Health economic evaluation of an mRNA high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) assay versus a DNA HR-HPV assay for the proposed French cervical screening programme

RNA extended interventional nucleic acid longitudinal study: Clinical performance of Aptima messenger RNA HPV testing in cervical cancer screening with a 9-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

There is a need for additional longitudinal studies with the Aptima messenger RNA human papillomavirus test (AHPV) to support the safety of extended screening intervals. RNA-based extended interventional nucleic acid (REINA) provides relevant information on the clinical performance of AHPV.

METHODS

This is a longitudinal prospective analysis of 1538 participants after AHPV and liquid-based cytology (LBC) co-test complemented with REINA interventional protocol with a second co-test 4 years after negative screening on 2000 women. Diagnostic accuracy and cumulative risks for CIN2+ up to 9 years were calculated for all test combinations.

RESULTS

Sensitivity and specificity for CIN2+ were 96.9% and 88.0% for AHPV and 72.3% and 92.0% for LBC. Negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) of AHPV were 99.9% and 23.6%. The 5- and 9-year risks of AHPV-negative women were 0.4% and 1.0% (CIN2+) and 0.3% and 0.7% (CIN3+), a 73% and 64% lower risk than with negative LBC (p ≤ .002). REINA participants with an AHPV-positive result at second co-test after a negative AHPV in first round had a significantly lower 5-year risk of CIN2+ (11.1%) than AHPV-positive women with unknown HPV history (29.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, this constitutes the longest European longitudinal study with AHPV testing in screening population. It reveals 99.9% NPV and a significant protective effect of a previous negative test 5 years after a new HPV infection. These findings support the safety of Aptima for screening intervals beyond 5 years. The risk of disease is lower 9 years after a negative AHPV test than 3 years after a negative LBC. High specificity and PPV of Aptima may benefit controlling overtreatment and colposcopy referrals.

An economic evaluation of two cervical screening algorithms in Belgium: HR-HPV primary compared to HR-HPV and liquid-based cytology co-testing

OBJECTIVE

To assess the costs and benefits of two algorithms for cervical cancer screening in Belgium (1) high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) primary screening and (2) HR-HPV and liquid-based cytology (LBC) co-testing.

METHODS

A decision tree was adapted from published work and parameterised using HORIZON study data and Belgian cost and population data. The theoretical model represents two different screening algorithms for a cohort of 577 846 women aged 25-64 attending routine cervical screening. Scenario analyses were used to explore the impact of including vaccinated women and alternative pricing approaches. Uncertainty analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

The cost per woman screened was €113.50 for HR-HPV primary screening and €101.70 for co-testing, representing a total cost of €65 588 573 and €58 775 083, respectively, for the cohort; a 10% difference. For one screening cycle, compared to HR-HPV primary, co-testing resulted in 13 173 more colposcopies, 67 731 more HR-HPV tests and 477 020 more LBC tests. Co-testing identified 2351 more CIN2+ cases per year (27% more than HR-HPV primary) and 1602 more CIN3+ cases (24% more than HR-HPV primary) than HR-HPV primary.

CONCLUSION

In Belgium, a co-testing algorithm could increase cervical pre-cancer detection rates compared to HR-HPV primary. Co-testing would cost less than HR-HPV primary if the cost of the HPV test and LBC were cost-neutral compared to the current cost of LBC screening but would cost more if the cost per HPV test and LBC were the same in both co-testing and HR-HPV primary strategies.

Agreement between Self- and Physician‑Sampling for Detection of High‑Risk Human Papillomavirus Infections in Women Attending Cervical Screening at National Cancer Institute, Thailand

BACKGROUND

We determined testing of self-sampling vagina swabs for Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) can be used to screen for cervical disease in outpatient clinics.

METHODS

In this study, women attending cervical cancer screening clinic and gynecology clinic of the National Cancer Institute were invited to take a vaginal self-sampling and physician-collected cervical sampling.

RESULTS

Of 268 participants, 20 (7.5%) were HPV-positive on the physician-collected samples. Among these screen-positive women, only two (0.7%) had HPV 18 and/or 45 and none had HPV 16 infections. For the self-collected samples, 4 participants had invalid HPV test results. Of the remaining 264 women with valid test results on self-collected samples, 29 (11.0 %) were HPV-positive, of whom, two (0.8%) were infected with HPV 16 and one (0.4%) with HPV 18 and/or 45 infections. The agreement between self-sampling and physician-sampling HPV test results (when two HPV results categories were considered) was 92. 8% with a moderate Kappa value of 0.57.

CONCLUSION

Overall, self-sampling seems to be a reliable alternative to health-provider collection. However, instructions on proper procedures for sample collection to the women are important step before general roll out.

Performance of the Human Papillomavirus E6/E7 mRNA Assay in the Primary Screening of Cervical Cancer: Opportunistic Screening in Fujian, China

Purpose

A high-risk human papillomavirus E6/E7 mRNA (HR-HPV mRNA) assay is widely used in cervical cancer screening in China. However, it is still unclear whether stand-alone HR-HPV mRNA testing is sufficient for primary screening. The purpose of this study was to investigate the feasibility of a stand-alone HR-HPV mRNA assay for primary screening of cervical cancer.

Methods

Women aged 21 and older were recruited in Fujian Province, China, from January 2020 to January 2022. Cervical exfoliated cells were collected for cervical cytology and HR-HPV mRNA assays, and women with positive results on either assay were referred for colposcopy. The screening effectiveness of the assay was calculated based on the cervical histology. When comparing the efficacy of the different screening strategies, only women aged 25 and older were included.

Results

A total of 9927 women were recruited. This study identified 217 cases of high-grade squamous intraepithelial disease or worse (HSIL+). The overall age-specific HR-HPV infection rate showed a U-shaped distribution. The sensitivity of the HR-HPV mRNA assay to identify CIN2+ and CIN3+ was 97.2% and 97.9%, respectively, which was significantly higher than that of cytology (82.9% and 88.6%, P<0.001 and 0.002). The sensitivity of the HR-HPV mRNA primary screening strategy to identify CIN2+ and CIN3+ was 92.2% and 94.3%, respectively, which was similar to the co-testing strategy (P=0.336 and 0.394) and higher than the cytology primary screening (P=0.002 and 0.048). In addition, the HR-HPV primary screening strategy had a lower referral rate for colposcopy than cytology primary screening (5.4% vs 6.6%, P<0.001), and the screening cost was lower than co-testing ($29,594.3 per 1000 screened women vs $55,140 per 1000 screened women, P<0.001).

Conclusion

In conclusion, the detection of CIN2+/CIN3+ by HR-HPV mRNA is both specific and sensitive. It may be suitable for primary screening of cervical cancer in China.