Clinical and Analytical Evaluation of the Anyplex II HPV HR Detection Assay within the VALGENT-3 Framework

Allplex HPV HR Detection assay fulfils all clinical performance and reproducibility validation requirements for primary cervical cancer screening

Human papillomavirus (HPV)-based screening offers better protection against cervical cancer compared to cytology, but HPV screening assays must adhere to validation requirements of the international guidelines to ensure optimal performance. Allplex HPV HR Detection (Allplex) assay, launched in the late 2022, is a fully automated real-time PCR-based assay utilizing innovative technology that enables quantification and concurrent distinction of 14 high-risk HPV genotypes (HPV16,18,31,33,35,39,45,51,52,56,58,59,66 and 68). We assessed the validity of the Allplex for cervical cancer screening purposes, via comparison to a clinically validated comparator assay (Hybrid Capture 2; HC2), and through assessment of intra-laboratory reproducibility and inter-laboratory agreement. A clinical validation panel comprised of 973 residual ThinPrep samples was obtained from women aged 30-64 years participating in the organized Slovenian screening program, of these 863 were from women undergoing their regular screening visit after a previous negative screen test while 110 were from women with underlying cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) lesions. The Allplex's relative clinical sensitivity for detection of CIN2+ and CIN3+ were 1.01 (95%CI;0.98-1.04) and 0.98 (95%CI;0.95-1.02), compared to that of HC2. At recommended thresholds of ≥98% and ≥90%, the Allplex's clinical sensitivity and specificity (p=0.0004 and p=0.02, respectively) were non-inferior to HC2. High intra-laboratory reproducibility and inter-laboratory agreement, both overall (98.1% and 97.9%, respectively) and at genotype level (>98.7%) was observed. In addition, analytical genotype-specific performance of Allplex was compared to that of its predecessor Anyplex HPV HR; high overall agreement was observed (96.3%; kappa value 0.88), with some variations in performance. In conclusion, Allplex met all validation criteria described in the international guidelines on sensitivity, specificity and laboratory reproducibility and can be considered clinically validated for primary cervical cancer screening.

Comparison between the Roche Cobas 4800 Human Papillomavirus (HPV), Abbott RealTime High-Risk HPV, Seegene Anyplex II HPV28, and Novel Seegene Allplex HPV28 Assays for High-Risk HPV Detection and Genotyping in Mocked Self-Samples

Infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) is well recognized as the main cause of cervical cancer. The recently developed Seegene Allplex HPV28 assay is a novel quantitative PCR (qPCR) assay designed to separately detect and quantify 28 distinct HPV genotypes in a fully automated and user-friendly manner. This study evaluated and compared the performance of this new assay with the performance of the Roche Cobas 4800, the Abbott RealTime high-risk HPV, and the Seegene Anyplex II HPV28 assays. A total of 114 mocked self-samples, i.e., semicervical samples collected by gynecologists using the Viba-Brush, were analyzed with all four HPV assays. Agreement in terms of detecting and genotyping HPV was assessed by the mean of the Cohen's kappa (κ) coefficient. Results of all four HPV assays agreed in 85.9% of the cases when using the Abbott RealTime manufacturer's recommended quantification cycle (Cq) cutoff for positivity (<32.00) and 91.2% when using an adapted range (32.00 to 36.00). An intercomparison of the included assays demonstrated an overall agreement ranging from 85.9 to 100.0% (κ = 0.42 to 1.00) when using the manufacturer's guidelines and 92.9 to 100.0% (κ = 0.60 to 1.00) with the adapted range. For all assays, highly significant, strongly positive Pearson correlations were shown between the Cq values of positive test results. This study thereby shows high concordance between results of the included HPV assays on mocked self-samples. Based on these findings, we imply that the novel Allplex HPV28 assay demonstrates a comparable performance to those of available qPCR HPV assays, potentially providing opportunities for the simplification and standardization of future large-scale testing. IMPORTANCE This study proves that the novel Allplex HPV28 assay has a good diagnostic performance in comparison with the well-known, validated, and frequently used Roche Cobas 4800, Abbott RealTime, and Anyplex II HPV28 assays. According to our experience, the novel Allplex HPV28 assay had a user-friendly and automated workflow with short hands-on time, had an open platform which facilitates the use of add-on assays, and provided quick and easy-to-interpret results. Together with its ability to detect and quantify 28 HPV genotypes, the Allplex HPV28 assay could therefore potentially provide opportunities for the simplification and standardization of future diagnostic testing programs.

Papilloplex HR-HPV test has non-inferior clinical performance for detection of human papillomavirus infection: assessment using the VALGENT framework

AIM

The Papilloplex high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) test (Genefirst, Oxford, UK) is a single tube real-time HPV test which provides multiplex detection and separate identification of 14 hrHPV types. Here, we present the clinical validation of the test in SurePath samples in comparison to a clinically validated reference test, the GP5+/6+Enzyme ImmunoAssay (GP5+/6+EIA) using the VALGENT (VALidation of HPV GENotyping Tests) framework.

METHODS

Clinical performance was assessed using 998 unselected, cervical screening samples enriched with 297 cytologically abnormal specimens (100 atypical squamous cells of unspecified significance, 100 low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, 97 high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions). Cases were defined as women diagnosed with histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia two or more (≥CIN2, N=119) and controls defined as women with two subsequent negative cytology results (N=834).

RESULTS

The Papilloplex HR-HPV test has non-inferior sensitivity for detection of cervical precancer (p=0.0001 for ≥CIN2 and p=0.0005 for ≥CIN3) and non-inferior specificity, compared with GP5+/6+EIA (pni=0.0167)). The assay also showed excellent or good agreement for overall hrHPV and nearly all individual HPV types as compared with GP5+/6+EIA/Luminex.

CONCLUSION

The Papilloplex HR-HPV applied on cervical specimens stored in SurePath medium fulfils the international clinical accuracy criteria for use in cervical cancer screening.

Evaluation of Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) Genotyping and Viral Load Determination as Diagnostic Biomarkers of Cervical Cancer Risk

HPV testing in cervical cancer screening programs offers the possibility of introducing molecular standardized biomarkers for the triage of HPV-positive women. This study aimed to evaluate the role of HPV genotyping and viral load as possible diagnostic biomarkers of high-grade cervical lesions (CIN2+) by performing a preliminary evaluation of a new HPV test. Cervical specimens were obtained from 200 women referred for a colposcopy. Samples were tested using both Anyplex™ II HR-HPV as well as OncoPredict HPV^® Screening (SCR) and quantitative typing (QT). Using a cycle threshold cutoff (Ct) of 36.8 for the SCR assay and 1.27 log₁₀ (viral copies/10⁴ cells) for the QT assay, relative clinical sensitivity for CIN2+ and relative clinical specificity for CIN2- as compared to Anyplex™ II HR-HPV were, respectively, 0.92 and 1.00 for SCR and 1.35 and 1.24 for QT. The distribution of high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) genotypes (p = 0.009) as well as the viral copy numbers (CIN2-: 3.7 log₁₀ (viral copies/10⁴ human cells); CIN2+: 4.3 log₁₀ (viral copies/10⁴ human cells); p = 0.047) were found to differ in women with high- and low-grade cervical lesions, suggesting a possible role of HPV genotyping and normalized viral load as potential biomarkers to identify women at increased risk of cervical lesions.

Hookworm infection associates with a vaginal Type 1/Type 2 immune signature and increased HPV load

Helminth infection-driven changes to immunity in the female reproductive tract (FRT) is an immune axis that is currently understudied but can have major implications for the control of FRT infections. Here we address how human hookworm infection associates with vaginal immune profile and risk of Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. Stool, blood, cervical swabs and vaginal flushes were collected from women from the Central region of Togo to screen for hookworms (Ancylostoma duodenale) and high carcinogenic risk HPV types, via Kato Katz and PCR, respectively. Cytokine, chemokine and immunoglobulin levels were analysed in cervicovaginal lavages and plasma samples. A pronounced mixed Type 1/Type 2 immune response was detected in the vaginal fluids of women with hookworm infection and this immune signature was a notable feature in hookworm-HPV co-infected women. Moreover, hookworm infection is positively associated with increased risk and load of HPV infection. These findings highlight helminth infection as a significant risk factor for acquiring a sexually transmitted viral infection and potentially raising the risk of subsequent pathology.

Clinical Performance of the Full Genotyping Agena MassARRAY HPV Assay Using SurePath Screening Samples within the VALGENT4 Framework

The clinical performance evaluation of the novel MassARRAY human papillomavirus (MA-HPV) assay was performed using Danish SurePath cervical cancer screening samples under the fourth Validation of HPV Genotyping Tests (VALGENT) framework. The MA-HPV assay is a mass array-based assay that individually detects 14 oncogenic HPV genotypes and five nononcogenic types. The MA-HPV assay was validated using the VALGENT4 panel, which constitutes 997 consecutive samples from a screening population in addition to 297 disease-enriched samples with abnormal cytology findings. The clinical accuracy of the MA-HPV assay for sensitivity and specificity was assessed relative to that of the general primer 5+/6+ PCR enzyme immunoassay (GP-EIA), by a noninferiority test. The type-specific concordance of the MA-HPV assay was assessed as well. The relative sensitivity of the MA-HPV assay for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia ≥2 or ≥3 was 1.02 (95% CI, 0.98-1.05) and 1.01 (95% CI, 0.99-1.04), respectively. The sensitivity of the MA-HPV was noninferior to that of the GP-EIA (P = 0.0001), whereas the specificity of the MA-HPV was inferior (0.89; 95% CI, 0.85-0.91; P > 0.99). The MA-HPV assay is a clinical sensitive assay with a lower clinical specificity compared with the GP-EIA. The assay in its current form seems more suited to play a role where specificity is of lesser importance but where high sensitivity is paramount.

A comparison of high-risk human papillomavirus DNA detection between urine and cervical sample testing in women with abnormal Pap smears

AIMS

To compare the clinical performance of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) DNA detection between urine and cervical samples collected from the same patient for the detection of CIN2+ lesions (high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or cervical cancer lesions). The secondary objectives were to evaluate agreement among hrHPV genotypes and to compare patient satisfaction between urine and cervical sample collection.

METHODS

This prospective cross-sectional study enrolled 96 women with abnormal cervical cytology who attended the colposcopy clinic at Siriraj Hospital (Bangkok, Thailand) between July 2016 and January 2017. Self-collected random-voiding and first stream urine samples were collected into a universal sterile urine container and immediately mixing with preservative before the pelvic examination. Cervical tissue sampling was performed according to standard treatment guidelines. Both specimens were sent for extraction and detection of hrHPV by Anyplex II HPV high-risk testing. Study patients were surveyed to compare patient satisfaction between urine and cervical sample collection.

RESULTS

Carcinogenic hrHPV positive rate was 73% in urine samples and 81% in cervical samples. The sensitivity for HPV in the detection CIN2+ was high in both the urine and cervical groups at 86.2% and 94.8%, respectively. Agreement between the urine and cervical groups for HPV 16 or 18 detection was high, with kappa values of 0.86 for subtypes 16/18. Urine specimen collection had significantly higher satisfaction and acceptability than cervical specimen collection.

CONCLUSION

Urine hrHPV testing by real-time polymerase chain reaction demonstrated high sensitivity and accuracy for the detection of CIN2+ lesions, with very good agreement when compared with cervical sample testing.

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

Comparison of the clinical and analytical performance of Alinity m HR HPV and cobas 4800 HPV assays in a population-based screening setting

BACKGROUND

The recently launched Abbott Alinity m HR HPV (Alinity) assay separately identifies high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) genotypes HPV16, HPV18, and HPV45, and reports 11 other genotypes as two aggregates.

METHODS

Clinical and analytical performance of Alinity was compared with the cobas 4800 HPV assay on 4,334 women aged 20-64 years attending routine, population-based organized cervical cancer screening during 2009/2010. After 36 months, they were invited to participate in the second screening round (2012-2014) and later followed-up through centralized national cervical cancer screening registry.

RESULTS

In women 30 and older, the clinical sensitivity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN2+) was 100.0% (95% CI, 88.2-100.0%) for Alinity and 100.0% (95% CI, 88.2-100.0%) for cobas, and for CIN3+ 100.0% (95% CI, 78.9-100.0%) for both assays. The clinical specificity for ≤ CIN1 in women 30 and older was 92.4% (95% CI, 91.4-93.3%) and 92.9% (95% CI, 91.9-93.7%), respectively. The assays demonstrated excellent overall agreement for hrHPV detection (97.9%) and genotype-specific agreement for HPV16 (99.6%), HPV18 (99.8%), and other hrHPV (98.1%). Overall positive agreement and positive agreements for HPV16, HPV18, and other hrHPV genotypes were 84.3%, 89.1%, 73.2%, and 82.3%. Based on a 5-year CIN3+ risk, slightly more HPV-positive women would require referral to immediate colposcopy after testing with Alinity vs. cobas (4.1% vs. 3.8%; p = 0.470), but significantly fewer Alinity-tested women would need a 6- to 12-month follow-up visit compared with those tested with cobas (5.0% vs. 8.6%; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Alinity and cobas have comparable clinical performance and showed excellent overall and genotype-specific agreement. The Alinity's extended genotyping ability could help predict the 5-year CIN3+ risk and cost-saving management of HPV-screen-positive women.

Anyplex II HPV test in detection and follow-up after surgical treatment of CIN2+ lesions

Human papillomavirus (HPV) tests differ for technology, targets, and information on the genotype and viral load. In this study, we evaluated the performance of the Seegene Anyplex II HPV HR (Anyplex) assay in the detection of cervical intraepithelial lesions (CIN) and as a test-of-cure in the follow-up after surgical treatment. One hundred and sixty-seven women referred to the European Institute of Oncology, Milan, for surgical treatment of CIN2+ were enrolled. A cervical sample was taken before treatment and at the first follow-up visit: on these samples, Qiagen Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2), Roche Linear Array HPV Test (Linear Array), cytology and histology were performed at baseline, HC2, and cytology at follow-up. Anyplex genotyping HPV test was performed on a post aliquot from liquid-based cytology specimens when available. The concordance between Anyplex and HC2 was 93.6% at baseline and 76.7% at follow-up (3-9 months after treatment), respectively. The concordance between Anyplex and Linear Array was evaluable only at baseline (92.9%). No recurrence occurred in women without the persistence of the same genotype at follow-up. Seven women relapsed: six had persistence of the same genotypes (five HPV16, one HPV33, and one HPV39), while one tested negative not only with Anyplex but also with HC2 for the persistence of low-risk genotype infection (HPV73 only detected by Linear Array). Anyplex test represents a valid option for HPV detection and genotyping in order to stratify women at risk of high-grade lesions at baseline and to monitor patients treated for CIN2+ lesions during follow-up.

Characterization and Diversity of 243 Complete Human Papillomavirus Genomes in Cervical Swabs Using Next Generation Sequencing

In recent years, next generation sequencing (NGS) technology has been widely used for the discovery of novel human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes, variant characterization and genotyping. Here, we compared the analytical performance of NGS with a commercial PCR-based assay (Anyplex II HPV28) in cervical samples of 744 women. Overall, HPV positivity was 50.2% by the Anyplex and 45.5% by the NGS. With the NGS, we detected 25 genotypes covered by Anyplex and 41 additional genotypes. Agreement between the two methods for HPV positivity was 80.8% (kappa = 0.616) and 84.8% (kappa = 0.652) for 28 HPV genotypes and 14 high-risk genotypes, respectively. We recovered and characterized 243 complete HPV genomes from 153 samples spanning 40 different genotypes. According to phylogenetic analysis and pairwise distance, we identified novel lineages and sublineages of four high-risk and 16 low-risk genotypes. In total, 17 novel lineages and 14 novel sublineages were proposed, including novel lineages of HPV45, HPV52, HPV66 and a novel sublineage of HPV59. Our study provides important genomic insights on HPV types and lineages, where few complete genomes were publicly available.

Evaluation and Optimization of the Clinical Accuracy of Hybribio's 14 High-Risk HPV with 16/18 Genotyping Assay within the VALGENT-3 Framework

Hybribio's 14 High-Risk HPV with 16/18 genotyping real-time PCR (HBRT-H14) is a human papillomavirus (HPV) assay with approval from the China Food and Drug Administration that is widely used in China. VALGENT (VALidation of HPV GENotyping Tests) is an established framework for evaluating HPV tests' clinical performance relative to validated comparators. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical accuracy of HBRT-H14 following international validation criteria. Within VALGENT-3, clinical performance of HBRT-H14 was compared with Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2), Linear Array HPV genotyping test (Linear Array), and Cobas 4800 HPV test (Cobas). VALGENT-3 comprised 1,300 consecutive samples and 300 abnormal cytological samples from the Slovenian cervical cancer screening program. Disease was defined as histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia scoring grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and CIN3+, and two negative cytology results in a row were a proxy for nondisease. In the total study population, relative sensitivity and specificity of HBRT-H14 versus HC2 for detecting CIN2+ were 0.98 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94 to 1.03; P noninferiority[P _ni] < 0.01) and 0.97 (95% CI, 0.96 to 0.99; P _ni = 0.78), respectively. Applying an optimized a posteriori cutoff, defined using Linear Array and Cobas as bridging tests, yielded relative values of 0.98 (95% CI, 0.94 to 1.03; P _ni < 0.01) and 1.01 (95% CI, 1.00 to 1.03; P _ni < 0.01), respectively. In conclusion, HBRT-H14 was as sensitive but less specific than HC2 for detecting cervical precancer at the predefined cutoff. However, HBRT-H14 fulfilled international accuracy criteria for cervical cancer screening when using an optimized cutoff and might be attractive in low-resource settings given its low cost.

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.

Alinity m HR HPV Assay Fulfills Criteria for Human Papillomavirus Test Requirements in Cervical Cancer Screening Settings

The Alinity m HR HPV assay (Alinity) is a novel human papillomavirus (HPV) assay that individually identifies genotypes HPV16, HPV18, and HPV45 while reporting on 11 other high-risk HPV (hrHPV) genotypes in two aggregates: HPV31/33/52/58 and HPV35/39/51/56/59/66/68. The clinical performance of Alinity for screening for cervical cancer was evaluated in population-based settings. For women aged ≥30 years, the clinical sensitivity (n = 68) and specificity (n = 3,077) for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN2+) of Alinity were 100.0% and 92.4%, respectively, and were not inferior to those of the Qiagen Digene Hybrid Capture 2 high-risk HPV DNA assay (hc2) (P = 0.0006 and P < 0.0001, respectively). The intralaboratory reproducibility and interlaboratory agreement of Alinity were 96.7% (kappa, 0.92) and 98.7% (kappa, 0.97), respectively. In the group ≥30 years of age, women who were baseline hrHPV negative had a lower risk for CIN2+ at 3 years using Alinity (0.04%) than those with a normal baseline cytology (0.65%) and had a risk comparable to that determined by the Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV assay (0.04%), hc2 (0.08%), or the Roche Cobas 4800 HPV assay (0.04%). High-risk HPV16/18 infection was associated with a significantly higher baseline and 3-year CIN2+ and CIN3+ risk than the absence of HPV16/18 or the presence of hrHPVs at the baseline (all P values were <0.05). The baseline CIN2+ risk was 8.8% for those with HPV31/33/52/58 infection and 2.5% for those with HPV35/39/51/56/59/66/68 infection, while the 3-year CIN2+ risk was 17.0% and 4.9%, respectively (relative risk, 3.4 [P = 0.03] and 3.5 [P = 0.003], respectively), suggesting that extended genotyping by Alinity may be valuable in improving patient risk stratification. Alinity fulfills international consensus guideline criteria for primary cervical cancer screening and can be considered clinically validated, demonstrating safety comparable to that of other clinically validated HPV tests.

hrHPV prevalence and type distribution in rural Zimbabwe: A community-based self-collection study using near-point-of-care GeneXpert HPV testing

Objectives:

High-risk human papilloma viruses (hrHPV) are the causative agents of cervical cancer, the leading cause of cancer deaths among Zimbabwean women. The objective of this study was to describe the hrHPV types found in Zimbabwe for consideration in cervical cancer screening and vaccination efforts.

Design and methods:

To determine hrHPV prevalence and type distribution in Zimbabwe we implemented a community-based cross-sectional study of self-collected cervicovaginal samples with hrHPV screening using near-point-of-care Cepheid GeneXpert HPV.

Results:

The hrHPV prevalence was 17% (112/643); 33% (41/123) vs. 14% (71/520) among HIV-1-positive and -negative participants, respectively (p = 2.3E-07). Typing via Xpert HPV showed very good overall agreement (77.2%, kappa = 0.698) with the Seegene Anyplex II HPV HR Detection kit. The most common types were HPV16, HPV18, HPV35, HPV52, HPV58, HPV68, HPV18, and HPV51, each of which appeared in 14–20% of infections. 37% (28/76) of women with positive cytology results (ASCUS+) had a type not included in the basic vaccine and 25% (19/76) had a type not currently in the nine-valent vaccine.

Conclusions:

hrHPV type distribution includes less common high-risk types in rural Zimbabwe. The distribution and carcinogenicity of hrHPV type distribution should be considered during screening assay design, program development, as well as vaccine distribution and design.

Clinical performance of Anyplex II HPV28 by human papillomavirus type and viral load in a referral population

Anyplex II HPV28 (`Anyplex`) is a semi-quantitative DNA PCR assay divided into set A, comprising 14 high risk (hr)HPV types; and set B, comprising 5 possibly hrHPV types and 9 low risk (lr)HPV types. We compared the ability of Anyplex to that of Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) and PreTect HPV-Proofer (`Proofer`) to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade two or worse (CIN2+) by HPV types and viral load. This cross-sectional study included 296 women referred to colposcopy with abnormal cervical cytology and/or persistent HPV infection. CIN2+ was identified in 175/296 women. Liquid based cytology samples were used to perform HPV testing. The sensitivity of Anyplex to detect CIN2+ was 98.9% (95% CI 95.9–99.9) and specificity 43.0% (95% CI 34.0–52.3). Restricting to medium and high viral loads in Anyplex set A, sensitivity and specificity were 97.1% (95% CI 93.5–99.1) and 59.5% (95% CI 50.2–68.3) with positive (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) 77.6% and 93.5%, respectively, comparable to HC2. Restricting Anyplex to the hrHPV types in Proofer, HPV16, 18, 31, 33 and 45, sensitivity and specificity for CIN2+ were 85.1% (95% CI 79.0–90.1) and 71.1% (95% CI 62.1–79.0), comparable to Proofer`s. When adding HPV52 and 58, the sensitivity for CIN2+ was 92.6% (95% CI 87.6–96.0) and CIN3+ 96.5% (95% CI 92.0–98.8). No value of Anyplex set B was found in detecting CIN2+. In conclusion, the clinical performance of medium and high viral loads in Anyplex set A was comparable to HC2. Restricting the test to the 7 hrHPV types included in the 9-valent HPV-vaccine, HPV16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52 and 58, satisfies the international criteria for cervical cancer screening with relative sensitivity compared to HC2 for CIN2+ and CIN3+ of 0.98 and 1.01, respectively. Detecting all 28 Anyplex HPV types adds no benefit in a referral population.