Onclarity Human Papillomavirus Extended Genotyping in the Management of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia 2+ Lesions

A retrospective study for long-term oncologic and obstetric outcomes in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia treated with loop electrosurgical excision procedure: focus on surgical margin and human papillomavirus

BACKGROUND

The present study aimed to evaluate the long-term oncological and obstetric outcomes following the loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) in patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and investigate the risk factors for recurrence and preterm birth.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent LEEP for CIN 2-3 between 2011 and 2019. Demographic information, histopathological findings, postoperative cytology, and human papillomavirus (HPV) status were collected and analyzed. The Cox proportional hazards model and Kaplan-Meier curves with the log-rank test were used for risk factor analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 385 patients treated with the LEEP were analyzed. Treatment failure, including recurrence or residual disease following surgery, was observed in 13.5% of the patients. Positive surgical margins and postoperative HPV detection were independent risk factors for CIN1 + recurrence or residual disease (HR 1.948 [95%CI 1.020-3.720], p = 0.043, and HR 6.848 [95%CI 3.652-12.840], p-value < 0.001, respectively). Thirty-one patients subsequently delivered after LEEP, and the duration between LEEP and delivery was significantly associated with preterm-related complications, such as a short cervix, preterm labor, and preterm premature rupture of the membrane (p = 0.009). However, only a history of preterm birth was associated with preterm delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

Positive HPV status after LEEP and margin status were identified as independent risk factors for treatment failure in patients with CIN who underwent LEEP. However, combining these two factors did not improve the prediction accuracy for recurrence.

Human Papillomavirus Same Genotype Persistence and Risk of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia2+ Recurrence

Simple Summary

Women diagnosed with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and treated by excisional procedures remain at high risk for recurrence over time. “Treatment failure” has been reported in up to 23% of women within two years after treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of HPV same genotype persistence on CIN2+ recurrence. Our findings confirm that HPV same genotype persistence has 30-fold increased odds of developing CIN2+ recurrence (p < 0.001), whereas histological grade, glandular crypt involvement, and margin status are not significantly related with treatment failure. Persistence of multiple genotypes and of HPV 16/18 with or without other HR genotypes show a significant impact on relapse free survival. HPV genotyping as “test-of-cure” enables a personalized risk-based management, by identifying women at higher risk of relapse who need intensive follow-up and avoiding risk of over-treatment in women with new HPV genotype infection after surgery.

Abstract

To evaluate the significance of HPV persistence as a predictor for the development of CIN2+ recurrence and the impact of multiple genotypes and of HPV 16/18 on recurrence risk. A prospective cohort observational study was carried out at the European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy, from December 2006 to December 2014. A total of 408 women surgically treated by excisional procedure for pre-neoplastic and neoplastic cervical lesions were enrolled. HPV test was performed at baseline and at first follow-up visit planned at 6 ± 3 months after treatment. Two-year cumulative incidences for relapse were estimated and compared by the Gray’s test. Overall, 96 (23.5%) patients were persistent for at least one genotype at three to nine months from baseline and 21 (5.1%) patients relapsed. The two-year cumulative relapse incidence was higher in HPV persistent patients compared to not-persistent (CIF = 27.6%, 95% CI: 16.2–40.2% versus CIF = 1.7%, 95% CI: 0.3–5.8%, p < 0.001), in women with persistent multiple infections (CIF = 27.2%, 95% CI: 7.3–52.3%, p < 0.001), and with the persistence of at least one genotype between 16 and 18, irrespective of the presence of other HR genotypes (CIF = 32.7%, 95% CI: 17.9–48.3%, p < 0.001), but not significantly different from women positive for single infections or any other HR genotype, but not for 16 and 18. The risk of CIN2+ recurrence should not be underestimated when same HPV genotype infection persists after treatment.

Human papillomavirus genotyping predicts residual/recurrent disease after local treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia better than viral DNA testing

AIM

Type-specific persistent infection (TSPI) of human papillomavirus (HPV) is reportedly associated with a high risk of residual/recurrent disease after local treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). This study aimed to evaluate whether HPV genotyping is more accurate in detecting residual/recurrent disease than HPV DNA testing and identify which HPV genotype can predict a high risk of residual/recurrent disease.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patient outcomes and results of HPV DNA testing and genotyping at 6-12 months after local treatment for CIN2/3 for 439 women. We investigated residual/recurrent disease occurrence according to the TSPI and new infections. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV, respectively) of the two testing methods for predicting residual/recurrent diseases were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Eighty-five (19.4%) patients were positive for HPV DNA testing after treatment, of which 74 (87.1%) had TSPI. Residual/recurrent disease was identified in 34 (7.7%) patients, of which 30 were positive for HPV DNA testing and had TSPI of HPV16, 18, 31, 33, 52, and 58 (six HPV genotypes). The sensitivity and NPV of HPV DNA testing and TSPI were equal at 88.2% and 98.9%, respectively. The specificity and PPV of TSPI were higher than those of HPV DNA testing (89.1% vs. 86.4%, 40.5% vs. 35.2%, respectively). Furthermore, the TSPI of the six HPV genotypes further improved specificity (90.6%) and PPV (44.1%) with the same sensitivity and NPV.

CONCLUSION

HPV genotyping is more useful than HPV DNA testing for determining TSPI, especially of the six HPV genotypes.

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.

Analytical and Clinical Sample Performance Characteristics of the Onclarity Assay for the Detection of Human Papillomavirus

The objective of this study was to determine the result reproducibility and performance of the BD Onclarity human papillomavirus (HPV) assay (Onclarity) on the BD Viper LT platform using both contrived and clinical specimens. Reproducibility was assessed in BD SurePath liquid-based cytology (LBC) medium (SurePath) using contrived panels (HPV genotype 16 [HPV16] positive, HPV18 positive, or HPV45 positive) or clinical specimens (HPV16, -18, -31, -33/58, -45, or -52 positive or HPV negative). In addition, specimens from 3,879 individuals from the Onclarity trial were aliquoted prior to or following cytology processing and tested for HPV. Finally, specimens were collected using either the Cervex-Brush or Cytobrush (or Cytobrush/spatula) for comparison of HPV results. Contrived specimens showed >95% concordance with the expected results, and pooled clinical specimens had standard deviations and coefficients of variation ranging from 0.87 to 1.86 and 2.9% to 5.6%, respectively. For precytology and postcytology aliquot analyses, specimens showed >98.0% overall agreement and mean differences in cycle threshold (C_T ) scores for HPV ranging from -0.07 to 0.31. Positivity rates were close between the Cervex-Brush and Cytobrush/spatula for all age groups tested. Onclarity results are reproducible and reliable, regardless of sample collection before or after cytology aliquoting. Onclarity performs well regardless of the method of specimen collection (Cervex-Brush or Cytobrush/spatula) for cervical cancer screening.

Human Papillomavirus Genotyping Compared With a Qualitative High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Test After Treatment of High-Grade Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia: A Systematic Review

There is moderately high-quality evidence to support the improved clinical utility of human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping compared with qualitative HPV positivity to follow-up after treatment of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.

To systematically examine human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping compared with qualitative high-risk HPV result during follow-up after treatment of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), for risk estimation of posttreatment high-grade CIN.