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 38.7, to prevent a cervical cancer death. Triaging HPV positive women before treatment resulted in minimal loss of effectiveness and had more favorable NNTs (19.7-33.0). Screening using visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) or cytology was less effective than primary HPV and, in the case of VIA, generated a far higher NNT of 107.5. These findings support the WHO 2021 recommendation that women living with HIV are screened with primary HPV testing in a screen-triage-and-treat approach starting at 25 years, with regular screening every 3-5 years.

Benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness of cervical screening, triage and treatment strategies for women in the general population

In 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) launched a strategy to eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem. To support the strategy, the WHO published updated cervical screening guidelines in 2021. To inform this update, we used an established modeling platform, Policy1-Cervix, to evaluate the impact of seven primary screening scenarios across 78 low- and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) for the general population of women. Assuming 70% coverage, we found that primary human papillomavirus (HPV) screening approaches were the most effective and cost-effective, reducing cervical cancer age-standardized mortality rates by 63-67% when offered every 5 years. Strategies involving triaging women before treatment (with 16/18 genotyping, cytology, visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) or colposcopy) had close-to-similar effectiveness to HPV screening without triage and fewer pre-cancer treatments. Screening with VIA or cytology every 3 years was less effective and less cost-effective than HPV screening every 5 years. Furthermore, VIA generated more than double the number of pre-cancer treatments compared to HPV. In conclusion, primary HPV screening is the most effective, cost-effective and efficient cervical screening option in LMICs. These findings have directly informed WHO's updated cervical screening guidelines for the general population of women, which recommend primary HPV screening in a screen-and-treat or screen-triage-and-treat approach, starting from age 30 years with screening every 5 years or 10 years.

Molecular triaging options for women testing HPV positive with self-collected samples

We review developments in molecular triaging options for women who test positive for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) on self-collected samples in the context of cervical cancer elimination. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends hrHPV screening as the primary test for cervical screening due to its high sensitivity compared to other screening tests. However, when hrHPV testing is used alone for treatment decisions, a proportion of women of childbearing age receive unnecessary treatments. This provides the incentive to optimize screening regimes to minimize the risk of overtreatment in women of reproductive age. Molecular biomarkers can potentially enhance the accuracy and efficiency of screening and triage. HrHPV testing is currently the only screening test that allows triage with molecular methods using the same sample. Additionally, offering self-collected hrHPV tests to women has been reported to increase screening coverage. This creates an opportunity to focus health resources on linking screen-positive women to diagnosis and treatment. Adding an additional test to the screening algorithm (a triage test) may improve the test's positive predictive value (PPV) and offer a better balance of benefits and risks for women. Conventional triage methods like cytology and visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) cannot be performed on self-collected samples and require additional clinic visits and subjective interpretations. Molecular triaging using methods like partial and extended genotyping, methylation tests, detection of E6/E7 proteins, and hrHPV viral load in the same sample as the hrHPV test may improve the prediction of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and invasive cancer, offering more precise, efficient, and cost-effective screening regimes. More research is needed to determine if self-collected samples are effective and cost-efficient for diverse populations and in comparison to other triage methods. The implementation of molecular triaging could improve screening accuracy and reduce the need for multiple clinical visits. These important factors play a crucial role in achieving the global goal of eliminating cervical cancer as a public health problem.

Public Health Approach in the Elimination and Control of Cervical Cancer: A Review

Public health experts worldwide have emphasized cervical cancer since it is a substantial global health burden primarily affecting women. This article thoroughly reviews the public health approach to eradicating and managing cervical cancer. The public health community seeks to lower the prevalence, morbidity, and mortality linked to this preventable disease by integrating primary prevention by means of vaccination against the human papillomavirus (HPV), secondary prevention using screening and early identification, and tertiary prevention through improved therapy and supportive care. In order to accomplish broad vaccination coverage and ultimately effectively prevent cervical cancer, it remains crucial to address obstacles to vaccine accessibility, reluctance, and fair distribution. Early identification and subsequent treatments depend greatly on cervical cancer screening programs. This study explores several screening methods, such as Papanicolaou (Pap) tests based on cytology and cutting-edge technologies like molecular assays and HPV detection. The detection of precancerous lesions and early-stage malignancies, permitting prompt treatment, has shown significant promise when integrating these technologies into coordinated population-based screening programs. The study also underlines the significance of addressing cervical cancer burden inequities, particularly in resource-constrained areas where access to preventative and curative care is constrained. Innovative and affordable methods for addressing marginalized groups are studied, including community-based outreach programs, mobile health technology, and local healthcare practitioners and community leaders in awareness campaigns. The research also examines improvements in cervical cancer treatment procedures, such as surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy. It improves therapeutic efficacy and patient survival rates by incorporating various modalities into a multidisciplinary strategy. Highlighted palliative care and psychological support are crucial for patients who have advanced cervical carcinoma.

Evaluating operational parameters of the careHPV, GeneXpert, AmpFire, and MA-6000 HPV systems for cervical precancer screening: Experience from Battor, Ghana

In response to calls by the World Health Organization for cervical precancer screening services in low-resource settings to lean toward HPV DNA testing, a number of testing platforms have been made available. This study aimed to evaluate the operational parameters of four HPV testing systems in previous (careHPV) and current (GeneXpert, AmpFire, and MA-6000) use in a secondary healthcare setting in terms of 'appropriateness', ease of use, throughput, and diagnostic yield. This descriptive retrospective cohort analysis included 6056 women who presented to our facility between June 2016 and March 2022 for cervical precancer screening via HPV testing. A large majority of this cohort underwent AmpFire testing (55.8%), followed by careHPV (23.3%), MA-6000 (14.7%), and GeneXpert (6.1%). MA-6000 showed the highest hr-HPV positivity rate of 26.4% (95% CI, 23.6-29.5), followed by AmpFire (17.2%; 95% CI, 15.9-17.5). GeneXpert and careHPV showed similar hr-HPV positivity rates of 14.8% (95% CI, 11.3-18.8) and 14.8% (95% CI, 13.0-16.8), respectively. For the AmpFire and MA-6000 platforms, which utilize similar detection and reporting formats, we found a significant excess detection rate of 9.2% (95% CI, 6.1-12.4; p-value <0.0001) for MA-6000 compared to AmpFire. At the genotype level, MA-6000 also detected significantly higher rates of HPV 16 and other hr-HPV types (both p-values <0.001) than AmpFire; there was no difference in detection for HPV 18. Based on our experiences and preliminary analysis, we believe that the choice of HPV testing platform cannot be accomplished with a one-size-fits-all approach. Factors worth considering are the financial implications of platform acquisition, costs to clients, and throughput when screening programs are not sufficiently large. We describe our successes and challenges with the different platforms which we believe will be helpful to centers in low-income countries as they transition into using HPV DNA testing for cervical precancer screening.

Accuracy of screening tests for cervical pre-cancer in women living with HIV in low-resource settings: a paired prospective study in Lusaka, Zambia

Introduction

To provide evidence to improve cervical screening for women living with HIV (WLHIV), we assessed the accuracy of screening tests that can be used in low-resource settings and give results at the same visit.

Methods

We conducted a paired, prospective study among consecutive eligible WLHIV, aged 18-65 years, receiving cervical cancer screening at one hospital in Lusaka, Zambia. The histopathological reference standard was multiple biopsies taken at two time points. The target condition was high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+). The index tests were high-risk human papillomavirus detection (hrHPV, Xpert HPV, Cepheid), portable colposcopy (Gynocular, Gynius), and visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA). Accuracy of stand-alone and test combinations were calculated as the point estimate with 95% confidence intervals. A sensitivity analysis considered disease when only visible lesions were biopsied.

Results

Among 371 participants with histopathological results, 27% (101/371) women had CIN2+ and 23% (23/101) was not detected by any index test. Sensitivity and specificity for stand-alone tests were: hrHPV, 67.3% (95% CI: 57.7-75.7) and 65.3% (59.4-70.7); Gynocular 51.5% (41.9-61.0) and 80.0% (74.8-84.3); and VIA 22.8% (15.7-31.9) and 92.6% (88.8-95.2), respectively. The combination of hrHPV testing followed by Gynocular had the best balance of sensitivity (42.6% [33.4-52.3]) and specificity (89.6% [85.3-92.7]). All test accuracies improved in sensitivity analysis.

Conclusion

The low accuracy of screening tests assessed might be explained by our reference standard, which reduced verification and misclassification biases. Better screening strategies for WLHIV in low-resource settings are urgently needed.

Registration number

The trial was registered prospectively at ClinicalTrials.gov (ref: NCT03931083 ). The study protocol has been previously published, and the statistical analysis plan can be accessed on ClinicalTrials.gov .

Key messages

What is already known on this topic: The 2021 World Health Organization guidelines recommend that women living with HIV (WLHIV) receive screening for high risk human papillomavirus high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) genotypes at three- to five-year intervals, followed by a triage test to determine whether treatment is needed but this is based on low and moderate certainty evidence.What this study adds: This study among WLHIV in Lusaka, Zambia evaluated three screening tests that allow same-day treatment; hrHPV test, portable colposcopy (Gynocular), and visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), using strict methods to reduce verification and misclassification biases. The test accuracy of the different screening was poor, with sensitivities and specificity for stand-alone tests: hrHPV, 67.3% and 65.3%; Gynocular 51.5% and 80.0%; and VIA 22.8% and 92.6%; respectively.How this study might affect research, practice or policy: Our findings have implications for research and cervical cancer screening policies among WLHIV if test-accuracy in this high-risk population has been overestimated from a majority of exsisting studies that are affected by verification and misclassification biases. Methodologically robust studies are crucial to inform cervical cancer screening practices and policies for the successful implementation of a cervical cancer elimination plan in sub-Saharan Africa, where 85% of women with cervical cancer and HIV live.

Comparison of the AmpFire® Multiplex HPV Assay to the Xpert® HPV Assay for detection of human papillomavirus and cervical disease in women with human immunodeficiency virus: a pragmatic performance evaluation

BACKGROUND

Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) account for nearly 85% of the global cervical cancer burden, yet have the least access to high-performance screening. International guidelines recommend human papillomavirus testing (HPV) as primary screening, yet implementation is inhibited by the cost of HPV testing. Atila AmpFire® HPV Assay (AmpFire) is both affordable and easy to use, and offers individual genotyping. The objective of this study was to compare the performance of the AmpFire HPV assay to the Xpert® HPV assay in detection of both HPV and clinically significant cervical disease.

METHODS

We utilized stored cervical specimens from a prospective cohort study of women living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in Botswana conducted from May to July 2018. Positive and negative percent agreement was calculated for the AmpFire and Xpert assays, as was detection of high-grade cervical dysplasia.

RESULTS

63 stored cervical specimens had detectable DNA after thawing and were included in the analysis. The positive percent agreement was 91.2% (95%CI 76.3-98.1) and negative percent agreement was 79.3% (95% CI 60.3-92.0). Six cases positive by AmpFire but negative by Xpert were HPV genotypes 35, 52 (n = 2), 58, 68, and co-infection with HPV 45 and 68. Both Xpert and AmpFire assays detected HPV in all 10 samples of women who had high-grade cervical dysplasia.

CONCLUSIONS

The AmpFire HPV assay demonstrated excellent analytic performance in both detection of HPV and clinically significant cervical disease. AmpFire HPV is a promising option to increase access to affordable, type-specific HPV screening for cervical cancer in LMICs.

Comparison of the AmpFire Multiplex HPV Assay to the Xpert HPV Assay for detection of human papillomavirus and cervical disease in women with human immunodeficiency virus: A pragmatic performance evaluation

Background: Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) account for nearly 85% of the global cervical cancer burden, yet have the least access to high-performance screening. International guidelines recommend human papillomavirus testing (HPV) as primary screening, yet implementation is inhibited by the cost of HPV testing.Atila AmpFire HPV Assay (AmpFire) is both affordable and easy to use, and offers individual genotyping. The objective of this study was to compare the performance of the AmpFire HPV assay to the Xpert HPV assay in detection of both HPV and clinically significant cervical disease. Methods: We utilized stored cervical specimens from a prospective cohortstudy of women living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in Botswana conducted from May to July 2018. Positive and negative percent agreement was calculated for the AmpFire and Xpert assays, as was detection of high-grade cervical dysplasia. Results : 63 stored cervical specimens haddetectable DNA after thawing and were included in the analysis. The positive percent agreement was 91.2% (95%CI: 76.3-98.1) and negative percent agreement was 79.3% (95% CI: 60.3-92.0). Six cases positive by AmpFire but negative by Xpert were HPV genotypes 35, 52 (n=2), 58, 68, and co-infection with HPV 45 and 68. Both Xpert and AmpFire assays detected HPV in all 10 samples of women who had high-grade cervical dysplasia. Conclusions : The AmpFire HPV assay demonstrated excellent analytic performance in both detection of HPV and clinically significant cervical disease. AmpFire HPV is a promising option to increase access to affordable, type-specific HPV screening for cervical cancer in LMICs.

Performance of screening tools for cervical neoplasia among women in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the performance of visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) testing, visual inspection with Lugol's iodine (VILI), primary HPV testing, and conventional Pap smear in detecting CIN2+ among non-pregnant women aged 30-65 in LMICs between 1990 and 2020.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Low- and middle-income countries, non-pregnant women aged 30-65.

METHODS

CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), CINAHL, Embase, Global Health, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched to identify studies evaluating the performance of cervical cancer screening methods in LMICs. A diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the performance of 4 screening methods in detecting CIN2+ relative to biopsy or cytology reference standards. Pooled statistics for sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratios, and summary receiver operating characteristic curves were determined for each method. Subgroup analyses were performed to examine whether there was variation in performance based on different reference standards for defining CIN2+, specifically: colposcopy-directed biopsy, biopsy alone, colposcopy alone, or liquid-based cytology.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were identified through systematic review. Twelve studies were included in meta-analysis; 11 were cross-sectional and 1 was a randomized controlled clinical trial. The remaining six of the eighteen studies were inclided in a narrative syntehsis. Pooled estimates for sensitivity for VIA, VILI, primary HPV testing, and conventional Pap smear were 72.3%, 64.5%, 79.5%, and 60.2%, respectively; pooled estimates for specificity were 74.5%, 68.5%, 72.6%, and 97.4%, respectively; the diagnostic odds ratios were 7.31, 3.73, 10.42, 69.48, respectively; and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curves were 0.766, 0.647, 0.959, and 0.818, respectively. Performance of the screening method varied based on the reference standard used; pooled estimates using either colposcopy-directed biopsy or biopsy alone as the reference standard generally reported lower estimates; pooled estimates using either colposcopy alone or liquid-based cytology as references reported higher estimates.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

This meta-analysis found primary HPV testing to be the highest performing cervical cancer screening method in accurately identifying or excluding CIN2+. Further evaluation of performance at different CIN thresholds is warranted.