The BD Onclarity HPV Assay on Samples Collected in SurePath Medium Meets the International Guidelines for Human Papillomavirus Test Requirements for Cervical Screening

Performance of BD Onclarity HPV assay on FLOQSwabs vaginal self-samples

This study assessed the accuracy of high-risk human papillomavirus testing of BD Onclarity HPV (Onclarity) assay on vaginal self-collected FLOQSwab versus cervical samples to ensure similar accuracy to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Testing was performed on two automated platforms, BD Viper LT and BD COR, to evaluate the effect of machine and using two vaginal self-samples to analyze the influence of collection, transport, and freezing-unfreezing on the results. A cervical sample and two self-samples were collected from 300 women. The first collected vaginal and the cervical sample were tested on BD Viper LT, and the second swab was frozen and subsequently tested on both automated systems. Test results on vaginal and cervical specimens were considered the index and comparator, respectively; colposcopy and histology were reference standards. Relative sensitivity for ≥CIN2 on vaginal samples analyzed versus the cervical sample was 1.01 (0.97-1.06), 1.01 (0.97-1.06), and 1.00 (0.95-1.05), for the first, second self-collected sample tested on BD VIPER LT, and second self-collected sample tested on BD COR, respectively. Relative specificity was 0.83 (0.73-0.94), 0.76 (0.67-0.87), and 0.82 (0.73-0.92) using the three different workflows. Cut-off optimization for human papillomavirus (HPV) positivity defined at Ct ≤38.3 for HPV16, ≤ 34.2 for HPV18, and ≤31.5 for all other types showed an increased relative specificity with similar sensitivity. No significant difference was observed between self-samples tested with the two platforms and between first- and second-collected swabs. Onclarity assay on FLOQSwab using both platforms showed similar sensitivity but lower specificity to detect ≥CIN2 compared to cervical samples. By cut-off optimization, non-inferior specificity could be reached.

IMPORTANCE

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing on self-collected vaginal samples has been shown to improve women's participation to cervical cancer screening programs, particularly in regions with limited access to health care. Nevertheless, the introduction of self-sampling in cervical cancer screening programs requires prior clinical validation of the HPV assay in combination with a self-sample collection device, including also the laboratory workflow and automation required for high-throughput testing in screening. In this study, the performance of BD Onclarity HPV on FLOQSwab-collected vaginal self-samples has been compared to clinician-taken liquid-based cytology samples, to detect high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia using two high-throughput platforms, BD Viper LT and BD COR. The study findings have shown a similar performance of BD Onclarity on testing self-collected samples, confirming the validation of the proposed pre-analytical and analytical protocols for their use in cervical cancer screening programs based on self-collected vaginal samples.

Molecular diagnostics of infectious disease: Detection and characterization of microbial agents in cytology samples

BACKGROUND

Cytology samples are widely used to diagnose various infectious diseases by detection and identification of causative infectious agents, including bacteria, fungi, and viruses. The role of cytopathology in infectious disease has expanded tremendously in the past decades with the advances in molecular techniques. Molecular diagnostic methods, compared to conventional methods, have shown improved patient outcome, reduction in cost, and shortened hospital stay times. The aim of this article is to review molecular testing in cytology samples for diagnosis of infectious diseases.

METHODS

The literature search for molecular testing in common cytology samples for diagnosis of infectious diseases was performed. The findings of the studies were summarized. The common cytology samples included in this article were gynecologic specimens, cerebrospinal fluid, bronchoalveolar lavage, and urine samples.

CONCLUSIONS

There are a number of molecular diagnostic tests that are available to be used in common cytology samples to detect infectious agents. Each test has its own advantages and limitations. It is our hope that upon reading this review article, the readers will have better understanding of molecular diagnostic testing of infectious diseases utilizing commonly sampled cytology specimens in daily practice.

HPV Tests Comparison in the Detection and Follow-Up after Surgical Treatment of CIN2+ Lesions

Background: HPV tests differ for technology, targets, and information on genotyping of high risk (HR) HPV. In this study, we evaluated the performance of 6 HPV DNA tests and one mRNA test in the detection of cervical intraepithelial lesions (CIN) and as a test-of-cure in the follow-up after surgical conservative treatment. Methods: One hundred seventy-two women referred to the European Institute of Oncology, Milan, for surgical treatment of pre-neoplastic cervical lesions, were enrolled in this study (IEO S544) from January 2011 to June 2015. For all women, a cervical sample was taken before treatment (baseline) and at the first follow-up visit (range 3 to 9 months): on these samples Qiagen Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2), Roche Linear Array HPV Test (Linear Array), Roche Cobas 4800 HPV test (Cobas), Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV test (RT), BD Onclarity HPV assay (Onclarity), Seegene Anyplex II HPV HR Detection (Anyplex), and Hologic Aptima HPV Assay (Aptima) histology and cytology were performed at baseline, and the same tests and cytology were performed at follow-up. Results: At baseline 158/172 (92%), histologies were CIN2+, and 150/172 (87%) women were recruited at follow-up. Assuming HC2 as a comparator, the concordance of HPV tests ranges from 91% to 95% at baseline and from 76% to 100% at follow-up (PABAK ranging from 0.81 to 0.90 at baseline and PABAK ranging from 0.53 to 1 at follow-up). All HPV showed a very good sensitivity in CIN2+ detection at baseline, more than 92%, and a very good specificity at follow-up, more than 89%. Conclusions: HPV tests showed a good concordance with HC2 and a very good and comparable sensitivity in CIN2+ detection. Hence, an HPV test represents a valid option as test-of-cure in order to monitor patients treated for CIN2+ lesions during follow-up.

Evaluation of the characteristics of multiple human papillomavirus (HPV) infections identified using the BD Onclarity HPV assay and comparison with those of single HPV infection

Background

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is a major cause of cervical cancer and associated precursor lesions. Multiple HPV genotype infections have been reported. However, their clinicopathological characteristics still remain elusive.

Methods

For this study, 814 consecutive patients who had undergone colposcopy and HPV genotyping test using BD Onclarity HPV assay were retrospectively selected. Clinicopathological parameters of multiple HPV infections were compared with those of single HPV infection.

Results

Multiple HPV infections were found in 110 out of 814 cases (13.5%). Multiple HPV infections were associated with a significantly higher incidence of high-grade intraepithelial lesions (HSILs) compared with single HPV infection. Other high-risk HPV genotypes, in addition to HPV 16, were found more frequently in the multiple HPV infections group; these included HPV 51, 52, 33/58, 56/59/66, and 35/39/68. No specific coinfection pattern was not identified. Additionally, the number of HPV genotypes in multiple HPV infections was not associated with the progression to HSIL or squamous cell carcinoma.

Conclusions

Multiple HPV infections have distinct clinicopathological characteristics (compared with single HPV infection). As their biological behavior is uncertain, close and frequent follow-up is warranted.

Comparison of Seegene Anyplex II HPV28 assay with BD Onclarity HPV assay for human papillomavirus genotyping

Presently, human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening is commonly used and is replacing conventional cytology screening tests. The HPV genotyping assay is useful for triage in cervical cancer screening and the evaluation of HPV vaccination effects. In this study, we evaluated the clinical performance of two HPV genotyping assays, BD Onclarity HPV (Onclarity) and Seegene Anyplex II HPV28 (Anyplex) in the detection of relevant cervical lesions and for HPV genotyping concordance. Anyplex and Onclarity assays were performed on 920 consecutive liquid-based specimens. Anyplex, sensitivity, specificity, and genotyping concordance with Onclarity were optimal when restricted to ≥2+ (medium) viral loads. HPV genotyping agreement between the two assays ranged between 0.75 and 0.9 (excellent), except for HPV 33/58, which was 0.73 (good). With Onclarity as a reference, the relative sensitivity of Anyplex for the detection of ≥CIN 2 was 1.05 (95% CI: 0.99–1.1) and the relative specificity for detection of negative for intraepithelial lesion and malignancy (NILM) was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.85–0.93). For most ≥CIN 2 lesions, high-risk HPV was detected by Onclarity (66/72) and Anyplex (69/72) assays. For high-risk HPV negative ≥CIN 2 lesions, possible high-risk HPV genotypes were detected by Anyplex. In conclusion, the genotyping agreement between the tests was good to excellent. Full genotyping with Anyplex might confer additional benefits to patients with ≥CIN 2, although the difference is small. We also suggest an optimal cutoff value when reporting HPV infections using the Anyplex assay (≥2+; medium viral loads).

Clinical Validation of the Onclarity Assay After Assay Migration to the High-Throughput COR Instrument Using SurePath Screening Samples From the Danish Cervical Cancer Screening Program

Objectives

This study presents the clinical assessment of the Onclarity HPV Assay (Becton Dickinson) on the novel COR high-throughput instrument (Becton Dickinson) using the international guidelines in a routine setting.

Methods

Screening samples collected in BD SurePath from women aged 30 years and older were used in this validation. Noninferiority of the Onclarity HPV Assay on the COR instrument (Onclarity-COR) was assessed with the comparator assay glycoprotein 5–positive (GP5+)/6+ enzyme immunoassay (GP-EIA) for clinical sensitivity on 122 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 and greater samples. Specificity was assessed using 887 samples with twice-normal cytology. Inter- and intralaboratory reproducibility analysis was assessed using 525 samples. Finally, a time-and-motion study was performed to evaluate COR instrument performance characteristics.

Results

The Onclarity-COR was noninferior to the GP-EIA for both sensitivity (P = .0016) and specificity (P < .0001). The intralaboratory reproducibility was 98.3% (κ = 0.96), and interlaboratory agreement was 98.5 % (κ = 0.96). The daily hands-on time for the COR instrument was 58 minutes, and walk-away time was 7 hours, 2 minutes per 8-hour day shift.

Conclusions

The Onclarity-COR instrument fulfills international validation criteria on sensitivity, specificity, and laboratory reproducibility. The Onclarity assay’s extended genotyping capability, together with its high-throughput characteristics, makes the COR instrument an excellent candidate for use in human papillomavirus primary cervical cancer screening.

Development of models for cervical cancer screening: construction in a cross-sectional population and validation in two screening cohorts in China

BACKGROUND

Current methods for cervical cancer screening result in an increased number of referrals and unnecessary diagnostic procedures. This study aimed to develop and evaluate a more accurate model for cervical cancer screening.

METHODS

Multiple predictors including age, cytology, high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) DNA/mRNA, E6 oncoprotein, HPV genotyping, and p16/Ki-67 were used for model construction in a cross-sectional population including women with normal cervix (N = 1085), cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN, N = 279), and cervical cancer (N = 551) to predict CIN2+ or CIN3+. A base model using age, cytology, and hrHPV was calculated, and extended versions with additional biomarkers were considered. External validations in two screening cohorts with 3-year follow-up were further conducted (N_Cohort-I = 3179, N_Cohort-II = 3082).

RESULTS

The base model increased the area under the curve (AUC, 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.88-0.93) and reduced colposcopy referral rates (42.76%, 95% CI = 38.67-46.92) compared to hrHPV and cytology co-testing in the cross-sectional population (AUC 0.80, 95% CI = 0.79-0.82, referrals rates 61.62, 95% CI = 59.4-63.8) to predict CIN2+. The AUC further improved when HPV genotyping and/or E6 oncoprotein were included in the base model. External validation in two screening cohorts further demonstrated that our models had better clinical performances than routine screening methods, yielded AUCs of 0.92 (95% CI = 0.91-0.93) and 0.94 (95% CI = 0.91-0.97) to predict CIN2+ and referrals rates of 17.55% (95% CI = 16.24-18.92) and 7.40% (95% CI = 6.50-8.38) in screening cohort I and II, respectively. Similar results were observed for CIN3+ prediction.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to routine screening methods, our model using current cervical screening indicators can improve the clinical performance and reduce referral rates.

2020 list of human papillomavirus assays suitable for primary cervical cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Only clinically validated HPV assays can be accepted in cervical cancer screening.

OBJECTIVES

To update the list of high-risk HPV assays that fulfil the 2009 international validation criteria (Meijer-2009).

DATA SOURCES

PubMed/Medline, Embase, Scopus, references from selected studies; published in January 2014 to August 2020.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

HPV test validation studies and primary screening studies, involving testing with an index HPV test and a comparator HPV test with reporting of disease outcome (occurrence of histologically confirmed cervical precancer; CIN2+).

PARTICIPANTS

Women participating in cervical cancer screening.

INTERVENTIONS

Testing with an index and a comparator HPV test of clinician-collected cervical specimens and assessment of disease outcome (

METHODS

Assessment of relative clinical accuracy (including non-inferiority statistics index vs comparator assay) and test reproducibility in individual studies; random effects meta-analyses of the relative clinical sensitivity and specificity of index vs comparator tests.

RESULTS

Seven hrHPV DNA tests consistently fulfilled all validation criteria in multiple studies using predefined test positivity cut-offs (Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV, Anyplex II HPV HR Detection, BD Onclarity HPV Assay, Cobas 4800 HPV Test, HPV-Risk Assay, PapilloCheck HPV-Screening Test and Xpert HPV). Another assay (Alinity m HR HPV Assay) was fully validated in one validation study. The newer Cobas 6800 HPV Test, was validated in two studies against Cobas 4800. Other tests partially fulfilled the international validation criteria (Cervista HPV HR Test, EUROArray HPV, Hybribio's 14 High-Risk HPV, LMNX Genotyping Kit GP HPV, MALDI-TOF, RIATOL qPCR and a number of other in-house developed assays) since the non-inferior accuracy was reached after a posteriori cut-off optimization, inconsistent accuracy findings in different studies, and/or insufficient reproducibility assessment. The APTIMA HPV Assay targeting E6/E7 mRNA of hrHPV was fully validated in one formal validation study and showed slightly lower pooled sensitivity but higher specificity than the standard comparator tests in seven screening studies. However, the current international validation criteria relate to DNA assays. The additional requirement for longitudinal performance data required for non-DNA based HPV assays was not assessed in this review.

CONCLUSIONS

Eleven hrHPV DNA assays fulfil all requirements for use in cervical cancer screening using clinician-collected specimens.

Collapse

Key Words

• Cervical cancer
• Cervical cancer screening
• Diagnostic test accuracy: validation of tests
• Human papillomavirus
• Meta-analysis
• Systematic review

Collapse

MESH Headings

• Alphapapillomavirus
• Early Detection of Cancer
• Female
• Genotyping Techniques
• Humans
• Papillomaviridae/isolation & purification
• Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis
• Reproducibility of Results
• Sensitivity and Specificity
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology

Collapse

Grants

• 001 World Health Organization

Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Marc Arbyn Unit of Cancer Epidemiology, Belgian Cancer Centre, Scientific Institute of Public Health, Brussels, Belgium; Department of Human Structure and Repair, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University Ghent, Ghent, Belgium.
Marie Simon Haute Autorité de Santé, Saint Denis, France
Eliana Peeters Unit of Cancer Epidemiology, Belgian Cancer Centre, Scientific Institute of Public Health, Brussels, Belgium
Lan Xu Unit of Cancer Epidemiology, Belgian Cancer Centre, Scientific Institute of Public Health, Brussels, Belgium; School of Public Health, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
Chris J L M Meijer Department of Pathology, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, location VUMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Johannes Berkhof Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Kate Cuschieri Scottish HPV Reference Laboratory, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
Jesper Bonde Molecular Pathology Laboratory, Department of Pathology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Hvidovre, Denmark
Anja Ostrbenk Vanlencak Institute of Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
Fang-Hui Zhao Department of Cancer Epidemiology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
Remila Rezhake Unit of Cancer Epidemiology, Belgian Cancer Centre, Scientific Institute of Public Health, Brussels, Belgium; Department of Cancer Epidemiology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China; The 3rd Affiliated Teaching Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University (Affiliated Cancer Hospital), Urumqi, China
Murat Gultekin Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynaecological Oncology, Ankara, Turkey
Joakim Dillner Department of Laboratory Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
Silvia de Sanjosé National Cancer Institute, Rockville, USA
Karen Canfell Cancer Research Division, Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia; School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
Peter Hillemanns Departments of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Hannover Medical School, Germany
Maribel Almonte International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
Nicolas Wentzensen Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer, Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
Mario Poljak Institute of Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia

Collapse

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.

Methylation markers FAM19A4 and miR124-2 as triage strategy for primary human papillomavirus screen positive women: A large European multicenter study

In human papillomavirus (HPV) cervical cancer screening, cytology is used as triage to counter the low specificity of HPV testing. VALID-SCREEN is a EU-multicenter, retrospective study conducted to evaluate the clinical performance of the FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation-based molecular triage test as a substitute or addition to cytology as reflex testing of HPV screen positive women. FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation test (QIAsure Methylation Test) was evaluated in 2384 HPV-positive cervical screening samples, from women 29-76 years of age, derived from four EU countries. Specimens were collected in ThinPrep or SurePath media, HPV-status, concurrent cytology, and histology diagnosis were provided by the parent institutes. The control population consisted of women with no evidence of disease within 2 years of follow-up. A total of 899 histologies were retrieved; 527 showed no disease, 124 CIN2 (5.2%), 228 CIN3 (9.6%) and 20 cervical cancers (0.8%); 19 of 20 screen-detected cervical cancers were found methylation-positive (sensitivity 95%). Overall specificity of FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation test was 78.3% (n = 2013; 95%CI: 76-80). The negative predictive value of hrHPV positive, methylation-negative outcomes were 99.9% for cervical cancer (N = 1694; 95%CI: 99.6-99.99), 96.9% for ≥CIN3 (95%CI: 96-98), and 93.0% for ≥CIN2 (95%CI: 92-94). Overall sensitivity for CIN3 using FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation test was 77% (n = 228; 95%CI: 71-82). CIN3 sensitivity was uniform between centers independent of sample collection medias, DNA extraction methods and HPV screening tests. Being objectively reported compared to the subjectivity of cytology, equally performing across settings and screening methods, the FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation constitute an alternative/supplement to cytology as triage method to be investigated in real-life pilot implementation.

Clinical validation of full genotyping CLART® HPV4S assay on SurePath and ThinPrep collected screening samples according to the international guidelines for human papillomavirus test requirements for cervical screening

Background

To ensure the highest quality of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in primary cervical cancer screening, novel HPV assays must be evaluated in accordance with the international guidelines. Furthermore, HPV assay with genotyping capabilities are becoming increasingly important in triage of HPV positive women in primary HPV screening. Here we evaluate a full genotyping HPV assay intended for primary screening.

Methods

The CLART® HPV4S (CLART4S) assay is a newly developed full-genotyping assay detecting 14 oncogenic (16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, 66, 68) and two non-oncogenic HPV genotypes (6, 11). It was evaluated using SurePath and ThinPrep screening samples collected from the Danish and Swedish cervical cancer screening programs, respectively. For calculation of sensitivity, 81 SurePath and 80 ThinPrep samples with confirmed ≥CIN2 were assessed. For clinical specificity analysis, 1184 SurePath and 1169 ThinPrep samples from women with <CIN2 histology were assessed. Sensitivity and specificity of the CLART4S assay was compared to an established reference test; the MGP-PCR (Modified General Primers GP5+/6+ with genotyping using Luminex). Inter and intra laboratory reproducibility of the assay was assessed using 540 SurePath and 520 ThinPrep samples, respectively. The genotype concordance between CLART4S and MGP-PCR was also assessed.

Results

In SurePath samples, the sensitivity of CLART4S was 0.90 (MGP-PCR =0.93) and the specificity was 0.91 (MGP-PCR = 0.91); In ThinPrep samples the sensitivity of CLART4S was 0.98 (MGP-PCR = 1.00) and specificity was 0.94 (MGP-PCR =0.87). The CLART4S was shown to be non-inferior to that of MGP-PCR for both sensitivity (p = 0.002; p = 0.01) and specificity (p = 0.01; p = 0.00) in SurePath and ThinPrep samples, respectively. Intra-laboratory reproducibility and inter-laboratory agreement was met for both media types. The individual genotype concordance between CLART4S and MGP-PCR was good agreement for almost all 14 HPV genotypes in both media types.

Conclusions

The CLART4S assay was proved non-inferior to the comparator assay MGP-PCR for both sensitivity and specificity using SurePath and ThinPrep cervical cancer screening samples from the Danish and Swedish screening programs, respectively. This is the first study to demonstrate clinical validation of a full-genotyping HPV assay conducted in parallel on both SurePath and ThinPrep collected samples.

Human papillomavirus prevalence and risk factors among HIV-negative and HIV-positive women residing in rural Eastern Cape, South Africa

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the prevalence of high-risk (HR) human papillomavirus (HPV) and factors associated with HR-HPV infection among women from rural Eastern Cape, South Africa.

METHODS

HPV prevalence was determined by Hybrid Capture 2 assay in cervical specimens from 417 women aged ≥30 years (median 46 years) recruited from the community health clinic in the Eastern Cape.

RESULTS

HR-HPV prevalence was 28.5% (119/417), and HIV-positive women had significantly higher HR-HPV prevalence than HIV-negative women (40.6%, 63/155 vs 21.4%, 56/262, respectively; p = 0.001). HIV-positive status (odds ratio (OR) 2.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.63-3.90), having ≥3 lifetime sexual partners (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.16-3.89), having ≥1 sexual partner in the last month (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.21-2.92), ≥4 times frequency of vaginal sex in the past 1 month (OR 2.40, 95% CI 1.32-4.35), and having a vaginal discharge currently/in the previous week (OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.18-3.85) increased the risk of HR-HPV infection. In the multivariate analysis, HIV positivity remained strongly associated with HR-HPV infection (OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.17-3.22).

CONCLUSIONS

Risk factors related to sexual behaviors play a significant role in HR-HPV infection in this population. This report will inform health policymakers on HPV prevalence and contribute to discussions on the use of HPV testing as the primary cervical cancer screening test in South Africa.

Clinical and Analytical Performance of the BD Onclarity HPV Assay with SurePath Screening Samples from the Danish Cervical Screening Program Using the VALGENT Framework

The Validation of HPV Genotyping Tests (VALGENT) framework is an international cooperation designed to evaluate human papillomavirus (HPV) assays with genotyping capabilities.

The Validation of HPV Genotyping Tests (VALGENT) framework is an international cooperation designed to evaluate human papillomavirus (HPV) assays with genotyping capabilities. Here, we assessed the performance of the BD Onclarity assay using Danish SurePath cervical screening samples collected under the fourth VALGENT installment, consisting of 998 consecutive samples from a screening population and 297 enriched samples with abnormal cytology (100 with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance [ASCUS], 100 with low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions [LSIL], and 97 with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions [HSIL]). The Onclarity assay detects six HPV genotypes individually (genotypes 16, 18, 31, 45, 51, and 52) and eight genotypes in three bulks (genotypes 33 and 58; genotypes 56, 59, and 66; and genotypes 35, 39, and 68). The clinical performance of the Onclarity assay for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse (≥CIN2) and of two consecutive cytology outcomes negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy (2×NILM) was assessed relative to that of the GP5+/6+ PCR-enzyme immunoassay (GP-EIA) by a noninferiority test. The relative sensitivity for ≥CIN2 was 1.00 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97 to 1.04), and the relative specificity for 2×NILM was 1.04 (95% CI, 1.02 to 1.06). The Onclarity assay was found to be noninferior to the GP-EIA in terms of both sensitivity (P = 0.0006) and specificity (P < 0.0001). The type-specific performance of the Onclarity assay was also assessed, using the GP5+/6+ PCR with Luminex genotyping (GP-LMNX) as the comparator. The Onclarity assay showed good concordance for almost all HPV genotype groups. A stability analysis of SurePath samples was also performed, where a SurePath aliquot was stored refrigerated for 7 months and the internal control of the Onclarity assay was used as a marker for cellularity. The threshold cycle (C_T) value was the same (24.8) in the first and second Onclarity runs, showing that a SurePath sample can be stored refrigerated for 7 months and still remain a valid test specimen.

Clinical Utility of Human Papillomavirus Genotyping in Cervical Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Thirteen human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes are associated with the highest risk of cervical disease/cancer; however, the risk of disease progression and cancer is genotype dependent. The objective of this systematic review was to examine evidence for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (≥CIN 3) risk discrimination using HPV genotyping.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of English and non-English articles through MEDLINE, Cochrane, clinicaltrials.gov, and abstracts presented at relevant professional society conferences were searched from 2000 to 2019. Search terms included: cervical cancer screening, HPV genotyping, CIN, HPV persistence, humans, and colposcopy; prospective, controlled trials, observational studies, and retrospective studies of residual specimens; evidence included HPV genotyping (beyond genotypes 16/18/45) results. Data were obtained independently by authors using predefined fields. Risk of bias was evaluated with a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology facilitated overall quality of evidence evaluation for risk estimation. The study protocol was registered with the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42018091093). The primary outcome was CIN 3 or worse risk both at baseline and at different follow-up periods.

RESULTS

Of 236 identified sources, 60 full texts were retrieved and 16 articles/sources were included. Risk of bias was deemed low; the overall quality of evidence for CIN 3 or worse risk with negative for intraepithelial lesions or malignancies or low-grade squamous intraepithelial cytology was assessed as moderate; that with atypical squamous cells-undetermined significance and "all cytology" was assessed as high. Clinical and methodological heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis. Human papillomavirus genotyping discriminated risk of CIN 3 or worse to a clinically significant degree, regardless of cytology result.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence supports a clinical utility for HPV genotyping in risk discrimination during cervical cancer screening.

A review of the FDA-approved molecular testing platforms for human papillomavirus

The advent of US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved molecular testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) has resulted in a dramatic shift from cytological testing alone to a combination of cytology and molecular testing for primary HPV screening. HPV testing has quickly become an essential component of daily practice in most laboratories and clinical practices. Although the principle of HPV testing is now familiar, it is important to understand the mechanisms behind these platforms in order to properly interpret the results and understand the limits of each method. HPV tests are more automated and reproducible than cytology, but are by no means perfect. None of these platforms will identify every HSIL/CIN2+ or cancer. This fact must be kept in mind when correlating the results of HPV testing with cytology or biopsy findings. The goal of this paper is to review the FDA- approved molecular testing platforms for HPV, including methodology, limitations, and specifications. The concordance between the platforms will also be discussed. Package inserts of the 5 FDA- approved molecular testing platforms for HPV, as well as a literature review of the platforms, were reviewed and assimilated into the article. Due to the multiple modalities available for detection of hrHPV, the concordance between these assays becomes important. Prior publications have compared HC2, Cervista, cobas, and Aptima, with most studies comparing to HC2 because it is considered the reference standard. With the newly approved BD platform, concordance studies were reviewed as well.

Bayesian analysis of baseline risk of CIN2 and ≥CIN3 by HPV genotype in a European referral cohort

Whereas HPV16 and HPV18 have been the focus in current risk-based cervical cancer screening algorithms using HPV genotype information, mounting evidence suggests that oncogenic HPV types such as HPV31, 33, 52 and 58 pose a ≥CIN3 risk equivalent to or greater than that of HPV18, and the combined risk of HPV31 and HPV33 rivals even HPV16 in women above 30 years of age. Here, we evaluate the baseline risk of CIN2 and CIN3 by genotype in a colposcopy referral population from Denmark and Italy. In total, 655 women were enrolled upon a referral to colposcopy after a positive screening sample. All samples were HPV analyzed using Onclarity HPV assay with extended genotyping and combined with the histology outcomes, a Bayesian probability modeling was used to determine the risk per genotype assessed. The combined data for this referral population showed that the ≥CIN2 risk of HPV16 was 69.1%, HPV31 at 63.3%, HPV33/58 at 52.7%, HPV18 at 46.6% and HPV52 at 40.8%. For ≥CIN3, the risks were 44.3%, 38.5%, 36.8%, 30.9% and 16.8% for HPV16, HPV31, HPV18, HPV33/58 and HPV52, respectively, indicating that the baseline risk of disease arising from HPV16 is, not surprisingly, the highest among the oncogenic HPV genotypes. We find that the HPV genotype-specific ≥CIN2 and ≥CIN3 risk-patterns are so distinct that, for example, 35/39/68 and 56/59/66 should be considered only for low intensive follow-up, thereby proposing active use of this information in triage strategies for screening HPV-positive women.

Comparison Study of BD Onclarity HPV With digene HC2 High-Risk HPV DNA Test and Roche Cobas 4800 HPV for Detecting High-Risk Human Papillomavirus in Japan

Objectives

To evaluate the clinical performance of novel detection kits for 14 high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) types with the BD Onclarity HPV Assay (Onclarity; Becton Dickinson, Sparks, MD).

Methods

Two cervical specimens from 144 women were obtained and placed in BD SurePath Collection Vials. The first specimen was used for cervical cytology and digene HC2 High-Risk HPV DNA Test (HC2; Qiagen, Germantown, MD), and the second specimen was used for Onclarity and Roche Cobas 4800 HPV (Cobas; Roche Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, CA). Other HPV genotyping kits were used for specimens identified as positive by Onclarity or Cobas.

Results

Fifty-three of 144 specimens were positive by Onclarity. Overall agreement rates of Onclarity with HC2 and Cobas were 93.8% and 94.4%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia type 2 or higher of Onclarity were similar to HC2 and Cobas.

Conclusion

The results showed that the clinical performance of Onclarity was equivalent to HC2 and Cobas.

Validation of a Human Papillomavirus (HPV) DNA Cervical Screening Test That Provides Expanded HPV Typing

As cervical cancer screening shifts from cytology to human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, a major question is the clinical value of identifying individual HPV types. We aimed to validate Onclarity (Becton Dickinson Diagnostics, Sparks, MD), a nine-channel HPV test recently approved by the FDA, by assessing (i) the association of Onclarity types/channels with precancer/cancer; (ii) HPV type/channel agreement between the results of Onclarity and cobas (Roche Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, CA), another FDA-approved test; and (iii) Onclarity typing for all types/channels compared to typing results from a research assay (linear array [LA]; Roche). We compared Onclarity to histopathology, cobas, and LA. We tested a stratified random sample (n = 9,701) of discarded routine clinical specimens that had tested positive by Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2; Qiagen, Germantown, MD). A subset had already been tested by cobas and LA (n = 1,965). Cervical histopathology was ascertained from electronic health records. Hierarchical Onclarity channels showed a significant linear association with histological severity. Onclarity and cobas had excellent agreement on partial typing of HPV16, HPV18, and the other 12 types as a pool (sample-weighted kappa value of 0.83); cobas was slightly more sensitive for HPV18 and slightly less sensitive for the pooled high-risk types. Typing by Onclarity showed excellent agreement with types and groups of types identified by LA (kappa values from 0.80 for HPV39/68/35 to 0.97 for HPV16). Onclarity typing results corresponded well to histopathology and to an already validated HPV DNA test and could provide additional clinical typing if such discrimination is determined to be clinically desirable.

Time and temperature dependent analytical stability of dry-collected Evalyn HPV self-sampling brush for cervical cancer screening

As a new initiative, HPV self-sampling to non-attenders using the dry Evalyn self-sampling brush is offered in the Capital Region of Denmark. The use of a dry brush is largely uncharted territory in terms of analytical stability. In this study we aim to provide evidence on the analytical quality of dry HPV self-sampling brushes as a function of time and temperature.

We assessed the analytical stability of dry stored Evalyn brushes at three different temperatures, (4 °C, room temperature, 30 °C) and five different storage time points; T = 0 (baseline), 2, 4, 8, 16, and 32 weeks prior to HPV analysis using the BD Onclarity HPV assay.

Mean Ct value of the Onclarity internal control was used as comparator of cellularity across time and temperatures, with no or only borderline statistical differences observed. HPV detection was stable throughout the five time points. In addition, analytically amplifiable DNA copy numbers and DNA fragmentation was assessed using the Agena iPLEX Exome QC assay, with no or only borderline statistical differences observed.

In conclusion, the Evalyn brush is analytically stable with respect to human genomic material and HPV detection for up to 32 weeks at temperatures ranging from 4 °C to 30 °C.

•

The Capital Region of Denmark is implementing HPV self-sampling using a dry brush.

•

But how analytically stable is a dry collected self-sampling device?

•

Stability was established for both human DNA (all, N = 637) and HPV (positives, N = 41).

•

We found the Evalyn Self-sampling brush stable up to 6 month.

•

Neither 4 °C nor 30 °C changed the analytical stability of the dry brush.

Influence of Prior Knowledge of Human Papillomavirus Status on the Performance of Cytology Screening

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the influence of prior knowledge of human papillomavirus (HPV) status in cervical cytopathology readings.

METHODS

Participants comprised 2,376 women who underwent parallel cytology and HPV-DNA testing. Smears were read twice by the same team, first with previous knowledge of HPV-DNA status.

RESULTS

Overall, 239 (10.2%) smears had their cytology classification altered by the HPV-informed review. Cytology readings with prior knowledge of the HPV status revealed 10.5% of abnormal smears (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or higher), while without prior knowledge, this rate dropped to 7.6%. When HPV status was informed, a significant increase in all categories of altered smears was observed. Cytology with prior knowledge of HPV status detected more cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN 2+) compared with blinded: 86.7% vs 60.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data indicate that cytology interpreted with prior knowledge of the HPV status provides higher sensitivity for CIN 2+ lesions while marginally reducing the overall specificity compared with HPV status blinded cytology.

High risk human papillomavirus prevalence and genotype distribution among women infected with HIV in Manaus, Amazonas

BACKGROUND

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive women have a high prevalence of human papillomavirus (HPV), and are infected with a broader range of HPV types than HIV-negative women. We aimed to determine the prevalence of cervical cytologic abnormalities, high-risk (HR)-HPV prevalence, type distribution according to the severity of cervical lesions and CD4 cell count and identify factors associated with HR-HPV infection among women living with HIV in Manaus, Amazonas.

METHODS

We enrolled 325 women living with HIV that attended an infectious diseases referral hospital. Each woman underwent a gynecological exam, cervical cytology, HR-HPV detection by Polymerase chain Reaction (PCR) using the BD Onclarity™ HPV Assay, colposcopy and biopsy, when necessary. We assessed the associations between potential risk factors and HR-HPV infection.

RESULTS

Overall, 299 (92.0%) women had a PCR result. The prevalence of HR-HPV- infection was 31.1%. The most prevalent HR-HPV types were: 56/59/66 (32.2%), 35/39/68 (28.0%), 52 (21.5%), 16 (19.4%), and 45 (12.9%). Among the women with HR-HPV infection (n = 93), 43.0% had multiple infections. Women with HPV infection showed higher prevalence of cervical abnormalities than that HPV-negative (LSIL: 22.6% vs. 1.5%; HSIL: 10.8% vs. 0.0%). The prevalence of HR-HPV among women with cytological abnormalities was 87.5% for LSIL and 100.0% for HSIL. Women with CD4 < 200 cell/mm³ showed the highest HR-HPV prevalence (59.3%) although this trend was not statistically significant (p-value = 0.62). The mean CD4 cell count decreased with increasing severity of cervical lesions (p-value = 0.001). The multivariable analysis showed that increasing age was associated with a decreased risk of HR-HPV infection with an adjusted prevalence odds ratio of 0.9 (95.0% CI: 0.9-1.0, p-value: 0.03) for each additional year. The only factor statistically significant associated with HR-HPV infection was CD4 cell count.

CONCLUSIONS

HR-HPV and abnormal cytology prevalence are high among women in the Amazonas. The low CD4 cell count was an important determinant of HPV infection and abnormal cytological findings. HPV quadrivalent vaccination used in Brazil might not offer protection for an important fraction of HPV-related disease burden in women living with HIV. This is partly explained by the high presence of non targeted vaccine HR-HPVs, such as the HPV genotype groups 56/59/66, 35/39/68 and individually HPV-52 and HPV-45, some of which contribute to high-grade lesion.

Prevalence of Human Papillomavirus in Self-Taken Samples from Screening Nonattenders

The Copenhagen Self-Sampling Initiative (CSi) has shown how human papillomavirus (HPV)-based self-sampling can be used to increase screening participation among 23,632 nonattenders in the Capital Region of Denmark. In this study, we describe HPV prevalence and genotype frequency in 4,824 self-samples as determined by three HPV assays (the CLART, Onclarity, and Hybrid Capture 2 [HC2] assays) and compare the results with those for physician-taken follow-up samples. The HPV self-sample findings were also compared to the findings for a reference population of 3,347 routinely screened women from the Horizon study, which had been undertaken in the same screening laboratory. Nonattenders had an HPV prevalence of 11.3% as determined by the CLART assay, which was lower than that for women from the Horizon study (18.5%). One-third of the CSi women who tested HPV positive by self-sampling tested HPV negative on the physician-taken follow-up sample. The CLART and Onclarity assays agreed on 64% (95% confidence interval [CI], 60 to 68%) of the HPV-positive self-taken samples. When the HC2 assay results were added into a three-way comparison, the level of agreement decreased to 27% (95% CI, 24 to 29%). Our findings suggest that further validation of HPV assays on self-taken samples is needed for optimal HPV detection and correct clinical management of HPV-positive women.

Assessment of a New Lower-Cost Real-Time PCR Assay for Detection of High-Risk Human Papillomavirus: Useful for Cervical Screening in Limited-Resource Settings?

Inexpensive and easy-to-perform human papillomavirus (HPV) tests are needed for primary cervical cancer screening in lower-resource regions. In a convenience sample of 516 residual exfoliative cervical specimens from the Kaiser Permanente Northern California and U.S. National Cancer Institute Persistence and Progression Study, we assessed the agreement and clinical performance of a simple, inexpensive real-time PCR assay for the detection of 13 carcinogenic HPV types (the H13 assay; Hybribio, Hong Kong) that is marketed in limited-resource settings compared to previous testing by the Hybrid Capture 2 assay (HC2; Qiagen, Germantown, MD) and the Onclarity assay (BD Diagnostics, Sparks, MD). The test set was chosen to include many HPV-positive specimens. The reference standard was a combination of HC2 and Onclarity results for HPV detection and histologic diagnosis of controls (less than cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 [<CIN2]) or cases (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher [CIN2+]) for disease status. In this enriched convenience sample, H13 tested positive for 94.4% of the 108 HC2- and Onclarity-positive CIN2+ specimens and negative for 88.2% of the 51 HC2- and Onclarity-negative <CIN2 specimens. H13 positivity was significantly lower than that of HC2 among women with CIN2+ (89.9% versus 98.7%, respectively) (P < 0.001) and <CIN2 (53.5% versus 72.4%, respectively) (P < 0.001). In conclusion, H13 corresponds well to the combination of HC2 and Onclarity and has good clinical accuracy compared to histologic diagnosis, with less cross-reactivity with untargeted HPV types than HC2. H13 is a lower-cost HPV DNA test that might be useful for primary screening in limited-resource settings.