Detection of cervical neoplasia by DNA methylation analysis in cervico-vaginal lavages, a feasibility study

DNA methylation at individual CpG-sites of EPB41L3, HTERT and FAM19A4 are useful for detection of cervical high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) or worse: Analysis of individual CpG-sites outperforms averaging

Global methylation analysis of gene promoters is promising for detection of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or worse (HSIL+) in high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)-positive women. However, diagnostic performance of methylation data at individual CpG-sites is limited. We explored methylation for predicting HSIL+ in self- and clinician-collected samples from Papua New Guinea. Methylation of EPB41L3 (1-6 CpG-sites), hTERT (1-10 CpG-sites) and FAM19A4 (1-5 CpG-sites) was assessed through pyrosequencing from 44 HPV+ samples (4 cancers, 19 HSIL, 4 low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL), 17 normal). New primers were designed for FAM19A4 directed to the first exon region not explored previously. In clinician-collected samples, methylation at CpG-sites 4 and 5 of EPB41L3 were the best HSIL predictors (AUC >0.83) and CpG-site 4 for cancer (0.925). Combination of EPB41L3 sites 2/4 plus FAM19A4 site 1 were the best HSIL+ markers [100% sensitivity, 63.2% specificity]. Methylation at CpG-site 5 of FAM19A4 was the best HSIL predictor (0.67) in self-collected samples, and CpG-sites 1 and 3 of FAM19A4 for cancer (0.77). Combined, FAM19A4 site 1 plus HPV 16/18 detection yielded sensitivity of 82.6% and specificity of 61.9%. In conclusion, methylation at individual CpG-sites of EPB41L3 and FAM19A4 outperformed global analysis and improved HSIL+ detection, warranting further investigation.

Cytological DNA methylation for cervical cancer screening: a validation set

Background

In a previous training set with a case-controlled design, cutoff values for host EPB41L3 and JAM3 gene methylation were obtained for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 or more severe lesions (CIN2+). This validation trial was conducted to evaluate the role of DNA methylation in screening for CIN2+ by cervical cytology among unselected participants.

Methods

From June 1, 2019, to September 1, 2019, in our study center, we collected liquid-based samples from cervical swabs for methylation assays and hrHPV testing in eligible patients. The primary endpoint was the diagnostic accuracy of DNA methylation and hrHPV genotyping for CIN2+ according to confirmed histology results.

Results

Among 307 participants, compared with hrHPV testing, the methylation assay for CIN2+ had lower sensitivity (68.7% versus 86.1%, p=0.002) but higher specificity (96.7% versus 0.696, p<0.001). The methylation assay also had favorable sensitivity and specificity in patients with negative hrHPV testing (56.3% and 96.9%) and in patients with cervical adenocarcinoma (73.7% and 92.7%). DNA methylation had higher specificity than the hrHPV assay (100.0% versus 44.4%, p<0.001) for identifying residual CIN2+ in patients without residual lesions. Positive cervical DNA methylation was associated with a diagnostic probability of endometrial carcinoma (odds ratio 15.5 [95% confidence interval 4.1-58.6]) but not of ovarian epithelial carcinoma (1.4 [0.3-6.5]).

Conclusions

The host EPB41L3 and JAM3 gene methylation assay in cervical cytology had favorable diagnostic accuracy for CIN2+ and was highly specific for residual CIN2+ lesions The methylation assay is a promising triage tool in hrHPV+ women, or even an independent tool for cervical cancer screening. The methylation status in cervical cytology could also serve as a prognostic biomarker. Its role in detecting endometrial carcinomas is worthy of further exploration.

PAX1 Methylation Status in Cervical Scrapes as Novel Diagnostic Biomarker in CIN 2/3 and Invasive Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Objectives

DNA methylation of paired box-1 (PAX-1) gene has been shown to be a potential biomarker for the detection of high-grade cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia (CIN) and invasive cervical cancer. The objective of this pilot study was to quantify and compare methylation percentage of PAX1 gene in benign cervical lesion, pre-invasive and invasive cervical cancer.

Methods

A total of 200 screen positive women (VIA, VILI and Pap test) underwent colposcopy. Cervical scrapes taken were taken and stored for DNA analysis and PAX 1 methylation status. Women with Swede score of 5 or more (n = 98) were biopsied. Cervical scrapes and biopsy were taken from women with obvious cervical growth (n = 14), without prior colposcopy. Sixty women were recruited to the study and allocated into three groups on the basis of histopathology, i.e., benign cervix (Group 1; n = 20), CIN 2/3 (Group 2; n = 20) and invasive cervical carcinoma (Group; n = 20). PAX 1 methylation percentage was calculated from the DNA extracted from the cervical scrapes of the women recruited.

Results

The mean PAX1 methylation percentage in benign lesions, CIN 2/3 and invasive cancer was 9.58% (SD ± 2.37%), 18.21% (SD ± 2.67%) and 24.34% (SD ± 4.09%), respectively, with p-value of < 0.001.

Conclusions

PAX 1 gene methylation has a promising role in identifying high-grade lesions and invasive cancer.

Detection of Host Cell Gene/HPV DNA Methylation Markers: A Promising Triage Approach for Cervical Cancer

Cervical cancer is the most prevalent gynecologic malignancy, especially in women of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). With a better understanding of the etiology and pathogenesis of cervical cancer, it has been well accepted that this type of cancer can be prevented and treated via early screening. Due to its higher sensitivity than cytology to identify precursor lesions of cervical cancer, detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) DNA has been implemented as the primary screening approach. However, a high referral rate for colposcopy after HR-HPV DNA detection due to its low specificity in HR-HPV screening often leads to overtreatment and thus increases the healthcare burden. Emerging evidence has demonstrated that detection of host cell gene and/or HPV DNA methylation represents a promising approach for the early triage of cervical cancer in HR-HPV-positive women owing to its convenience and comparable performance to cytology, particularly in LMICs with limited healthcare resources. While numerous potential markers involving DNA methylation of host cell genes and the HPV genome have been identified thus far, it is crucial to define which genes or panels involving host and/or HPV are feasible and appropriate for large-scale screening and triage. An ideal approach for screening and triage of CIN/ICC requires high sensitivity and adequate specificity and is suitable for self-sampling and inexpensive to allow population-based screening, particularly in LMICs. In this review, we summarize the markers of host cell gene/HR-HPV DNA methylation and discuss their triage performance and feasibility for high-grade precancerous cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or worse (CIN2+ and CIN3+) in HR-HPV-positive women.

Performance of a six-methylation-marker assay on self-collected cervical samples - A feasibility study

OBJECTIVES

In high-income countries, a high proportion of cervical cancers is diagnosed in screening non-attendees. One approach to improve screening coverage is to offer self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing. However, especially young women are often HPV positive without having a precancerous lesion in need of treatment. To improve the rather low specificity of HPV testing additional markers such as DNA-methylation can be used. The aim of this feasibility study was to examine the performance of the methylation marker assay GynTect®, comprising six methylation markers, on dry self-collected cervico-vaginal samples compared to physician-taken samples.

METHODS

We recruited 89 patients from our colposcopy clinic of whom 87 qualified for the study. The women took a self-sample with the Evalyn-Brush. Afterwards the planned colposcopy was performed and smears for cytology and reference HPV testing were taken as well as a biopsy in cases of abnormalities. Physician-taken and self-collected samples were tested for HPV DNA and were analyzed with GynTect®.

RESULTS

We obtained 95.5 % valid results for the self-collected samples which was very close to the physician-taken samples. Only about half of the self-collected samples were GynTect® positive in comparison to the physician-taken samples. GynTect® scores were significantly lower for self-collected than for physician-taken samples (p = 0.001, paired t-test). The overall concordance for GynTect® results was moderate (kappa 0.394; p < 0.001). For HPV testing we obtained a good concordance (kappa 0.586; p < 0.001). The GynTect® results for the self-collected samples showed a sensitivity for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse (CIN2+) of 26.1 % (95 %-CI: 0.13-0.46) and a specificity of 95.6 % (95 %-CI: 0.85-0.99), in comparison to a sensitivity of 45.5 % (95 %-CI: 0.27-0.65) and a specificity of 78.3 % (95 %-CI: 0.64-0.88) for the physician-taken samples.

CONCLUSIONS

GynTect® methylation marker testing has a satisfactory amount of valid results on self-collected samples. However, the results of the self-collected samples differed clearly in comparison to the reference samples. To justify an application in screening, a larger study with more cases of high-grade cervical dysplasia and HPV positive patients will be needed.

DNA methylation markers as triage test for the early identification of cervical lesions in a Chinese population

Objective strategies are required in cervical cancer screening. We have identified several DNA methylation markers with high sensitivity and specificity to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse (CIN2+) in Dutch women. Our study aims to analyze the diagnostic characteristics of these markers in a Chinese cohort. A total of 246 liquid-based cytology samples were included, of which 205 women underwent colposcopy due to an abnormal cytology result (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance [ASCUS] or worse), while 227 were tested high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) positive. All six individual markers (ANKRD18CP, C13ORF18, EPB41L3, JAM3, SOX1 and ZSCAN1) showed enhanced methylation levels and frequency with increasing severity of the underlying lesion (P ≤ .001). In cytological abnormal women, sensitivity to detect CIN2+ was 79%, 76% and 72% for the three panels (C13ORF18/EBP41L3/JAM3, C13ORF18/ANKRD18CP/JAM3 and ZSCAN1/SOX1, respectively), with a specificity of 57%, 65% and 68%. For the first two panels, these diagnostic characteristics were similar to the Dutch cohort, while for ZSCAN1/SOX1 the sensitivity was higher in the Chinese cohort, but with a lower specificity (both P < .05). In hrHPV-positive samples, similar sensitivity and specificity for the detection of CIN2+ were found as for the abnormal cytology cohort, which were now all similar between both cohorts and non-inferior to HPV16/18 genotyping. Our analysis reveals that the diagnostic performances are highly comparable for C13ORF18/EBP41L3/JAM3 and C13ORF18/ANKRD18CP/JAM3 methylation marker panels in both Chinese and Dutch cohorts. In conclusion, methylation panels identified in a Dutch population are also applicable for triage testing in cervical cancer screening in China.

Distribution of cervical lesions in high-risk HPV (hr-HPV) positive women with ASC-US: a retrospective single-center study in China

BACKGROUND

To investigate distributions of cervical lesions and factors associated with the severity of the cervical lesions in high-risk HPV (hr-HPV) positive women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) cytology.

METHODS

Clinical information of 250,000 women who underwent HPV and cytological test was collected from January 2012 to January 2019. The association between the severity of the cervical lesions and hr-HPV genotypes, hr-HPV viral load, and ages, were analyzed in hr-HPV-positive/ASC-US women.

RESULTS

3459 hr-HPV-positive/ASC-US women were enrolled in this study. Overall, 43.51% of women with ASC-US had normal histological results, 34.35% had high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL), and 1.30% had cervical cancer. The rate of HSIL or worse (HSIL+) in women with single HPV16 infection (63.09%) was the highest, followed by HPV33 (57.50%), HPV51 (36.11%), HPV58 (36.11%), HPV52 (28.28%), HPV18 (26.37%), HPV66 (19.35%), HPV39 (18.92%), HPV53 (15.00%), and HPV56 (8.51%). Detection rate of HSIL+ in low, intermediate and high viral-load groups were 15.87% (n = 30), 34.91% (n = 74) and 40.68% (n = 214) (Cochran-Armitage Trend test χ² = 35.03, p < 0.0001). Compared with the 51-60-year-old group (21.65%), the women in ≤ 30 (40.52%), 31-40 (39.67%), and 41-50 (34.22%) year-old groups had significantly higher risk of HSIL+. The women in ≤ 51-60 (2.68%) and > 60 (3.41%) year-old groups were at increased risk for cervical cancer, compared with the ≤ 30-year-old group (0.61%).

CONCLUSIONS

ASC-US women with HPV 16/18/33/51/52/58 single infection and multiple infections, as well as high HPV viral loads, have high risk of HSIL+.

DNA methylation for cervical cancer screening: a training set in China

Background

Despite rapid improvements in DNA methylation tools for cervical cancer screening, few robust, exploratory studies have been performed using the combination of two host genes, EPB41L3 and JAM3, newly developed assays.

Methods

A review of abnormal liquid-based cytology and/or high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) data from outpatient clinics in the study center from March 2018 to March 2019 was performed. Eligible patients with definitive histological pathology results were included, and their residual cytology samples were assessed for EPB41L3 and JAM3 methylation. The diagnostic accuracies of various screening strategies for definitive pathology and for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 or more severe lesions (CIN2+) were compared.

Results

In total, 306 patients were successfully tested; 301 cases with cervical histological pathology were included in the final analysis, including 118 (39.2%) and 183 (60.8%) cases of inflammation/CIN1 and CIN2+, respectively. Regarding CIN2+ detection, methylation status and hrHPV plus methylation had similar positive predictive values (0.930 and 0.954, respectively, p = 0.395). Additionally, hrHPV, methylation, and hrHPV plus methylation had similar negative predictive values (0.612, 0.679, and 0.655, p = 0.677) that were significantly higher than that of cytology alone (0.250, p values 0.012, 0.001, and 0.001, respectively). For 49 cases with negative hrHPV results, positive methylation alone was able to differentiate CIN2+ from inflammation/CIN1.

Conclusions

Methylation of both EPB41L3 and JAM3 is an accurate and feasible screening method for CIN2+.

DNA methylation genome-wide analysis in remnant and primary gastric cancers

BACKGROUND

Although primary (PGC) and remnant gastric cancers (RGC) both originate from the same gastrointestinal organ, they have very distinct clinicopathological behaviors. We hypothesized that there would be distinct differences in DNA methylation patterns that would occur during carcinogenesis of RGC and PGC, and that the differences in methylation patterns may help identify the primary factor contributing to chronic inflammation in patients with RGC.

METHODS

We investigated the genome-wide DNA methylation patterns of PGC and RGC tissues from 48 patients using the Infinium HumanMethylation450 Beadchip assay. The results were validated by quantitative methylation-specific PCR (qMSP) in separate, independent cohorts.

RESULTS

We found that in our training cohort of 48 patients, the most variable genes from the gastric cancer tissues identified by the Infinium HumanMethylation450 Beadchip clustered the resultant heatmap into high and low methylation groups. On multivariate analysis, PGCs contributed significantly to the high methylation group (p = 0.004, OR 12.33), which suggested that the promoter methylation status in PGC is higher than that in RGC. Supporting this conclusion was the finding that in a separate qMSP analysis in a test cohort, the EPB41L3 gene, chosen because of its high β value on microarray analysis in the gastric cancer tissues, had significantly higher DNA promoter methylation in cancer tissues in the validation PGC tissues than in RGC.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that promoter methylation status in PGC is higher than in RGC. This result may reflect the effects of the absence of Helicobacter pylori on the reduced DNA methylation in the remnant stomach.

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.

Cervical cancer risk in HPV-positive women after a negative FAM19A4/mir124-2 methylation test: A post hoc analysis in the POBASCAM trial with 14 year follow-up

DNA methylation analysis of cervical scrapes using FAM19A4 and mir124‐2 genes has shown a good clinical performance in detecting cervical cancer and advanced CIN lesions in need of treatment in HPV‐positive women. To date, longitudinal data on the cancer risk of methylation test‐negative women are lacking. In our study, we assessed the longitudinal outcome of FAM19A4/mir124‐2 methylation analysis in an HPV‐positive screening cohort with 14 years of follow‐up. Archived HPV‐positive cervical scrapes of 1,040 women (age 29–61 years), who were enrolled in the POBASCAM screening trial (ISRCTN20781131) were tested for FAM19A4/mir124‐2 methylation. By linkage with the nationwide network and registry of histo‐ and cytopathology in the Netherlands (PALGA), 35 cervical cancers were identified during 14 years of follow‐up comprising three screens (baseline, and after 5 and 10 years). The baseline scrape of 36.1% (n = 375) women tested positive for FAM19A4/mir124‐2 methylation, including 24 women with cervical cancer in follow‐up, and 30.6% (n = 318) had abnormal cytology (threshold borderline dyskaryosis or ASCUS), including 14 women with cervical cancer in follow‐up. Within screening round capability of FAM19A4/mir124‐2 methylation to detect cervical cancer was 100% (11/11, 95% CI: 71.5–100). Kaplan–Meier estimate of 14‐year cumulative cervical cancer incidence was 1.7% (95% CI: 0.66–3.0) among baseline methylation‐negative and 2.4% (95% CI: 1.4–3.6) among baseline cytology‐negative women (risk difference: 0.71% [95% CI: 0.16–1.4]). In conclusion, a negative FAM19A4/mir124‐2 methylation test provides a low cervical cancer risk in HPV‐positive women of 30 years and older. FAM19A4/mir124‐2 methylation testing merits consideration as an objective triage test in HPV‐based cervical screening programs.

What's new?

While HPV testing is increasingly being used for cervical‐cancer screening, there is a problem with this approach: Most HPV infections won't progress to (pre)malignant disease, which results in a significant number of unnecessary colposcopy referrals and over‐diagnoses. A better triage test is needed to discern which HPV+ women have clinically relevant disease. In this longitudinal study, the authors found that a methylation test may provide adequate predictive power. Low cervical‐cancer incidence after a negative FAM19A4/mir124‐2 methylation test among HPV+ women supports use of this methylation assay as safe, objective triage tool.

Identification and Validation of a 3-Gene Methylation Classifier for HPV-Based Cervical Screening on Self-Samples

Purpose: Offering self-sampling of cervico-vaginal material for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing is an effective method to increase the coverage in cervical screening programs. Molecular triage directly on hrHPV-positive self-samples for colposcopy referral opens the way to full molecular cervical screening. Here, we set out to identify a DNA methylation classifier for detection of cervical precancer (CIN3) and cancer, applicable to lavage and brush self-samples.Experimental Design: We determined genome-wide DNA methylation profiles of 72 hrHPV-positive self-samples, using the Infinium Methylation 450K Array. The selected DNA methylation markers were evaluated by multiplex quantitative methylation-specific PCR (qMSP) in both hrHPV-positive lavage (n = 245) and brush (n = 246) self-samples from screening cohorts. Subsequently, logistic regression analysis was performed to build a DNA methylation classifier for CIN3 detection applicable to self-samples of both devices. For validation, an independent set of hrHPV-positive lavage (n = 199) and brush (n = 287) self-samples was analyzed.Results: Genome-wide DNA methylation profiling revealed 12 DNA methylation markers for CIN3 detection. Multiplex qMSP analysis of these markers in large series of lavage and brush self-samples yielded a 3-gene methylation classifier (ASCL1, LHX8, and ST6GALNAC5). This classifier showed a very good clinical performance for CIN3 detection in both lavage (AUC = 0.88; sensitivity = 74%; specificity = 79%) and brush (AUC = 0.90; sensitivity = 88%; specificity = 81%) self-samples in the validation set. Importantly, all self-samples from women with cervical cancer scored DNA methylation-positive.Conclusions: By genome-wide DNA methylation profiling on self-samples, we identified a highly effective 3-gene methylation classifier for direct triage on hrHPV-positive self-samples, which is superior to currently available methods. Clin Cancer Res; 24(14); 3456-64. ©2018 AACR.

Genome-wide methylome analysis using MethylCap-seq uncovers 4 hypermethylated markers with high sensitivity for both adeno- and squamous-cell cervical carcinoma

Background

Cytology-based screening methods for cervical adenocarcinoma (ADC) and to a lesser extent squamous-cell carcinoma (SCC) suffer from low sensitivity. DNA hypermethylation analysis in cervical scrapings may improve detection of SCC, but few methylation markers have been described for ADC. We aimed to identify novel methylation markers for the early detection of both ADC and SCC.

Results

Genome-wide methylation profiling for 20 normal cervices, 6 ADC and 6 SCC using MethylCap-seq yielded 53 candidate regions hypermethylated in both ADC and SCC. Verification and independent validation of the 15 most significant regions revealed 5 markers with differential methylation between 17 normals and 13 cancers. Quantitative methylation-specific PCR on cervical cancer scrapings resulted in detection rates ranging between 80% and 92% while between 94% and 99% of control scrapings tested negative. Four markers (SLC6A5, SOX1, SOX14 and TBX20) detected ADC and SCC with similar sensitivity. In scrapings from women referred with an abnormal smear (n=229), CIN3+ sensitivity was between 36% and 71%, while between 71% and 93% of adenocarcinoma in situ (AdCIS) were detected; and CIN0/1 specificity was between 88% and 98%. Compared to hrHPV, the combination SOX1/SOX14 showed a similar CIN3+ sensitivity (80% vs. 75%, respectively, P>0.2), while specificity improved (42% vs. 84%, respectively, P < 10^-5).

Conclusion

SOX1 and SOX14 are methylation biomarkers applicable for screening of all cervical cancer types.

Methylation analysis and HPV genotyping of self-collected cervical samples from women not responding to screening invitation and review of the literature

Aim of the study

To assess the feasibility of partial HPV genotyping and methylation analysis of CADM1, MAL, and miR124-2 genes as triage tests in assaying self-collected cervical samples positive for high-risk HPV on primary screening, and to review the literature regarding host cellular gene methylation analysis of self-collected cervical samples.

Material and methods

Women residing in North-East Italy who had failed to respond to the invitation to participate in an organized population-based program were invited to provide a self-sample. Their stored baseline (self-collected) and follow-up (clinician-collected) cervical samples were included in the study. DNA was extracted from HPV-positive (Qiagen’s Hybrid Capture 2, HC2) samples. Partial genotyping with separate detection of HPV types 16 and 18 was performed with a hybrid capture-based method and a quantitative PCR assay. Methylation was assayed with a quantitative methylation-specific PCR.

Results

High-risk HPV infection was detected in 48% of baseline and 71% of follow-up HC2-positive samples. Methylation was demonstrated respectively in 15% and 23.5% of baseline and follow-up samples and chiefly involved a single gene (miR124-2). Invalid quantitative PCR results were recorded in 5% of self-collected samples. The specificity of miR124-1, MAL, and CADM1 methylation was 84%, 94%, and 98%, respectively, and the specificity of the three markers combined was 84%. Sensitivity was not estimated due to the lack of CIN2+ samples. The systematic review showed that different methylation assays yield different accuracy values.

Conclusion

Self-collected samples are suitable for methylation assays included in reflex triage testing. The reproducibility and accuracy of the methylation tests described in the literature should be improved.

JAM3 methylation status as a biomarker for diagnosis of preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions of the cervix

DNA methylation is clinically relevant to important tumorigenic mechanisms. This study evaluated the methylation status of candidate genes in cervical neoplasia and determined their diagnostic performance in clinical practice. Cervical cancer and normal cervix tissue was used to select the top 5 discriminating loci among 27 loci in 4 genes (CCNA1, CADM1, DAPK1, JAM3), and one locus of JAM3 (region M4) was identified and confirmed with 267 and 224 cervical scrapings from 2 independent colposcopy referral studies. For patients with atypical squamous cells of unknown significance and those with low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, with JAM3-M4 compared to a triage marker of hrHPV testing, the specificity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3 CIN3 and cancer cases (CIN3+) / no neoplasia and CIN1 (CIN1-) was significantly increased, from 21.88 to 81.82 and 15.38 to 85.18, respectively. The corresponding positive predictive value (PPV) was increased from 26.47 to 57.14 and 18.52 to 63.64, respectively. For hrHPV-positive patients, compared to a triage marker of cytology testing, JAM3-M4 showed increased specificity and PPV, from 30.67 to 87.65 and 38.82 to 82.14, respectively. We assessed whether JAM3-M4 could distinguish productive from transforming CIN2; the coincidence rate of JAM3-M4 and P16 was as high as 60.5%.

Triage of high-risk HPV positive women in cervical cancer screening

INTRODUCTION

High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing is expected to replace cytology as primary screening method for cervical cancer screening in an increasing number of countries. The high sensitivity of hrHPV testing is combined with a limited specificity which makes triaging of hrHPV positive women necessary. As an ideal triage method does not yet exist, an optimal triage strategy for hrHPV positive women based on current knowledge should be obtained. The aim of this article is to present an overview of available options for triage of hrHPV positive women, with their strengths and limitations and possible future opportunities.

AREAS COVERED

Current knowledge on morphological biomarkers, molecular biomarkers and combined triage strategies will be discussed to give an overview of the state-of-the-art on triaging hrHPV positive women. The literature search was limited to studies on triage strategies for hrHPV positive women. Expert commentary: Experience with morphology-based biomarkers makes these a valuable triage method. However, they lack the ability of differentiating productive from transforming infections. Molecular biomarkers are objective, highly reproducible, can be used in high throughput testing, and show promising results. With more extensive knowledge on these molecular markers, cervical cancer screening may transform to a full molecular screening in the future.

FAM19A4 methylation analysis in self-samples compared with cervical scrapes for detecting cervical (pre)cancer in HPV-positive women

BACKGROUND

High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)-positive women require triage to identify those with cervical high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia and cancer (⩾CIN3 (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3)). FAM19A4 methylation analysis, which detects advanced CIN and cancer, is applicable to different sample types. However, studies comparing the performance of FAM19A4 methylation analysis in hrHPV-positive self-samples and paired physician-taken scrapes are lacking.

METHODS

We compared the performance of FAM19A4 methylation analysis (and/or HPV16/18 genotyping) in self-samples and paired physician-taken scrapes for ⩾CIN3 detection in hrHPV-positive women (n=450,18-66 years).

RESULTS

Overall FAM19A4 methylation levels between sample types were significantly correlated, with strongest correlation in women with ⩾CIN3 (Spearman's ρ 0.697, P<0.001). The performance of FAM19A4 methylation analysis and/or HPV16/18 genotyping did not differ significantly between sample types. In women ⩾30 years, ⩾CIN3 sensitivity of FAM19A4 methylation analysis was 78.4% in self-samples and 88.2% in scrapes (ratio 0.89; CI: 0.75-1.05). In women <30 years, ⩾CIN3 sensitivities were 37.5% and 45.8%, respectively (ratio 0.82; CI: 0.55-1.21). In both groups, ⩾CIN3 specificity of FAM19A4 methylation analysis was significantly higher in self-samples compared with scrapes.

CONCLUSIONS

FAM19A4 methylation analysis in hrHPV-positive self-samples had a slightly lower sensitivity and a higher specificity for ⩾CIN3 compared with paired physician-taken scrapes. With a similarly good clinical performance in both sample types, combined FAM19A4 methylation analysis and HPV16/18 genotyping provides a feasible triage strategy for hrHPV-positive women, with direct applicability on self-samples.

Discovery of new methylation markers to improve screening for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2/3

Background

Assessment of DNA promoter methylation markers in cervical scrapings for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and cervical cancer is feasible, but finding methylation markers with both high sensitivity as well as high specificity remains a challenge. In this study, we aimed to identify new methylation markers for the detection of high-grade CIN (CIN2/3 or worse, CIN2+) by using innovative genome-wide methylation analysis (MethylCap-seq). We focused on diagnostic performance of methylation markers with high sensitivity and high specificity considering any methylation level as positive.

Results

MethylCap-seq of normal cervices and CIN2/3 revealed 176 differentially methylated regions (DMRs) comprising 164 genes. After verification and validation of the 15 best discriminating genes with methylation-specific PCR (MSP), 9 genes showed significant differential methylation in an independent cohort of normal cervices versus CIN2/3 lesions (p < 0.05). For further diagnostic evaluation, these 9 markers were tested with quantitative MSP (QMSP) in cervical scrapings from 2 cohorts: (1) cervical carcinoma versus healthy controls and (2) patients referred from population-based screening with an abnormal Pap smear in whom also HPV status was determined. Methylation levels of 8/9 genes were significantly higher in carcinoma compared to normal scrapings. For all 8 genes, methylation levels increased with the severity of the underlying histological lesion in scrapings from patients referred with an abnormal Pap smear. In addition, the diagnostic performance was investigated, using these 8 new genes and 4 genes (previously identified by our group: C13ORF18, JAM3, EPB41L3, and TERT). In a triage setting (after a positive Pap smear), sensitivity for CIN2+ of the best combination of genes (C13ORF18/JAM3/ANKRD18CP) (74 %) was comparable to hrHPV testing (79 %), while specificity was significantly higher (76 % versus 42 %, p ≤ 0.05). In addition, in hrHPV-positive scrapings, sensitivity and specificity for CIN2+ of this best-performing combination was comparable to the population referred with abnormal Pap smear.

Conclusions

We identified new CIN2/3-specific methylation markers using genome-wide DNA methylation analysis. The diagnostic performance of our new methylation panel shows higher specificity, which should result in prevention of unnecessary colposcopies for women referred with abnormal cytology. In addition, these newly found markers might be applied as a triage test in hrHPV-positive women from population-based screening. The next step before implementation in primary screening programs will be validation in population-based cohorts.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13148-016-0196-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Validation of the FAM19A4/mir124-2 DNA methylation test for both lavage- and brush-based self-samples to detect cervical (pre)cancer in HPV-positive women

Objectives

DNA methylation analysis of cancer-related genes is a promising tool for HPV-positive women to identify those with cervical (pre)cancer (CIN3+) in need of treatment. However, clinical performance of methylation markers can be influenced by the sample type utilized. We describe a multiplex quantitative methylation-specific PCR that targets FAM19A4 and mir124-2 loci, to detect CIN3+ using both HPV-positive lavage- and brush self-samples.

Methods

We determined methylation thresholds for clinical classification using HPV-positive training sets comprising lavage self-samples of 182 women (including 40 with CIN3+) and brush self-samples of 224 women (including 61 with CIN3+). Subsequently, independent HPV-positive validation sets of 389 lavage self-samples (including 78 with CIN3+), and 254 brush self-samples (including 72 with CIN3+) were tested using the preset thresholds. Furthermore, the clinical performance of combined methylation analysis and HPV16/18 genotyping was determined.

Results

Training set analysis revealed similar FAM19A4 and mir124-2 thresholds for both self-sample types to yield highest CIN3+ sensitivity at 70% specificity. Validation set analysis resulted in a CIN3+ sensitivity of 70.5% (95%CI: 60.4–80.6) at a specificity of 67.8% (95%CI: 62.7–73.0) for lavage self-samples, and a CIN3+ sensitivity of 69.4% (95%CI: 58.8–80.1) at a 76.4% (95%CI: 70.2–82.6) specificity for brush self-samples. In combination with HPV16/18 genotyping, CIN3+ sensitivity and specificity were 88.5% (95%CI: 81.4–95.6) and 46.0% (95%CI: 40.4–51.5) for lavage self-samples, and 84.7% (95%CI: 76.4–93.0) and 54.9% (95%CI: 47.7–62.2) for brush self-samples.

Conclusions

FAM19A4/mir124-2 methylation analysis performs equally well in HPV-positive lavage- and brush self-samples to identify women with CIN3+. In combination with HPV16/18 genotyping, significantly higher CIN3+ sensitivities are obtained, at decreased specificity.

•

FAM19A4/mir124-2 triage of HPV-positive self-samples is a feasible and promising tool

•

FAM19A4/mir124-2 analysis identifies HPV-positive women at risk of cervical cancer.

•

FAM19A4/mir124-2 analysis performs equally well in lavage and brush self-samples.

•

Further validation of HPV self-sampling with FAM19A4/mir124-2 triage is warranted

Diagnostic Value of Methylated Human Telomerase Reverse Transcriptase in Human Cancers: A Meta-Analysis

Human telomerase reverse transcriptase (hTERT) plays a critical role in the pathogenesis of human malignancies. Overexpression of hTERT is essential in controlling the propagation of cancer cells. The CpG island located at hTERT promoter region is subjected to methylation modification in human cancer. In this perspective article, we discussed the diagnostic value of methylated hTERT in human cancers. The definitive diagnosis of most solid tumors is based on histological and immunohistochemical features. Under certain circumstances, however, the use of methylated hTERT might be useful in overcoming the limitation of the conventional methods. Methylated hTERT showed a good diagnostic power in discriminating cancer from benign or normal tissues. Nevertheless, differences in detection method, methylation site, cancer type, and histological subtype of cancer make it difficult to evaluate the actual diagnostic accuracy of methylated hTERT. Therefore, we performed subgroup analysis to assess the effects of these factors on the diagnostic efficiency of methylated hTERT. We demonstrated that quantitative MSP (qMSP) assay offers the highest discriminative power between normal and cancer in comparison with different detection methods. In addition, the methylated sites selected by different studies had an impact on the detection performance. Moreover, the diagnostic power of methylated hTERT was affected by cancer type and histological subtype. In conclusion, the existing evidence demonstrated that methylated hTERT is effective in cancer detection. Detailed profiling of the methylation sites to local the common methylation hotspot across human cancers is warranted to maximize the diagnostic value of methylated hTERT in cancer detection.

Determination of malignant potential of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

Basic diagnostic procedures in cervical cancer screening are able to set the diagnosis but they do not provide any information about the biological nature and behavior of lesions. The causal link of HPV infection and cervical cancer and discoveries of complex interactions between host and HPV genome opened new possibilities in molecular diagnostics. HPV DNA analysis, determination of viral load, detection of E6 and E7 mRNA transcripts, identifying of methylation profiles, genomic changes, miRNAs, and telomerase activity should be the right choice for exact diagnostics and prediction of behavior of premalignant lesions of the cervix. These findings set a completely new light not only in diagnostic but also in management and treatment of cervical dysplasia and cervical cancer.

Comparing the performance of FAM19A4 methylation analysis, cytology and HPV16/18 genotyping for the detection of cervical (pre)cancer in high-risk HPV-positive women of a gynecologic outpatient population (COMETH study)

Recently, DNA methylation analysis of FAM19A4 in cervical scrapes has been shown to adequately detect high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cervical cancer (≥ CIN3) in high-risk HPV (hrHPV)-positive women. Here, we compared the clinical performance of FAM19A4 methylation analysis to cytology and HPV16/18 genotyping, separately and in combination, for ≥ CIN3 detection in hrHPV-positive women participating in a prospective observational multi-center cohort study. The study population comprised hrHPV-positive women aged 18-66 years, visiting a gynecological outpatient clinic. From these women, cervical scrapes and colposcopy-directed biopsies (for histological confirmation) were obtained. Cervical scrapes were analyzed for FAM19A4 gene promoter methylation, cytology and HPV16/18 genotyping. Methylation analysis was performed by quantitative methylation-specific PCR (qMSP). Sensitivities and specificities for ≥ CIN3 were compared between tests. Stratified analyses were performed for variables that potentially influence marker performance. Of all 508 hrHPV-positive women, the sensitivities for ≥ CIN3 of cytology, FAM19A4 methylation analysis, and cytology combined with HPV16/18 genotyping were 85.6, 75.6 and 92.2%, respectively, with corresponding specificities of 49.8, 71.1 and 29.4%, respectively. Both sensitivity and specificity of FAM19A4 methylation analysis were associated with age (p ≤ 0.001 each). In women ≥ 30 years (n = 287), ≥ CIN3 sensitivity of FAM19A4 methylation analysis was 88.3% (95%CI: 80.2-96.5) which was noninferior to that of cytology [85.5% (95%CI: 76.0-94.0)], at a significantly higher specificity [62.1% (95%CI: 55.8-68.4) compared to 47.6% (95%CI: 41.1-54.1)]. In conclusion, among hrHPV-positive women from an outpatient population aged ≥ 30 years, methylation analysis of FAM19A4 is an attractive marker for the identification of women with ≥ CIN3.

Methylated Host Cell Gene Promoters and Human Papillomavirus Type 16 and 18 Predicting Cervical Lesions and Cancer

Change in the host and/or human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA methylation profile is probably one of the main factors responsible for the malignant progression of cervical lesions to cancer. To investigate those changes we studied 173 cervical samples with different grades of cervical lesion, from normal to cervical cancer. The methylation status of nine cellular gene promoters, CCNA1, CDH1, C13ORF18, DAPK1, HIC1, RARβ2, hTERT1, hTERT2 and TWIST1, was investigated by Methylation Specific Polymerase Chain Reaction (MSP). The methylation of HPV18 L1-gene was also investigated by MSP, while the methylated cytosines within four regions, L1, 5’LCR, enhancer, and promoter of the HPV16 genome covering 19 CpG sites were evaluated by bisulfite sequencing. Statistically significant methylation biomarkers distinguishing between cervical precursor lesions from normal cervix were primarily C13ORF18 and secondly CCNA1, and those distinguishing cervical cancer from normal or cervical precursor lesions were CCNA1, C13ORF18, hTERT1, hTERT2 and TWIST1. In addition, the methylation analysis of individual CpG sites of the HPV16 genome in different sample groups, notably the 7455 and 7694 sites, proved to be more important than the overall methylation frequency. The majority of HPV18 positive samples contained both methylated and unmethylated L1 gene, and samples with L1-gene methylated forms alone had better prognosis when correlated with the host cell gene promoters’ methylation profiles. In conclusion, both cellular and viral methylation biomarkers should be used for monitoring cervical lesion progression to prevent invasive cervical cancer.

Methylation analysis of the FAM19A4 gene in cervical scrapes is highly efficient in detecting cervical carcinomas and advanced CIN2/3 lesions

Primary testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) in cervical screening requires triage to differentiate women with transient infection from those with persistent infection who require more intensive management given their risk for cervical (pre)cancer. In this study, the clinical performance of a novel methylation marker FAM19A4 for the triage of high-risk (hr)HPV-positive women was evaluated. Using a training-validation set approach, we analyzed a FAM19A4 quantitative methylation-specific PCR (qMSP). The training set comprised hrHPV-positive cervical scrapes of 43 women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) and 135 women with ≤CIN1. The validation set comprised hrHPV-positive cervical scrapes of 52 women with CIN2+, including 33 CIN3+, 19 CIN2, and 166 women with ≤CIN1. The methylation threshold of FAM19A4 qMSP that gave rise to CIN3+ specificity of 70% in the training set was applied in the validation set. This resulted in CIN3+ sensitivity of 75.8% [95% confidence interval (CI), 61.1-90.4] at 67.0% (95% CI, 60.3-73.8) specificity. Next, the validated qMSP was applied to an independent series of hrHPV-positive cervical scrapes of 22 women with cervical cancer, 29 with advanced CIN2/3 [i.e., women with a known preceding hrHPV infection (PHI) lasting ≥5 years as proxy of longer duration of lesion existence], and 19 with early CIN2/3 (i.e., PHI <5 years). All carcinomas (22/22) and advanced CIN2/3 lesions (29/29) were FAM19A4 methylation-positive, compared with 42.1% (8/19; 95% CI, 19.9-64.3) of early CIN2/3 lesions. In conclusion, FAM19A4 is an attractive triage marker for hrHPV-positive women, with a high reassurance for the detection of cervical carcinoma and advanced CIN2/3 lesions.

CADM1, MAL and miR124-2 methylation analysis in cervical scrapes to detect cervical and endometrial cancer

Aims

Gene promoter hypermethylation is recognised as an essential early step in carcinogenesis, indicating important application areas for DNA methylation analysis in early cancer detection. The current study was set out to assess the performance of CADM1, MAL and miR124-2 methylation analysis in cervical scrapes for detection of cervical and endometrial cancer.

Methods

A series of cervical scrapes of women with cervical (n=79) or endometrial (n=21) cancer, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN3) (n=16) or CIN2 (n=32), and women without evidence of CIN2 or worse (n=120) were assessed for methylation of CADM1, MAL and miR124-2. Methylation analysis was done by the PreCursor-M assay, a multiplex quantitative methylation-specific PCR.

Results

All samples of women with cervical cancer (79/79, 100%), independent of the histotype, and 76% (16/21; 95% CI 58.0% to 94.4%) of women with endometrial cancer scored positive for DNA methylation for at least one of the three genes. In women without cancer, methylation frequencies increased significantly with severity of disease from 19.2% (23/120; 95% CI 12.1% to 26.2%) in women without CIN2 or worse to 37.5% (12/32; 95% CI 20.7% to 54.3%) and 68.8% (11/16; 95% CI 46.0% to 91.5%) in women with CIN2 and CIN3, respectively. Overall methylation positivity and the number of methylated genes increased proportionally to the lesion severity.

Conclusions

DNA methylation analysis of CADM1, MAL and miR124-2 in cervical scrapes consistently detects cervical cancer and the majority of CIN3 lesions, and has the capacity to broaden its use on cervical scrapes through the detection of a substantial subset of endometrial carcinomas.

Methylation marker analysis and HPV16/18 genotyping in high-risk HPV positive self-sampled specimens to identify women with high grade CIN or cervical cancer

OBJECTIVES

Methylation marker analysis using bi-marker panel MAL/miR-124-2 is a promising triage test for identifying cervical (pre)cancer in high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) positive women. Bi-marker panel MAL/miR-124-2 can be applied directly on self-sampled cervico-vaginal material and its sensitivity is non-inferior to that of cytology, yet at the cost of more colposcopy referrals. Our objective was to increase specificity of MAL/miR-124-2 methylation analysis by varying the assay thresholds and adding HPV16/18 genotyping.

METHODS

1019 hrHPV-positive women were selected from a randomized controlled self-sampling trial (PROHTECT-3; 33-63 years, n=46,001) and nine triage strategies with methylation testing of MAL/miR-124-2 and HPV16/18 genotyping were evaluated. The methylation assay threshold was set at four different predefined levels which correspond with clinical specificities for end-point cervical intra-epithelial grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) of 50%, 60%, 70%, and 80%.

RESULTS

The CIN3+ sensitivity of methylation analysis decreased (73.5 to 44.9%) while specificity increased (47.2 to 83.4%) when increasing the assay threshold. CIN3+ sensitivity and specificity of HPV16/18 genotyping were 68.0% and 65.6%, respectively. Combined methylation analysis at threshold-80 and HPV16/18 genotyping yielded similar CIN3+ sensitivity as that of methylation only at threshold-50 (77.6%) with an increased specificity (54.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Combined triage by MAL/miR-124-2 methylation analysis with threshold-80 and HPV16/18 genotyping reaches high CIN3+ sensitivity with increased specificity to identify women with cervical (pre)cancer among HPV self-sample positive women. The combined strategy is attractive as it is fully molecular and identifies women at the highest risk of cervical (pre)cancer because of strongly elevated methylation levels and/or HPV16/18 positivity.

DNA methylation analysis in self-sampled brush material as a triage test in hrHPV-positive women

BACKGROUND

Primary high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing in cervical cancer screening shows relatively low specificity, which makes triage testing necessary. In this study, DNA methylation analysis was compared with cytology for triage testing in hrHPV-positive women. Moreover, feasibility of DNA methylation analysis directly on brush-based self-sampled specimens was assessed.

METHODS

Non-responding women from population-based screening were invited to self-collect a cervico-vaginal specimen for hrHPV testing; hrHPV-positive women were referred to a physician for triage liquid-based cytology. DNA methylation analysis was performed on 128 hrHPV-positive physician-collected triage samples and 50 matched brush self-samples with QMSP for C13ORF18, EPB41L3, JAM3 and TERT.

RESULTS

In physician-taken triage material, DNA methylation analysis of JAM3 showed the highest combined specificity (88%) and sensitivity (82%) for detection of CIN3+, whereas cytology showed a specificity of 48% and a sensitivity of 91%. Out of 39 women with abnormal cytology and normal histology (false-positive by cytology), 87% were negative for JAM3 and 90% for C13ORF18 methylation. Agreement between DNA methylation analysis performed directly on the matched self-sampled material and physician-taken samples was 88% for JAM3 (κ=0.75, P<0.001) and 90% for C13ORF18 (κ=0.77; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

DNA methylation analysis as a triage test in hrHPV-positive women is an attractive alternative to cytology. Furthermore, DNA methylation is feasible directly on brush-based self-samplers and showed good correlation with matched physician-taken samples. Direct molecular triage on self-collected specimens could optimise the screening program, especially for non-responders, as this would eliminate the need for an additional physician-taken scraping for triage testing.

Comparative performance of novel self-sampling methods in detecting high-risk human papillomavirus in 30,130 women not attending cervical screening

We determined whether the participation rate for a brush-based cervicovaginal self-sampling device is noninferior to the participation rate for a lavage-based one for testing for hrHPV (high-risk human papillomavirus). Additionally, positivity rates for hrHPV, the detection rates for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grades 2 and 3 or worse (CIN2+/3+), and user comfort were compared. A total of 35,477 non-responders of the regular cervical screening program aged 33-63 years were invited to participate. Eligible women (n = 30,130) were randomly assigned to receive either a brush-based or a lavage-based device, and a questionnaire for reporting user convenience. Self-sampling responders testing hrHPV-positive were invited for a physician-taken sample for cytology; triage-positive women were referred for colposcopy. A total of 5,218 women participated in the brush-based sampling group (34.6%) and 4809 women in the lavage-based group (31.9%), i.e. an absolute difference of 2.7% (95%CI 1.8-4.2). The hrHPV-positivity rates in the two groups were identical (8.3%, relative risk (RR) 0.99, 95%CI 0.87-1.13). The detection of CIN2+ and CIN3+ in the brush group (2.0% for CIN2+; 1.3% for CIN3+) was similar to that in the lavage group (1.9% for CIN2+; 1.0% for CIN3+) with a cumulative RR of 1.01, 95%CI 0.83-1.24 for CIN2+ and 1.25, 95%CI 0.92-1.70 for CIN3+. The two self-sampling devices performed similarly in user comfort. In conclusion, offering a brush-based device to non-responders is noninferior to offering a lavage-based device in terms of participation. The two self-sampling methods are equally effective in detecting hrHPV, CIN2+/CIN3+ and are both well accepted.

Clinical implications of (epi)genetic changes in HPV-induced cervical precancerous lesions

Infection of cervical epithelium with high-risk human papilloma virus (hrHPV) might result in productive or transforming cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) lesions, the morphology of which can overlap. In transforming CIN lesions, aberrations in host cell genes accumulate over time, which is necessary for the ultimate progression to cancer. On the basis of (epi)genetic changes, early and advanced transforming CIN lesions can be distinguished. This paves the way for new molecular tools for cervical screening, diagnosis and management of cervical cancer precursor lesions.

Credentialing of DNA methylation assays for human genes as diagnostic biomarkers of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in high-risk HPV positive women

Objective

Testing for high risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) is increasing; however due to limitations in specificity there remains a need for better triage tests. Research efforts have focused recently on methylation of human genes which show promise as diagnostic classifiers.

Methods

Methylation of 26 genes: APC, CADM1, CCND2, CDH13, CDKN2A, CTNNB1, DAPK1, DPYS, EDNRB, EPB41L3, ESR1, GSTP1, HIN1, JAM3, LMX1, MAL, MDR1, PAX1, PTGS2, RARB, RASSF1, SLIT2, SOX1, SPARC, TERT and TWIST1 was measured by pyrosequencing in cytology specimens from a pilot set of women with normal or cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN3) histology. Six genes were selected for testing in Predictors 1, a colposcopy referral study comprising 799 women. The three genes EPB41L3, DPYS and MAL were further tested in a second colposcopy referral study, Predictors 2, comprising 884 women.

Results

The six genes selected from the pilot: EPB41L3, EDNRB, LMX1, DPYS, MAL and CADM1 showed significantly elevated methylation in CIN2 and CIN3 (CIN2/3) versus ≤CIN1 in Predictors 1 (p < 0.01). Highest methylation was observed in cancer tissues. EPB41L3 methylation was the best single classifier of CIN2/3 in both HR-HPV positive (p < 0.0001) and negative samples (p = 0.02). Logistic regression modeling showed that other genes did not add significantly to EPB41L3 and in Predictors 2, its classifier value was validated with AUC 0.69 (95% CI 0.65–0.73).

Conclusion

Several methylated genes show promise for detecting CIN2/3 of which EPB41L3 seems the best. Methylated human gene biomarkers used in combination may be clinically useful for triage of women with HR-HPV infections.

•

Methylation of 26 human genes assessed by pyrosequencing in 40 cytology specimens

•

Several methylated genes show promise for detecting CIN2/3.

•

EBP41L3 shows reproducible biomarker potential in high risk HPV positive women.

Methylation marker analysis of self-sampled cervico-vaginal lavage specimens to triage high-risk HPV-positive women for colposcopy

Methylation markers were studied for their suitability to triage human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive women by testing self-collected cervico-vaginal lavage specimens. For this purpose, we analyzed 355 hrHPV-positive self-collected specimens with three methylation markers, that is, CADM1-m18, MAL-m1 and miR-124-2 by quantitative methylation-specific PCR. The areas under the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve for end-point cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) were 0.637 for CADM1-m18, 0.767 for MAL-m1 and 0.762 for miR-124-2. This indicates that CADM1-m18 is not suitable as single marker. By varying the thresholds of both markers in the bi-marker panels CADM1-m18/MAL-m1, CADM1-m18/miR-124-2 and MAL-m1/miR-124-2 upper and lower ROC curves were obtained, depicting the maximum and minimum CIN3+ sensitivity, respectively, at given specificity. For all these bi-marker combinations, the upper curves were similar. However, for the MAL-m1/miR-124-2 panel, the distance between upper and lower ROC curves was closest and this panel displayed the highest assay thresholds, indicating that this combination was most robust. At clinical specificities of 50 and 70%, the MAL-m1/miR-124-2 sensitivity for detection of CIN3+ ranged from 77.0 to 87.8% and from 64.9 to 71.6%, respectively. At 70% specificity thresholds no carcinomas were missed. By comparison, the CIN3+ sensitivity of HPV16/18 genotyping on the self-sampled lavage specimens was 58.1% (95%CI: 46.6-68.8) at a specificity of 87.7% (95%CI: 83.2-91.2). In conclusion, methylation analysis is a promising triage tool that in combination with HPV-DNA testing offers feasible, full molecular screening on self-collected cervico-vaginal lavage specimens.

Molecular targets of HPV oncoproteins: potential biomarkers for cervical carcinogenesis

Cervical cancer is the second most common cancer among women worldwide and is responsible for 275,000 deaths each year. Persistent infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) is an essential factor for the development of cervical cancer. Although the process is not fully understood, molecular mechanisms caused by HPV infection are necessary for its development and reveal a large number of potential biomarkers for diagnosis and prognosis. These molecules are host genes and/or proteins, and cellular microRNAs involved in cell cycle regulation that result from disturbed expression of HR-HPV E5, E6 and E7 oncoproteins. One of the current challenges in medicine is to discover potent biomarkers that can correctly diagnose cervical premalignant lesions and standardize clinical management. Currently, studies are showing that some of these molecules are potential biomarkers of cervical carcinogenesis, and it is possible to carry out a more accurate diagnosis and provide more appropriate follow-up treatment for women with cervical dysplasia. In this paper, we review recent research studies on cell cycle molecules deregulated by HPV infections, as well as their potential use for cervical cancer screening.

New technologies and procedures for cervical cancer screening

The clearly higher sensitivity and reproducibility of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) has led to widespread calls to introduce it as the primary screening test. The main concern has been its lower specificity, due to the fact that it cannot separate transient from persistent infections, and only the latter are associated with an increased risk of high-grade CIN and cancer. Thus, even proponents of HPV testing generally only recommend it for women over the age of 30 years (or in some cases 35 years). If HPV testing is to reach its full potential, new approaches with better specificity are needed, either as triage tests for HPV positive women or, if the high sensitivity of HPV DNA testing can be maintained, as alternate primary screening modalities. Approaches that may useful in this regard, especially as triage tests, include HPV typing, methylation (and consequent silencing) of host and viral genes, and new cytologic methods, such as p16(INK4a) staining, which attempt to identify proliferating cells. At an earlier stage of development are direct methods based on detection of HPV E6 or E7 proteins. Recent progress and current status of these methods is discussed in this chapter. The current status of visual inspection (VIA and VILI) methods is also surveyed and progress on self-sampling is reviewed. This article forms part of a special supplement entitled "Comprehensive Control of HPV Infections and Related Diseases" Vaccine Volume 30, Supplement 5, 2012.

Development of a multiplex methylation-specific PCR as candidate triage test for women with an HPV-positive cervical scrape

Background

Quantitative methylation-specific PCR (qMSP) analysis for determining the methylation status of (candidate) tumor suppressor genes has potential as objective and valuable test to triage high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) positive women in cervical screening. Particularly combined methylation analysis of a panel of genes shows most promising clinical performance, with sensitivity levels that equal or exceed that of cytology. However, the wide application of such methylation marker panels is hampered by the lack of effective multiplex assays allowing simultaneous methylation detection of various targets in a single reaction. Here, we designed and analyzed a multiplex qMSP assay for three genes whose methylation was previously found to be informative for cervical (pre)cancer (i.e. CADM1, MAL and hsa-miR-124-2) as well as a reference gene β-actin. Based on our experience, we discuss the optimization of the parameters that provide a practical approach towards multiplex qMSP design.

Methods

Primers and PCR reagents were optimized for multiplex qMSP purposes and the resulting assay was analytically validated on serial dilutions of methylated DNA in unmethylated DNA, and compared with singleplex counterparts on hrHPV-positive cervical scrapings.

Results

Upon optimization, including primer redesign and primer limiting assays, the multiplex qMSP showed the same analytical performance as the singleplex qMSPs. A strong correlation between the obtained normalized ratios of the singleplex and multiplex qMSPs on cervical scrapes was found for all three markers: CADM1 (R²=0.985), MAL (R²=0.986) and hsa-miR-124-2 (R²=0.944).

Conclusion

Multiplex qMSP offers a promising approach for high-throughput diagnostic analysis of the methylation status of multiple genes, which after proper design and validation can be equally specific, sensitive and reproducible as its singleplex versions.

High-risk HPV testing on self-sampled versus clinician-collected specimens: a review on the clinical accuracy and impact on population attendance in cervical cancer screening

This review elaborates on the accuracy and feasibility of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling, i.e., offering self-sampling of (cervico-)vaginal cell material by women themselves in nonclinical settings for high-risk HPV (hrHPV) detection in the laboratory, for cervical screening. To that end a bibliographic database search (PubMed) was performed to identify studies (published between January 1992 and January 2012) that compared clinical accuracy of HPV testing on self-sampled material with that of cytology or HPV testing on clinician-taken samples, and studies comparing response to offering HPV self-sampling with a recall invitation. Overall, hrHPV testing on self-samples appeared to be at least as, if not more, sensitive for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) as cytology on clinician-obtained cervical samples, though often less specific. In most studies, hrHPV testing on self- and clinician-sampled specimens is similarly accurate with respect to CIN2+ detection. Variations in clinical performance likely reflect the use of different combinations of collection devices and HPV tests. Because it is known that underscreened women are at increased risk of cervical cancer, targeting non-attendees of the screening program could improve the effectiveness of cervical screening. In developed countries offering self-sampling has shown to be superior to a recall invitation for cytology in re-attracting original non-attendees into the screening program. Additionally, self-testing has shown to facilitate access to cervical screening for women in low resource areas. This updated review of the literature suggests that HPV self-sampling could be an additional strategy that can improve screening performance compared to current cytology-based call-recall programs.

Aberrant DNA methylation in cervical carcinogenesis

Persistent infection with high-risk types of human papillomavirus(HPV) is known to cause cervical cancer; however, additional genetic and epigenetic alterations are required for progression from precancerous disease to invasive cancer. DNA methylation is an early and frequent molecular alteration in cervical carcinogenesis. In this review, we summarize DNA methylation within the HPV genome and human genome and identify its clinical implications. Methylation of the HPV long control region (LCR) and L1 gene is common during cervical carcinogenesis and increases with the severity of the cervical neoplasm. The L1 gene of HPV16 and HPV18 is consistently hypermethylated in invasive cervical cancers and can potentially be used as a clinical marker of cancer progression. Moreover, promoters of tumor suppressor genes (TSGs) involved in many cellular pathways are methylated in cervical precursors and invasive cancers. Some are associated with squamous cell carcinomas, and others are associated with adenocarcinomas. Identification of methylated TSGs in Pap smear could be an adjuvant test in cervical cancer screening for triage of women with high-risk HPV, atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance, or low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL). However, consistent panels must be validated for this approach to be translated to the clinic. Furthermore, reversion of methylated TSGs using demethylating drugs may be an alternative anticancer treatment, but demethylating drugs without toxic carcinogenic and mutagenic properties must be identified and validated.

DNA methylation based biomarkers: practical considerations and applications

A biomarker is a molecular target analyzed in a qualitative or quantitative manner to detect and diagnose the presence of a disease, to predict the outcome and the response to a specific treatment allowing personalized tailoring of patient management. Biomarkers can belong to different types of biochemical molecules such as proteins, DNA, RNA or lipids, whereby protein biomarkers have been the most extensively studied and used, notably in blood-based protein quantification tests or immunohistochemistry. The rise of interest in epigenetic mechanisms has allowed the identification of a new type of biomarker, DNA methylation, which is of great potential for many applications. This stable and heritable covalent modification mostly affects cytosines in the context of a CpG dinucleotide in humans. It can be detected and quantified by a number of technologies including genome-wide screening methods as well as locus- or gene-specific high-resolution analysis in different types of samples such as frozen tissues and FFPE samples, but also in body fluids such as urine, plasma, and serum obtained through non-invasive procedures. In some cases, DNA methylation based biomarkers have proven to be more specific and sensitive than commonly used protein biomarkers, which could clearly justify their use in clinics. However, very few of them are at the moment used in clinics and even less commercial tests are currently available. The objective of this review is to discuss the advantages of DNA methylation as a biomarker, the practical considerations for their development, and their use in disease detection, prediction of outcome or treatment response, through multiple examples mainly focusing on cancer, but also to evoke their potential for complex diseases and prenatal diagnostics.

Should human papillomavirus DNA testing be offered in combination with cytology or as a sole primary screening test in cervical cancer prevention?

Evaluation of: Rijkaart DC, Berkhof J, van Kemenade FJ et al. HPV DNA testing in population-based cervical screening (VUSA-Screen study): results and implications. Br. J. Cancer 106(5), 975–981 (2012). Previous studies have shown that the combination of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) testing and cytology increases sensitivity for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3, a surrogate end point for the reduction of cervical cancer. This paper addressed three questions regarding the implementation of high-risk HPV testing within a cervical screening program. The main question addressed was whether high-risk HPV testing should be provided as a standalone primary screen or in combination with cytology. Management of HPV-positive women and the optimum age for HPV testing were also examined. Results identified limited benefit from co-testing compared with HPV testing alone and emphasized the importance of repeat testing for HPV-positive women with negative cytology triage at baseline, in all women from 30 years of age onwards.

A four-gene methylation marker panel as triage test in high-risk human papillomavirus positive patients

Cervical neoplasia-specific biomarkers, e.g. DNA methylation markers, with high sensitivity and specificity are urgently needed to improve current population-based screening on (pre)malignant cervical neoplasia. We aimed to identify new cervical neoplasia-specific DNA methylation markers and to design and validate a methylation marker panel for triage of high-risk human papillomavirus (hr-HPV) positive patients. First, high-throughput quantitative methylation-specific PCRs (QMSP) on a novel OpenArray™ platform, representing 424 primers of 213 cancer specific methylated genes, were performed on frozen tissue samples from 84 cervical cancer patients and 106 normal cervices. Second, the top 20 discriminating methylation markers were validated by LightCycler® MSP on frozen tissue from 27 cervical cancer patients and 20 normal cervices and ROCs and test characteristics were assessed. Three new methylation markers were identified (JAM3, EPB41L3 and TERT), which were subsequently combined with C13ORF18 in our four-gene methylation panel. In a third step, our methylation panel detected in cervical scrapings 94% (70/74) of cervical cancers, while in a fourth step 82% (32/39) cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or higher (CIN3+) and 65% (44/68) CIN2+ were detected, with 21% positive cases for ≤CIN1 (16/75). Finally, hypothetical scenario analysis showed that primary hr-HPV testing combined with our four-gene methylation panel as a triage test resulted in a higher identification of CIN3 and cervical cancers and a higher percentage of correct referrals compared to hr-HPV testing in combination with conventional cytology. In conclusion, our four-gene methylation panel might provide an alternative triage test after primary hr-HPV testing.