HPV infections and cytologic abnormalities in vaccinated women 21–34 years of age: Results from the baseline phase of the Onclarity trial

HPV Testing and its Role in Cervical Cancer Screening

The recognition that persistent infection with carcinogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) is a necessary cause of cervical precancer and cancer has led to the introduction of HPV testing into cervical cancer screening, either as a primary screening test or in conjunction with cervical cytology (i.e., co-testing). HPV testing has much higher sensitivity for detection of cervical precancer and provides greater long-term reassurance if negative compared to cytology. However, most HPV infections are transient, and do not progress to invasive cancer, thus triage tests are required to identify individuals who should be referred to colposcopy for diagnostic evaluation. This chapter begins with a description of the biology, natural history, and epidemiology of HPV as a foundation for understanding the role of HPV in cervical carcinogenesis. This section is followed by a detailed discussion regarding the introduction of HPV-based testing and triage into cervical cancer screening and management. Summarized triage tests include cervical cytology, HPV genotyping, p16/Ki-67 dual stain, and HPV and cellular methylation markers. The final section of this chapter includes an important discussion on cervical cancer disparities, particularly within the United States, followed by concluding remarks.

Concordance between the BD Onclarity and Roche cobas assays for detection of HPV DNA in a Chinese population

As cervical cancer screening shifts from cytology to human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, a major issue involves validating more HPV tests. In recent years, some HPV tests are used for clinical performance verification in China. The purpose of this study was to explore whether the BD Onclarity (Becton, Dickinson and Company)HPV assay differs from the Roche cobas (Roche Molecular Systems)HPV assay, as determined using 944 cervical samples, including 588 with sequencing results. In the nucleic acid assay accuracy verification, the assays showed excellent concordance for detection of HPV16 (κ = 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89-0.97) and HPV18 (κ = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.83-0.97), and very good concordance for the 12 other high-risk types (HPV31/33/35/39/45/51/52/56/58/59/66/68, κ = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.75-0.83). The overall agreement for HPV DNA detection between Onclarity and cobas was very good (κ = 0.7755). No difference for ≥CIN2 sensitivity was observed between Onclarity and cobas (both 96.5%), whereas the ≥CIN2 specificity for detection of Onclarity (16.6%, 95% CI: 13.7-19.9) was higher than that of cobas (11.5%, 95% CI: 9.1-14.5). Onclarity exhibited comparable screening performance and triage efficiency compared to cobas in the detection of cervical disease in Chinese women.

A comprehensive HPV-STI NGS assay for detection of 29 HPV types and 14 non-HPV sexually transmitted infections

BACKGROUND

Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are prevalent throughout the world and impose a significant burden on individual health and public health systems. Missed diagnosis and late treatment of STIs can lead to serious complications such as infertility and cervical cancer. Although sexually transmitted co-infections are common, most commercial assays target one or a few STIs. The HPV-STI ChapterDx Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) assay detects and quantifies 29 HPVs and 14 other STIs in a single-tube and single-step PCR reaction and can be applied to tens to thousands of samples in a single sequencing run.

METHODS

A cohort of 274 samples, previously analyzed by conventional cytology/histology and Roche cobas HPV Test, were analyzed by ChapterDx HPV-STI NGS assay for detection of 43 HPV and STI. A set of 43 synthetic control DNA fragments for 43 HPV and STI were developed to evaluate the limit of detection, specificity, and sensitivity of ChapterDx HPV-STI NGS assay.

RESULTS

The assay was evaluated in this study, and the limit of detection was 100% at 50 copies for all targets, and 100%, 96%, 88% at 20 copies for 34, 8, and 1 target, respectively. The performance of this assay has been compared to Roche cobas HPV test, showing an overall agreement of 97.5% for hr-HPV, and 98.5% for both, HPV16 and HPV18. The assay also detected all HPV-infected CIN2/3 with 100% agreement with Roche cobas HPV results. Moreover, several co-infections with non-HPV STIs, such as C. trachomatis, T. vaginalis, M. genitalium, and HSV2 were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

The ChapterDx HPV-STI NGS assay is a user-friendly, easy to automate and cost-efficient assay, which provides accurate and comprehensive results for a wide spectrum of HPVs and STIs.

Evaluation of Implementation Effect of Cervical Cancer Comprehensive Treatment Patients With Whole-Course High-Quality Care Combined With Network Continuation Care

Purpose

Discuss the implementation effect of cervical cancer comprehensive treatment patients applying whole-course high-quality care combined with network continuation care.

Methods

From August 2020 to August 2021, 120 patients who met the inclusion criteria for comprehensive treatment of cervical cancer were divided into the regular group (n = 60) who received conventional care and the joint group (n = 60) who received whole-course high-quality care combined with network continuation care, according to the method of care. The comprehensive treatment cognition level, comprehensive treatment compliance, adverse reaction rate, quality of life questionnaire (QLQ-C30) score, self-rating anxiety/depression scale (SAS/SDS) score, and nursing satisfaction were compared between the two groups.

Results

After care, the comprehensive treatment cognition score and comprehensive treatment compliance score were higher in the joint group than in the regular group (P < 0.05). After care, the incidence of radiation cystitis and radiation proctitis was lower in the joint group than that in the regular group (P < 0.05). After care, QLQ-C30 scores on symptom domains, functional domains, and single questions were higher in both groups than before care, and were higher in the joint group than in the regular group (P < 0.05). After care, SAS and SDS scores were lower in both groups than before care, and were lower in the joint group than in the regular group (P < 0.05). After care, the joint group was more satisfied with care than the regular group (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

The implementation of cervical cancer comprehensive treatment patients with whole-course high-quality care combined with network continuation care has an ideal implementation effect, which can significantly increase the patient's cognition and compliance with treatment, the incidence of adverse reactions is less, the quality of life and emotional state have also improved significantly, and care satisfaction has also increased accordingly.

Real-world impact and effectiveness assessment of the quadrivalent HPV vaccine: a systematic review of study designs and data sources

INTRODUCTION

Vaccine effectiveness and impact studies are typically observational, generating evidence after vaccine launch in a real-world setting. For human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination studies, the variety of data sources and methods used is pronounced. Careful selection of study design, data capture and analytical methods can mitigate potential bias in such studies.

AREAS COVERED

We systematically reviewed the different study designs, methods, and data sources in published evidence (1/2007-3/2020), which assessed the quadrivalent HPV vaccine effectiveness and impact on cervical/cervicovaginal, anal, and oral HPV infections, anogenital warts, lesions in anus, cervix, oropharynx, penis, vagina or vulva, and recurrent respiratory papillomatosis.

EXPERT OPINION

The rapid growth in access to real-world data allows global monitoring of effects of different public health interventions, including HPV vaccination programs. But the use of data which are not collected or organized to support research also underscore a need to develop robust methodology that provides insight of vaccine effects and consequences of different health policy decisions. To achieve the WHO elimination goal, we foresee a growing need to evaluate HPV vaccination programs globally. A critical appraisal summary of methodology used will provide timely guidance to researchers who want to initiate research activities in various settings.

Evaluation of the Onclarity HPV assay on the high-throughput COR system

Background: Here we compare the performance of the high-throughput BD COR System (COR) to the Viper LT System (Viper) using the BD Onclarity HPV assay.Research Design and Methods: Remnant clinical specimens, contrived specimens in SurePath (BD) and PreservCyt (Hologic) media, and prospective clinical specimens in BD Cervical Brush Diluent (CBD) were tested. Outcomes included intra-laboratory agreement of Onclarity results on COR and inter-system agreement between COR and Viper.Results: Onclarity reproducibility on COR resulted in standard deviation and correlation of variation of Ct values ranging from 0.14 to 1.98 and 0.49% to 2.15%, respectively, for contrived specimens, and 0.9-3.08 and 2.89-9.21%, respectively, for clinical specimens. In the COR and Viper clinical agreement study, OPA for Onclarity ranged from 97.1%-98.9%, depending on the collection media type. PPA values for pooled, HPV(+) specimens at low positive (C₉₅), and moderate positive (3XC₉₅) target concentrations were ≥95.0% and 100%, respectively; PPA values associated with HPV 16, 18, 31, 45, 33/58, 52, 35/39/68, 51, and 56/59/66, individually, ranged from 93.8%-100%.Conclusions: Onclarity performance on COR is equivalent to Viper, and is accurate and reproducible for detection of all high-risk HPV genotypes, with a throughput of 330 results from a single 8-hour shift.

Systematic literature review of cross-protective effect of HPV vaccines based on data from randomized clinical trials and real-world evidence

BACKGROUND

The extent of cross-protection provided by currently licensed bivalent and quadrivalent HPV vaccines versus direct protection against HPV 31-, 33-, 45-, 52-, and 58-related disease is debated. A systematic literature review was conducted to establish the duration and magnitude of cross-protection in interventional and observational studies.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCT) and observational studies published between 2008 and 2019 reporting on efficacy and effectiveness of HPV vaccines in women against non-vaccine types 31, 33, 45, 52, 58, and 6 and 11 (non-bivalent types). Key outcomes of interest were vaccine efficacy against 6- and 12-month persistent infection or genital lesions, and type-specific genital HPV prevalence or incidence. RCT data were analyzed for the according-to-protocol (bivalent vaccine) or negative-for-14-HPV-types (quadrivalent vaccine) efficacy cohorts.

RESULTS

Data from 23 RCTs and 33 observational studies evaluating cross-protection were extracted. RCTs assessed cross-protection in post-hoc analyses of small size subgroups. Among fully vaccinated, baseline HPV-naïve women, the bivalent vaccine showed statistically significant cross-protective efficacy, although with wide confidence intervals, against 6-month and 12-month persistent cervical infections and CIN2+ only consistently for HPV 31 and 45, with the highest effect observed for HPV 31 (range 64.6% [95% CI: 27.6 to 83.9] to 79.1% [97.7% CI: 27.6 to 95.9] for 6-month persistent infection; maximal follow-up 4.7 years). No cross-protection was shown in extended follow-up. The quadrivalent vaccine efficacy reached statistical significance for HPV 31 (46.2% [15.3-66.4]; follow-up: 3.6 years). Similarly, observational studies found consistently significant effectiveness only against HPV 31 and 45 with both vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

RCTs and observational studies show that cross-protection is inconsistent across non-vaccine HPV types and is largely driven by HPV 31 and 45. Furthermore, existing data suggest that it wanes over time; its long-term durability has not been established.

High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Identification in Precancerous Cervical Intraepithelial Lesions

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to summarize the currently available human papillomavirus (HPV) testing methods for precancerous cervical intraepithelial lesions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search of PubMed using key words "high-risk HPV, precancerous cervical intraepithelial lesions, FDA-approved HPV tests, p16 IHC, Ki 67 IHC, fluorescent in situ hybridization for HPV, Pap smear, HPV vaccines, HPV tests using self-collected samples, and next-generation sequencing" was performed between January 1 and June 14, 2019. The package inserts of the Food and Drug Administration-approved HPV tests were obtained from the companies' Web sites.

RESULTS

Multiple morphology-based, immunohistochemical staining and nucleic acid HPV tests were reviewed, including the material required, methodologies, result interpretations, as well as their advantages, limitations, and futures. The structure of HPV and its natural history of infection and transmission were touched on as well for a better understanding of these testing methods.

CONCLUSIONS

Human papillomavirus tests are a critical component for cervical cancer screening, and understanding of these tests helps test results interpretation and patients' triage.

Cervical cancer screening for individuals at average risk: 2020 guideline update from the American Cancer Society

The American Cancer Society (ACS) recommends that individuals with a cervix initiate cervical cancer screening at age 25 years and undergo primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing every 5 years through age 65 years (preferred); if primary HPV testing is not available, then individuals aged 25 to 65 years should be screened with cotesting (HPV testing in combination with cytology) every 5 years or cytology alone every 3 years (acceptable) (strong recommendation). The ACS recommends that individuals aged >65 years who have no history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe disease within the past 25 years, and who have documented adequate negative prior screening in the prior 10 years, discontinue all cervical cancer screening (qualified recommendation). These new screening recommendations differ in 4 important respects compared with the 2012 recommendations: 1) The preferred screening strategy is primary HPV testing every 5 years, with cotesting and cytology alone acceptable where access to US Food and Drug Administration-approved primary HPV testing is not yet available; 2) the recommended age to start screening is 25 years rather than 21 years; 3) primary HPV testing, as well as cotesting or cytology alone when primary testing is not available, is recommended starting at age 25 years rather than age 30 years; and 4) the guideline is transitional, ie, options for screening with cotesting or cytology alone are provided but should be phased out once full access to primary HPV testing for cervical cancer screening is available without barriers. Evidence related to other relevant issues was reviewed, and no changes were made to recommendations for screening intervals, age or criteria for screening cessation, screening based on vaccination status, or screening after hysterectomy. Follow-up for individuals who screen positive for HPV and/or cytology should be in accordance with the 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology risk-based management consensus guidelines for abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors.