Clinical validation of a type-specific real-time quantitative human papillomavirus PCR against the performance of hybrid capture 2 for the purpose of cervical cancer screening

The Sansure® Human Papillomavirus DNA Diagnostic Kit offers excellent reproducibility performance for the detection of high-risk HPV

Cervical cancer screening is a cornerstone of cervical cancer elimination. Detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) is recommended as the first step in screening provided that the assay used has been adequately validated. The Sansure® Human Papillomavirus DNA Diagnostic Kit is a new assay designed to detect HPV16, HPV18 and 13 other HPV in aggregate. The study aimed to evaluate the intra- and interlaboratory reproducibility of the assay according to international guidelines. Five hundred and fifty cervical residual cell samples from women attending cervical cancer screening were selected from the biobank of the HPV National Reference Centre in Belgium and used in this study. After DNA extraction, HPV was tested using the Sansure® Human Papillomavirus DNA Diagnostic Kit. The lower 95% confidence limit around the general reproducibility of this assay should be greater than or equal to 87%, with κ ≥ 0.50. Five hundred and thirty-three samples had valid results. The Sansure® Human Papillomavirus DNA Diagnostic Kit demonstrated an excellent intra-laboratory reproducibility of 93.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 91.4-95.7, κ = 0.85). The interlaboratory reproducibility was 93.4 (95% CI: 91.0-95.4, κ = 0.84). Intra and interlaboratory reproducibility were also excellent at the genotype level. Excluding HPV53 single infection samples from the analyses also resulted in excellent agreement. These data show that the Sansure® Human Papillomavirus DNA Diagnostic Kit is highly reproducible.

Development, Validation, and Implementation of an Augmented Multiwell, Multitarget Quantitative PCR for the Analysis of Human Papillomavirus Genotyping through Software Automation, Data Science, and Artificial Intelligence

The value of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical cancer screening is well established; however, its use as a primary screening option or as a reflex test after atypical cytology results is now gaining wider acceptance. The importance of full genotyping and viral load determination has been demonstrated to enhance the clinical understanding of the viral infection progression during follow-up or after treatment, thereby providing clinicians with supplementary tools for optimized patient management. We developed a new analysis method for the RIATOL quantitative PCR assay, and validated and implemented it in the laboratory of clinical molecular pathology at Algemeen Medisch Laboratorium (AML), under national accreditation and following the International Organization for Standardization guidelines. This study presents the successful validation of a high-throughput, multitarget HPV analysis method, with enhanced accuracy on both qualitative and quantitative end results. This is achieved by software standardization and automation of PCR curve analysis and interpretation, using data science and artificial intelligence. Moreover, the user-centric functionality of the platform was demonstrated to enhance both staff training and routine analysis workflows, thereby saving time and laboratory personnel resources. Overall, the integration of the FastFinder plugin semi-automatic analysis algorithm with the RIATOL real-time quantitative PCR assay proved to be a remarkable advancement in high-throughput HPV quantification, with demonstrated capability to provide highly accurate clinical-grade results and to reduce manual variability and analysis time.

Characterization of type-specific HPV prevalence in a population of persistent cutaneous warts in Flanders, Belgium

Cutaneous warts are benign skin lesions caused by the human papillomavirus (HPV). Even though they are considered benign, they can have a considerable impact on the quality of life and cause serious illness in certain immunocompromised populations. Studies have shown that the efficacy of wart treatment is dependent on the causative HPV type. Therefore, in this article, we aim to determine the HPV genotype-specific prevalence in cutaneous warts of a Flemish population as part of the Omnivirol-Salycilic acid randomized controlled trial. Swab samples of cutaneous warts (n = 269) were collected during enrollment. The DNA extraction was performed on the automated NucliSENS® easyMAG® system (bioMérieux). The samples were analyzed with two separate in-house PCR assays capable of detecting the most prevalent cutaneous HPV types (i.e. wart-associated HPV qPCR) as well as the most relevant mucosal types (i.e. RIATOL qPCR assay). In total, the type-specific prevalence of 30 distinct HPV genotypes was determined. The beta-globin gene was used as a cellularity control and for viral load quantification. Data concerning wart persistence, previous treatment, wart type, and other relevant wart and patient characteristics was collected through a baseline questionnaire. The study population consisted mostly of persistent warts considering that 98% (n = 263) of the sampled skin lesions were older than six months and 92% (n = 247) had undergone previous treatment. The most prominent wart type was the mosaic verruca plantaris (42%, n = 113). The most prevalent HPV types were cutaneous HPV types 27 (73%, n = 195), 57 (63%, n = 169), and 2 (42%, n = 113). Only 2% (n = 6) of the lesions was HPV negative. The highest median viral loads were observed with HPV27 and 57 (i.e. 6.29E+04 and 7.47E+01 viral copies per cell respectively). The multivariate analysis found significant associations between wart persistence and certain wart types, the number of warts, and HPV genotypes. Based on these findings, persistent warts are more likely to: (1) be verruca vulgaris, verruca plantaris simple or mosaic, (2) to manifest as multiple warts, (3) and to be negative for HPV type 2 or 4. These characteristics can be useful in the clinical setting for future risk stratification when considering treatment triage and management. Trial registration: NCT05862441, 17/05/2023 (retrospectively registered).

Intra- and interlaboratory reproducibility of the RIATOL qPCR HPV genotyping assay

The implementation of cervical screening based on human papillomavirus (HPV) continues to progress rapidly across countries. Evidence has shown that assays detecting high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) are more effective than cytology-based screening. Validation of new hrHPV DNA assays requires both noninferior clinical accuracy compared to a standard comparator for cervical precancer and good reproducibility. This study builds upon previous diagnostic accuracy assessments of the RIATOL HPV genotyping qPCR assay and aims to evaluate the international validation criteria for reproducibility. The intra- and interreproducibility of the RIATOL-qPCR assay were assessed using 550 remnant cervical cell material from the cytology archive of the National Reference Center for HPV in Belgium. Specimens were collected in the context of cervical cancer screening and tested in two different laboratories. The international reproducibility criteria include the lower bound of 95% confidence interval of the intra- and interlaboratory agreement regarding the detection of hrHPV DNA exceeding 87% with kappa ≥0.50. The RIATOL-qPCR assay demonstrated excellent intralaboratory reproducibility, achieving an overall agreement of 98.2 (95% CI 96.6-99.1%) and a kappa of 0.96. Interlaboratory testing showed an overall agreement of 98.5 (95% CI 97.1-99.4%) with a kappa of 0.97. The RIATOL-qPCR assay fulfills the third criterion for HPV test reproducibility requirement for use in cervical cancer screening.

Clinical value of the ThinPrep cytologic test with E6/E7 mRNA detection for cervical cancer screening in disease diagnosis

BACKGROUND

To investigate the clinical value of the ThinPrep cytologic test (TCT) with the E6/E7 mRNA test for cervical cancer screening in disease diagnosis.

METHODS

A total of 405 samples from Dazhou Central Hospital from April 2017 to July 2020 were collected, and we conducted a comparative analysis of the diagnostic performance of several test methods both individually andcombination.

RESULTS

The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy, and area under the curve (AUC) were compared by single TCT, E6/E7 mRNA test, and combination methods. The TCT+E6/E7mRNA test was confirmed to have a relatively higher specificity of 80.32% (95% CI: 75.40%-84.48%, both P < 0.001), and AUC value (0.78, 95% CI: 0.73-0.83, and P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The relative diagnostic value may be further improved by the combined detection of TCT and E6/E7 mRNA test. The combined detection of TCT and the E6/E7 mRNA test is expected to become a potential indicator for cervical lesions.

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

Negative Impact of Elevated DNA Fragmentation and Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Presence in Sperm on the Outcome of Intra-Uterine Insemination (IUI)

We wanted to determine the sperm DNA fragmentation index (DFI) cutoff for clinical pregnancies in women receiving intra-uterine insemination (IUI) with this sperm and to assess the contribution of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) infection on sperm DNA damage and its impact on clinical pregnancies. Prospective non-interventional multi-center study with 161 infertile couples going through 209 cycles of IUI in hospital fertility centers in Flanders, Belgium. Measurement of DFI and HPV DNA with type specific quantitative PCRs (HPV 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 53, 56, 58, 59, 66 and 68) in sperm before its use in IUI. Clinical pregnancy (CP) rate was used as the outcome to analyze the impact on fertility outcome and to calculated the clinical cutoff value for DFI. A DFI criterion value of 26% was obtained by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Couples with a male DFI > 26% had significantly less CPs than couples with DFI below 26% (OR 0.0326; 95% CI 0.0019 to 0.5400; p = 0.017). In sperm, HPV prevalence was 14.8%/IUI cycle. Sperm samples containing HPV had a significantly higher DFI compared to HPV negative sperm samples (29.8% vs. 20.9%; p = 0.011). When HPV-virions were present in sperm, no clinical pregnancies were observed. More than 1 in 5 of samples with normal semen parameters (17/78; 21.8%) had an elevated DFI or was HPV positive. Sperm DFI is a robust predictor of clinical pregnancies in women receiving IUI with this sperm. When DFI exceeds 26%, clinical pregnancies are less likely and in vitro fertilization techniques should be considered.

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.

Cervical, anal and oral human papillomavirus (HPV) infection in young women: A case control study between women with perinatally HIV infection and women with non-perinatally HIV infection

OBJECTIVES

HPV infection may differ in women who are HIV-positive since birth (perinatally infected, P-HIV) and those who acquire HIV later in life (non-perinatally infected, NP-HIV). We assessed the HPV prevalence in relation to the HIV acquisition route and HPV vaccination status.

STUDY DESIGN

Case control study comparing 22 P-HIV with 22 NP-HIV patients. Cervical, anal and oral specimen were collected for HPV PCRs. The primary outcome was the prevalence of cervical, oral and anal HPV in P-HIV and NP-HIV patients. The secondary outcome was to identify risk factors for HPV infection. Comparative statistics for two independent groups, univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used.

RESULTS

There were no differences between perinatally and non-perinatally infected women. Cervical dysplasia was found in 12/44 (27 %) patients and high-risk HPV (hrHPV) in 30 % of cervical (of which 89 % were hrHPV other than 16 and 18), in 3 % of oral and 65 % of anal specimens. All woman were using combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) and 64 % had HIVRNA < 20 cp/ml. A CD4 count <350/mm³ was associated with cytological abnormalities (OR: 13.52, p = 0.002) and with cervical HPV (OR: 6.11; p = 0.04); anal HPV was associated with a previous cervical dysplasia and concomitant cervical HPV infection. None of thirteen vaccinated patients had a 6/11/16/18 HPV infection.

CONCLUSION

In this small series of women under cART, we did not observe a difference in HPV infection in relation to the route of HIV acquisition. The high prevalence of hrHPV other than 16 and 18 support the use of a 9-valent vaccine.

Performance of OncoE6TM Cervical Test in detecting cervical precancer lesions in HIV-positive women attending an HIV clinic in Bujumbura, Burundi: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

New rapid and low-cost molecular tests for cervical cancer screening, such as the OncoE6 Cervical Test, are emerging and could be alternatives for low-income and middle-income countries. To this end, we evaluated the clinical performance of the OncoE6 Cervical Test in detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) among HIV-infected women in Bujumbura, Burundi.

METHODS

From June to December 2017, a cross-sectional study was conducted in 680 HIV-positive women at the University Hospital. Women aged 25-65 years who declared having had vaginal intercourse were consecutively recruited, and cervical specimens for OncoE6, liquid-based cytology and human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping were obtained and visual inspection with acetic acid performed. Thereafter, participants underwent a colposcopic examination. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the different tests were calculated with reference to 'colposcopic-histological' diagnoses, and areas under the receiver operating curves of OncoE6 and cytology tests were compared.

RESULTS

The prevalence of CIN was 4.9%, and OncoE6 positivity was 3.1%. OncoE6 sensitivity varied from poor to low with increasing disease severity (42.1%, 95% CI 19.9% to 64.3% at CIN2+ threshold; and 58.3%, 95% CI 30.4% to 86.2% at CIN3+ threshold). OncoE6 had the highest specificity compared with all other tests used together. The performance of the OncoE6 test was significantly lower compared with cytology at atypical squamous cell of undetermined significance (ASCUS+) cut-off (AUC=0.68 vs 0.85, p=0.03) and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL+) cut-off (AUC=0.68 vs 0.83, p=0.04) for CIN2+ diagnoses. However, the performance of the OncoE6 test was similar to that of cytology at high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL+) cut-off (AUC=0.68 vs 0.76; p=0.30) for CIN2+ diagnoses and was also similar to that of cytology at all cut-offs (ASCUS+, LSIL+ and HSIL+) for CIN3+ diagnoses (p1=0.76, p2=0.95 and p3=0.50, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The current OncoE6 test proved to be a point-of-care test. However, given its poor performance for CIN2+ diagnoses, we do not recommend it for primary screening. We recommend to enrich it with more oncogenic HPV types, which may improve the performance of the test akin to that of cytology.

HPV testing on vaginal/cervical nurse-assisted self-samples versus clinician-taken specimens and the HPV prevalence, in Adama Town, Ethiopia

This study aimed to determine the feasibility of vaginal/cervical nurse-assisted self-sampling (NASS) and the agreement between human papilloma virus (HPV) tests on self-samples versus clinician-taken (CT) specimens.Women participated voluntarily for cervical cancer screening at St. Aklesia Memorial Hospital. Eighty-three women provided a total of 166 coupled self-taken and CT specimens collected. Specimens were stored at room temperature for a maximum of 10 months and analyzed using validated the RIATOL qPCR HPV genotyping test, a quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) high-throughput HPV E6, E7 assay. The average age of the participating women was 32 years. Seventy-three women (87.9%) felt that NASS was easy to use. An overall HPV, high-risk (HR) HPV, and low-risk HPV prevalence was 22.7% (15/66), 18.2% (12/66), and 6.1% (4/66), respectively. The overall HR HPV prevalence was 17.2% (NASS) and 15.5% (CT). The most prevalent HPV type was HPV51; HPV 16 was only detected in 1 woman (CT+NASS) and HPV18 only in 1 woman (CT). The overall measurement agreement between self-taken and CT samples was moderate with a kappa value of 0.576 (P < .001). Lifetime partnered with >2 men were associated with HR HPV positivity (P < .001). There was a strong statistical association between HR HPV positivity and visual inspection with acetic acid- positive (P < .001). The NASS for HPV testing could be seen as an alternative option and might be acceptable to Ethiopian women. The overall HR HPV prevalence was comparable with Sub-Saharan countries in the general population.

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.

Time has come to include Human Papillomavirus (HPV) testing in sperm donor banks

HPV is well known as a potential cause of cervical cancer. Less well known is its link to temporal subfertility that is caused by binding of infectious virions to the spermatozoa's head which induces sperm-DNA damage and causes a reduction in clinical pregnancy rates in women receiving HPV positive semen. This impact on the global fertility burden remains greatly underestimated and underexplored. This risk of reduced fertility due to infectious HPV in sperm is especially important when donor sperm insemination is considered, since testing for the presence of HPV virions before use seems warranted. We tested 514 donor sperm samples from 3 different sperm banks for 18 different HPV types. Overall 3.9% (20/514) of tested donor sperm was positive for HPV, with different prevalence among the 3 different sperm banks (3.6% bank A, 3.1% bank B and 16.7% bank C). Also the HPV virion per spermatozoon ratio in donor samples was similar across the different sperm banks (95% CI 0,01 to 1,07 HPV virions/spermatozoon). When HPV positive donor sperm was used, no clinical pregnancies resulted, whereas when HPV negative donor sperm was used the clinical pregnancy rate was 14.6%. From both a cost/benefit and a safety point of view we recommend that donor sperm should always be tested for HPV before using it for insemination.

Validation of intra- and inter-laboratory reproducibility of the Xpert HPV assay according to the international guidelines for cervical cancer screening

Background

Cervical cancer screening with assays detecting DNA of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) types is more effective than cytology-based screening. This study completes the diagnostic accuracy assessment conducted previously within the framework of VALGENT-2 (Validation of HPV genotyping Tests) and aims to determine whether the reproducibility of Xpert HPV is in line with international validation criteria.

Methods

Validation of new hrHPV DNA assays requires demonstration of good reproducibility and non-inferior clinical accuracy for cervical precancer compared to a standard comparator assay. The international reproducibility criteria are: lower bound of 95% confidence interval of the intra- and inter-laboratory agreement regarding detection of high-risk HPV DNA exceeding 87% with kappa ≥0.5.

Results

The Xpert HPV assay showed high intra-laboratory reproducibility with an overall positivity/negativity agreement of 96.9% and a kappa of 0.925. Inter-laboratory testing showed an agreement of 97.8% with a kappa of 0.948.

Conclusions

The Xpert HPV assay fulfills the HPV test reproducibility criterion requirement for use in cervical cancer screening.

VALHUDES: A protocol for validation of human papillomavirus assays and collection devices for HPV testing on self-samples and urine samples

BACK GROUND

Systematic reviews have concluded that hrHPV DNA testing using target-amplification tests is as accurate on vaginal self-samples as on clinician-taken specimens for the detection of cervical precancer. However, insufficient evidence is available for specific HPV assay/self-sample device combinations.

OBJECTIVES

The VALHUDES protocol is designed as a diagnostic test accuracy study that aims to compare the clinical sensitivity and specificity of particular hrHPV assay(s) on vaginal self-samples and first-void-urine, collected in agreement with standardized protocols, with hrHPV testing on matched clinician-taken samples.

STUDY DESIGN

Five hundred enrolled women referred to a colposcopy clinic are invited to collect a first-void urine sample and one or more vaginal self-samples with particular devices before collection of a cervical sample by a clinician. Sample sets are subsequently analysed in a laboratory accredited for HPV testing. Disease verification for all enrolled patients is provided by colposcopy combined with histological assessment of biopsies.

RESULTS

A first VALHUDES study has started in Belgium in December 2017 with enrolment from four colposcopy centres. The following assays are foreseen to be evaluated: RealTime High Risk HPV assay (Abbott), cobas-4800 and -6800 (Roche), Onclarity (BD), Xpert HPV (Cepheid) and Anyplex II HPV HR (Seegene).

CONCLUSION

Given empirical evidence that the relative accuracy of HPV-testing on self- vs clinician-samples is robust across clinical settings, the VALHUDES protocol offers a framework for validation of HPV assay/self-sample device combinations that can be translated to a primary screening setting.

Human papillomavirus genotype and viral load agreement between paired first-void urine and clinician-collected cervical samples

The performance and acceptability of first-void urine as specimen for the detection of HPV DNA in a Belgian referral population was evaluated using an optimized sample collection and processing protocol. One hundred ten first-void urine and cervical samples were collected from 25- to 64-year-old women who were referred for colposcopy (January-November 2016). Paired samples were analyzed by the Riatol qPCR HPV genotyping assay. Acceptability data were gathered through questionnaires (NCT02714127). A higher high-risk HPV DNA prevalence was observed in first-void urine (n = 76/110) compared to cervical samples (n = 73/110), with HPV31 and HPV16/31 being most prevalent correspondingly. For both any and high-risk HPV DNA, good agreement was observed between paired samples (Cohen's Kappa of 0.660 (95% CI: 0.486-0.833) and 0.688 (95% CI: 0.542-0.835), respectively). In addition, significant positive correlations in HPV copies (per microliter of DNA extract) between paired samples were observed for HPV16 (rs = 0.670; FDR (false discovery rate)-adjusted p = 0.006), HPV18 (rs = 0.893; FDR-adjusted p = 0.031), HPV31 (rs = 0.527; FDR-adjusted p = 0.031), HPV53 (rs = 0.691; FDR-adjusted p = 0.017), and HPV68 (rs = 0.569; FDR-adjusted p = 0.031). First-void urine sampling using a first-void urine collection device was preferred over a clinician-collected cervical sample. And mostly, first-void urine sampling at home was favored over collection at the clinic or the general practitioner's office. First-void urine sampling is a highly preferred, non-invasive method that ensures good agreement in HPV DNA (copies) with reference cervical samples. It is particularly interesting as a screening technique to reach non-participants, and its clinical performance should be further evaluated.

A randomized, controlled trial of two strategies of offering the home-based HPV self-sampling test to non- participants in the Flemish cervical cancer screening program

We conducted a randomized, controlled trial to evaluate different strategies of offering an HPV-self sampling program, and compared this with two control groups. All total of 35,354 women who did not participate in the Flemish cancer screening program were included in the study: 9,118 received a HPV self-collection brush (RIATOL qPCR HPV genotyping test (qPCR [E6/E7]); 9,098 were offered the opportunity to order an HPV-selfsampling brush, 8,830 received the recall letter; 8,849 received no intervention. Within 12 months after the mailing, 18.7% of the women who had received the brush, participated by returning a self-sample sample, while 10.6% women allocated to the opt- in group did so. 10.5% women who received the standard recall letter, had a PAP smear taken within a period of 12 months; while 8% women did so without receiving an intervention at all. Participation in postmenopausal women was higher than in women younger than 50 in both self-sampling arms. Screening by means of the self-sample kit increased by age, contradictory when screening is performed by a PAP smear. Of those testing hrHPV positive (9.5%), 88.9% attended for follow up cytology. The mean DNA concentration, found in the self-sampler, decreased by age, causing a higher number of inconclusive results. Our results support the efficacy of a self-sampling strategy to increase participation in the Flemish screening program. Self-sampling seems particularly acceptable to postmenopausal non-responders. Future research should focus on the performance of different self-sampling devices in post-menopausal women as low DNA concentrations exponentially increased over age.

Serial measurement of type-specific human papillomavirus load enables classification of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia lesions according to occurring human papillomavirus-induced pathway

This retrospective study examined whether human papillomavirus (HPV) type-specific viral load changes measured in two or three serial cervical smears are predictive for the natural evolution of HPV infections and correlate with histological grades of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), allowing triage of HPV-positive women. A cervical histology database was used to select consecutive women with biopsy-proven CIN in 2012 who had at least two liquid-based cytology samples before the diagnosis of CIN. Before performing cytology, 18 different quantitative PCRs allowed HPV type-specific viral load measurement. Changes in HPV-specific load between measurements were assessed by linear regression, with calculation of coefficient of determination (R) and slope. All infections could be classified into one of five categories: (i) clonal progressing process (R≥0.85; positive slope), (ii) simultaneously occurring clonal progressive and transient infection, (iii) clonal regressing process (R≥0.85; negative slope), (iv) serial transient infection with latency [R<0.85; slopes (two points) between 0.0010 and -0.0010 HPV copies/cell/day], and (v) transient productive infection (R<0.85; slope: ±0.0099 HPV copies/cell/day). Three hundred and seven women with CIN were included; 124 had single-type infections and 183 had multiple HPV types. Only with three consecutive measurements could a clonal process be identified in all CIN3 cases. We could clearly demonstrate clonal regressing lesions with a persistent linear decrease in viral load (R≥0.85; -0.003 HPV copies/cell/day) in all CIN categories. Type-specific viral load increase/decrease in three consecutive measurements enabled classification of CIN lesions in clonal HPV-driven transformation (progression/regression) and nonclonal virion-productive (serial transient/transient) processes.

Cytology versus HPV testing for cervical cancer screening in the general population

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer screening has traditionally been based on cervical cytology. Given the aetiological relationship between human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and cervical carcinogenesis, HPV testing has been proposed as an alternative screening test.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of HPV testing for detecting histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasias (CIN) of grade 2 or worse (CIN 2+), including adenocarcinoma in situ, in women participating in primary cervical cancer screening; and how it compares to the accuracy of cytological testing (liquid-based and conventional) at various thresholds.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search of articles in MEDLINE and Embase (1992 to November 2015) containing quantitative data and handsearched the reference lists of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included comparative test accuracy studies if all women received both HPV testing and cervical cytology followed by verification of the disease status with the reference standard, if positive for at least one screening test. The studies had to include women participating in a cervical cancer screening programme who were not being followed up for previous cytological abnormalities.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We completed a 2 x 2 table with the number of true positives (TP), false positives (FP), true negatives (TN), and false negatives for each screening test (HPV test and cytology) used in each study. We calculated the absolute and relative sensitivities and the specificities of the tests for the detection of CIN 2+ and CIN 3+ at various thresholds and computed sensitivity (TP/(TP + TN) and specificity (TN/ (TN + FP) for each test separately. Relative sensitivity and specificity of one test compared to another test were defined as sensitivity of test-1 over sensitivity of test-2 and specificity of test-1 over specificity of test-2, respectively. To assess bias in the studies, we used the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic test Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) tool. We used a bivariate random-effects model for computing pooled accuracy estimates. This model takes into account the within- and between-study variability and the intrinsic correlation between sensitivity and specificity.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 40 studies in the review, with more than 140,000 women aged between 20 and 70 years old. Many studies were at low risk of bias. There were a sufficient number of included studies with adequate methodology to perform the following test comparisons: hybrid capture 2 (HC2) (1 pg/mL threshold) versus conventional cytology (CC) (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS)+ and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL)+ thresholds) or liquid-based cytology (LBC) (ASCUS+ and LSIL+ thresholds), other high-risk HPV tests versus conventional cytology (ASCUS+ and LSIL+ thresholds) or LBC (ASCUS+ and LSIL+ thresholds). For CIN 2+, pooled sensitivity estimates for HC2, CC and LBC (ASCUS+) were 89.9%, 62.5% and 72.9%, respectively, and pooled specificity estimates were 89.9%, 96.6%, and 90.3%, respectively. The results did not differ by age of women (less than or greater than 30 years old), or in studies with verification bias. Accuracy of HC2 was, however, greater in European countries compared to other countries. The results for the sensitivity of the tests were heterogeneous ranging from 52% to 94% for LBC, and 61% to 100% for HC2. Overall, the quality of the evidence for the sensitivity of the tests was moderate, and high for the specificity.The relative sensitivity of HC2 versus CC for CIN 2+ was 1.52 (95% CI: 1.24 to 1.86) and the relative specificity 0.94 (95% CI: 0.92 to 0.96), and versus LBC for CIN 2+ was 1.18 (95% CI: 1.10 to 1.26) and the relative specificity 0.96 (95% CI: 0.95 to 0.97). The relative sensitivity of HC2 versus CC for CIN 3+ was 1.46 (95% CI: 1.12 to 1.91) and the relative specificity 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93 to 0.97). The relative sensitivity of HC2 versus LBC for CIN 3+ was 1.17 (95% CI: 1.07 to 1.28) and the relative specificity 0.96 (95% CI: 0.95 to 0.97).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Whilst HPV tests are less likely to miss cases of CIN 2+ and CIN 3+, these tests do lead to more unnecessary referrals. However, a negative HPV test is more reassuring than a negative cytological test, as the cytological test has a greater chance of being falsely negative, which could lead to delays in receiving the appropriate treatment. Evidence from prospective longitudinal studies is needed to establish the relative clinical implications of these tests.

Human Papillomavirus

Individuals with inherited immunodeficiencies, autoimmune disorders, organ or bone marrow transplantation, or infection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are at increased risk of infection with both low-risk and high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) types. Chronic immunosuppression provides an environment for persistent HPV infection which carries a higher risk of malignant transformation. Screening guidelines have been developed or advocated for processes that have detectable premalignant lesions, such as anal cancer or cervical cancer. For other anatomic locations, such as cutaneous, penile, and oropharyngeal, a biopsy of suspicious lesions is necessary for diagnosis. HPV cannot be cultured from clinical specimens in the laboratory, and diagnosis relies on cytologic, histologic, or molecular methods.

Molecular approaches for HPV genotyping and HPV-DNA physical status

Persistent infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes is the leading cause of cervical cancer development. To this end several studies have focused on designing molecular assays for HPV genotyping, which are considered as the gold standard for the early diagnosis of HPV infection. Moreover, the tendency of HPV DNA to be integrated into the host chromosome is a determining event for cervical oncogenesis. Thus, the establishment of molecular techniques was promoted in order to investigate the physical status of the HPV DNA and the locus of viral insertion into the host chromosome. The molecular approaches that have been developed recently facilitate the collection of a wide spectrum of valuable information specific to each individual patient and therefore can significantly contribute to the establishment of a personalised prognosis, diagnosis and treatment of HPV-positive patients. The present review focuses on state of the art molecular assays for HPV detection and genotyping for intra-lesion analyses, it examines molecular approaches for the determination of HPV-DNA physical status and it discusses the criteria for selecting the most appropriate regions of viral DNA to be incorporated in HPV genotyping and in the determination of HPV-DNA physical status.

Performance of a Cartridge-Based Assay for Detection of Clinically Significant Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Infection: Lessons from VALGENT (Validation of HPV Genotyping Tests)

The Validation of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Genotyping Tests (VALGENT) studies offer an opportunity to clinically validate HPV assays for use in primary screening for cervical cancer and also provide a framework for the comparison of analytical and type-specific performance. Through VALGENT, we assessed the performance of the cartridge-based Xpert HPV assay (Xpert HPV), which detects 14 high-risk (HR) types and resolves HPV16 and HPV18/45. Samples from women attending the United Kingdom cervical screening program enriched with cytologically abnormal samples were collated. All had been previously tested by a clinically validated standard comparator test (SCT), the GP5+/6+ enzyme immunoassay (EIA). The clinical sensitivity and specificity of the Xpert HPV for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+) and CIN3+ relative to those of the SCT were assessed as were the inter- and intralaboratory reproducibilities according to international criteria for test validation. Type concordance for HPV16 and HPV18/45 between the Xpert HPV and the SCT was also analyzed. The Xpert HPV detected 94% of CIN2+ and 98% of CIN3+ lesions among all screened women and 90% of CIN2+ and 96% of CIN3+ lesions in women 30 years and older. The specificity for CIN1 or less (≤CIN1) was 83% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80 to 85%) in all women and 88% (95% CI, 86 to 91%) in women 30 years and older. Inter- and intralaboratory agreements for the Xpert HPV were 98% and 97%, respectively. The kappa agreements for HPV16 and HPV18/45 between the clinically validated reference test (GP5+/6+ LMNX) and the Xpert HPV were 0.92 and 0.91, respectively. The clinical performance and reproducibility of the Xpert HPV are comparable to those of well-established HPV assays and fulfill the criteria for use in primary cervical cancer screening.

Clinical Validation of Anyplex II HPV HR Detection Test for Cervical Cancer Screening in Korea

CONTEXT

The Anyplex II HPV HR detection kit (Seegene Inc, Seoul, Korea) is a new, multiplex, real-time polymerase chain reaction assay to detect individual 14 high-risk (HR) human papillomavirus (HPV) types in a single tube.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical performance of the HPV HR kit in predicting high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and cervical intraepithelial lesions grade 2 or worse in cervical cancer screening.

DESIGN

We analyzed 1137 cervical samples in Huro Path medium (CelltraZone, Seoul, Korea) from Korean women. The clinical performance of the HPV HR kit was compared with Hybrid Capture 2 (Qiagen, Valencia, California) using the noninferiority score test in a routine cervical cancer screening setting. The intralaboratory and interlaboratory agreements of HPV HR were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall agreement between the 2 assays was 92.4% (1051 of 1137) with a κ value of 0.787. Clinical sensitivity of HPV HR for high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and cervical intraepithelial lesions grade 2 or worse was 94.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.2-99.7) and 92.5% (95% CI, 84.3-100.0), respectively. The respective values for Hybrid Capture 2 were 93.1% (95% CI, 87.2-98.9) and 87.5% (95% CI, 77.3-99.7). Clinical sensitivity and specificity of HPV HR were not inferior to those of Hybrid Capture 2 (P = .005 and P = .04, respectively). The HPV HR showed good intralaboratory and interlaboratory reproducibility at 98.0% (κ = 0.953) and 97.4% (κ = 0.940), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The HPV HR demonstrates comparable performance to the Hybrid Capture 2 test and can be useful for HPV-based cervical cancer screening testing.

Linear viral load increase of a single HPV-type in women with multiple HPV infections predicts progression to cervical cancer

Persistent high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is strongly associated with development of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or cancer (CIN3+). In single type infections, serial type-specific viral-load measurements predict the natural history of the infection. In infections with multiple HPV-types, the individual type-specific viral-load profile could distinguish progressing HPV-infections from regressing infections. A case-cohort natural history study was established using samples from untreated women with multiple HPV-infections who developed CIN3+ (n = 57) or cleared infections (n = 88). Enriched cell pellet from liquid based cytology samples were subjected to a clinically validated real-time qPCR-assay (18 HPV-types). Using serial type-specific viral-load measurements (≥3) we calculated HPV-specific slopes and coefficient of determination (R(2) ) by linear regression. For each woman slopes and R(2) were used to calculate which HPV-induced processes were ongoing (progression, regression, serial transient, transient). In transient infections with multiple HPV-types, each single HPV-type generated similar increasing (0.27copies/cell/day) and decreasing (-0.27copies/cell/day) viral-load slopes. In CIN3+, at least one of the HPV-types had a clonal progressive course (R(2)  ≥ 0.85; 0.0025copies/cell/day). In selected CIN3+ cases (n = 6), immunostaining detecting type-specific HPV 16, 31, 33, 58 and 67 RNA showed an even staining in clonal populations (CIN3+), whereas in transient virion-producing infections the RNA-staining was less in the basal layer compared to the upper layer where cells were ready to desquamate and release newly-formed virions. RNA-hybridization patterns matched the calculated ongoing processes measured by R(2) and slope in serial type-specific viral-load measurements preceding the biopsy. In women with multiple HPV-types, serial type-specific viral-load measurements predict the natural history of the different HPV-types and elucidates HPV-genotype attribution.

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

This study describes a validation of the BD Onclarity HPV (Onclarity) assay using the international guidelines for HPV test requirements for cervical cancer screening of women 30 years old and older using Danish SurePath screening samples. The clinical specificity (0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.88 to 0.91) and sensitivity (0.97, 95% CI = 0.87 to 1.0) of the Onclarity assay were shown to be not inferior to the reference assay (specificity, 0.90 [95% CI = 0.88 to 0.92]; sensitivity, 0.98 [95% CI = 0.91 to 1.0]). The intralaboratory reproducibility of Onclarity was 97%, with a lower confidence bound of 96% (kappa value, 0.93). The interlaboratory agreement was 97%, with a lower confidence bound of 95% (kappa value, 0.92). The BD Onclarity HPV assay fulfills all the international guidelines for a new HPV test to be used in primarily screening. This is the first clinical validation of a new HPV assay using SurePath screening samples, and thus the Onclarity HPV assay is the first HPV assay to hold an international validation for both SurePath and ThinPrep.

Prevalence of high-risk human papillomavirus and abnormal pap smears in female sex workers compared to the general population in Antwerp, Belgium

Background

Although female sex workers (FSWs) are a well-known high-risk group for Human Papillomavirus (HPV) infections, few tailored intervention programmes for HPV have been established worldwide. The lack of reliable data on the prevalence of HPV and related cervical lesions hampers the establishment of evidence-based intervention programmes.

The objectives of this study were to describe the prevalence of high-risk Human Papillomavirus (hrHPV) infections and abnormal pap smears in FSWs compared to a control group in Antwerp, Belgium.

Methods

HPV genotyping and cytology data were analysed from routine Pap smear tests that were collected from both FSWs and the general population (1334 samples for each group) between June 2006 and June 2010. Within the laboratory database, all FSWs were matched 1:1 for age and testing date to determine the ORs of hrHPV genotypes, DNA and cytology outcome.

Results

The prevalence of hrHPV DNA in FSWs was 41.7 % compared to 19.8 % in the age-matched controls with an overall OR of 2.8 (95 % CI: 2.3–3.4). Significant differences were observed in all age groups, and the most significant differences were observed in the cohort under 21 years of age (prevalence of 64.4 % in FSWs versus 14.8 % in controls; OR 10.3 (95 % CI: 5.0–21.2). Significantly more cervical lesions were observed in FSWs, particularly in the 17- to 21-year old age group (OR for LSIL or HSIL: 10.3 (95 % CI: 3.2–33.8). In both groups, HPV 16 was the most prevalent at 12.1 and 6.6 % in the FSW and control groups, respectively. HPV 18 was the 8^th and 7^th most frequent genotype at 5.0 and 2.5 % in the FSW and control groups, respectively.

Conclusions

FSWs have a significantly higher prevalence of hrHPV and more abnormal Pap smears than does the general population in Antwerp, Belgium. The hrHPV prevalence in FSWs is similar to that reported in the literature. The need for tailored intervention programmes should be investigated further.

GTL001, A Therapeutic Vaccine for Women Infected with Human Papillomavirus 16 or 18 and Normal Cervical Cytology: Results of a Phase I Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

Women infected with human papillomavirus (HPV) with normal cytology to mild abnormalities currently have no treatment options other than watchful waiting or surgery if high-grade cervical lesions or cancer develop. A therapeutic vaccine would offer the possibility of preventing high-grade lesions in HPV-infected women. GTL001 is a therapeutic vaccine composed of recombinant HPV16 and HPV18 E7 proteins fused to catalytically inactive Bordetella pertussis CyaA. This study examined the tolerability and immunogenicity of GTL001 in women infected with HPV16 or HPV18 with normal cytology.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

This was a phase I trial (EudraCT No. 2010-018629-21). In an open-label part, subjects received two intradermal vaccinations 6 weeks apart of 100 or 600 μg GTL001 + topical 5% imiquimod cream at the injection site. In a double-blind part, subjects were randomized 2:1:1 to two vaccinations 6 weeks apart of 600 μg GTL001 + imiquimod, 600 μg GTL001 + placebo cream, or placebo + imiquimod.

RESULTS

Forty-seven women were included. No dropouts, treatment-related serious adverse events, or dose-limiting toxicities occurred. Local reactions were transient and mostly mild or moderate. HPV16/18 viral load decreased the most in the 600 μg GTL001 + imiquimod group. In post hoc analyses, the 600 μg GTL001 + imiquimod group had the highest rates of initial and sustained HPV16/18 clearance. Imiquimod increased antigen-specific T-cell response rates but not rates of solicited reactions. All subjects seroconverted to CyaA.

CONCLUSIONS

For women infected with HPV16 or HPV18 with normal cervical cytology, GTL001 was immunogenic and had acceptable safety profile. Clin Cancer Res; 22(13); 3238-48. ©2016 AACR.

Long-Term Follow-up of HPV Infection Using Urine and Cervical Quantitative HPV DNA Testing

The link between infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) and cervical cancer has been clearly demonstrated. Virological end-points showing the absence of persistent HPV infection are now accepted as a way of monitoring the impact of prophylactic vaccination programs and therapeutic vaccine trials. This study investigated the use of urine samples, which can be collected by self-sampling at home, instead of cervical samples for follow-up of an HPV intervention trial. Eighteen initially HPV DNA-positive women participating in an HPV therapeutic vaccine trial were monitored during a three-year follow-up period. A total of 172 urine samples and 85 cervical samples were collected. We obtained a paired urine sample for each of the 85 cervical samples by recovering urine samples from six monthly gynaecological examinations. We performed a small pilot study in which the participating women used a urine collection device at home and returned their urine sample to the laboratory by mail. All samples were analyzed using quantitative real-time HPV DNA PCR. A good association (κ value of 0.65) was found between the presence of HPV DNA in urine and a subsequent cervical sample. Comparisons of the number of HPV DNA copies in urine and paired cervical samples revealed a significant Spearman rho of 0.676. This correlation was superior in women with severe lesions. The HPV DNA results of the small pilot study based on self-collected urine samples at home are consistent with previous and subsequent urine and/or cervical results. We demonstrated that urine sampling may be a valid alternative to cervical samples for the follow-up of HPV intervention trials or programs. The potential clinical value of urine viral load monitoring should be further investigated.

Human Papillomavirus Laboratory Testing: the Changing Paradigm

High-risk human papillomaviruses (HPVs) cause essentially all cervical cancers, most anal and oropharyngeal cancers, and some vaginal, vulvar, and penile cancers. Improved understanding of the pathogenesis of infection and the availability of newer tests are changing the approach to screening and diagnosis. Molecular tests to detect DNA from the most common high-risk HPVs are FDA approved for use in conjunction with cytology in cervical cancer screening programs. More-specific tests that detect RNA from high-risk HPV types are now also available. The use of molecular tests as the primary screening tests is being adopted in some areas. Genotyping to identify HPV16 and -18 has a recommended role in triaging patients for colposcopy who are high-risk HPV positive but have normal cytology. There are currently no recommended screening methods for anal, vulvar, vaginal, penile, or oropharyngeal HPV infections. HPV testing has limited utility in patients at high risk for anal cancer, but p16 immunohistochemistry is recommended to clarify lesions in tissue biopsy specimens that show moderate dysplasia or precancer mimics. HPV testing is recommended for oropharyngeal squamous cell tumors as a prognostic indicator. Ongoing research will help to improve the content of future guidelines for screening and diagnostic testing.

VALGENT: A protocol for clinical validation of human papillomavirus assays

BACKGROUND

Testing for high-risk HPV is more effective in primary cervical cancer screening than the cytological examination of a Pap smear. Separate genotyping may be useful for triage in both HPV-based and cytology-based screening. Only clinically validated tests should be used in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

VALGENT is a study framework for test comparison and validation of HPV assays in general and HPV genotyping tests in particular according to clinically relevant outcomes and for clinical applications endorsed by scientific evidence.

STUDY DESIGN

VALGENT involves the collation of fresh or archived cervical cell specimen from women attending routine screening supplemented with cytologically abnormal samples. Multiple aliquots of residual material are sent from a central laboratory to participating laboratories for testing with novel HPV assays with limited, extended or full genotyping capacity. Outcomes are derived from screening and pathology registries. Each VALGENT panel includes an assay already validated for screening. A series of accuracy and concordance statistics were generated.

RESULTS

Currently, two VALGENT study rounds, originated from laboratories in Antwerp (Belgium) and Edinburgh (Scotland), were completed. Two new assays (G5+/6+ PCR-LMNX and Xpert HPV) were validated for screening by showing similar accuracy for cervical precancer as the standard comparator test. For two other tests (BD Onclarity, PapilloCheck) validation was confirmed. Inter-test agreement was high although certain type-specific discordances were observed which warrant further analysis.

CONCLUSION

VALGENT extends current guidelines for high-risk HPV test validation in cervical cancer screening and has produced a large study resource for test comparison. More robust procedures of sample selection and handling and integration with the global WHO reference laboratory network focusing on analytical accuracy, may result in the generation of an international standard and a formalized system for clinical validation of HPV assays and quality control in HPV-based screening.

Surveillance of effects of HPV vaccination in Belgium

BACKGROUND

Early effects of HPV (human papillomavirus) vaccination are reflected by changes observable in young women attending cervical cancer screening.

SUBJECT AND METHODS

The SEHIB study included HPV geno-typing of ∼6000 continuous and 650 pathological cervical cell specimen as well as biopsies, collected from women in Belgium in 2010-2014. Data were linked to vaccination status.

RESULTS

HPV vaccination offered protection among women aged <30years against infection with HPV16 (vaccine effectiveness [VE]=67%, 95% CI: 48-79%), HPV18 (VE=93%, 95% CI: 52-99%), and high-risk HPV (VE=16%, 95% CI: 2-29%). Vaccination protected also against cytological lesions. Vaccination protected against histologically confirmed lesions: significantly lower absolute risks of CIN1+ (risk difference [RD]=-1.6%, 95% CI: -2.6% to -0.7%) and CIN3+ associated with HPV16/18 (RD=-0.3%, 95% CI -0.6% to -0.1%). Vaccine effectiveness decreased with age. Protection against HPV16 and 18 infection was significant in all age groups, however no protection was observed against cytological lesions associated with these types in age-group 25-29.

CONCLUSION

The SEHIB study demonstrates the effectiveness of HPV vaccination in Belgian young women in particular in age group 18-19. Declining effectiveness with increasing age may be explained by higher tendency of women already exposed to infection to get the vaccine.

Serial type-specific human papillomavirus (HPV) load measurement allows differentiation between regressing cervical lesions and serial virion productive transient infections

Persistent high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is strongly associated with the development of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) or cancer. Not all persistent infections lead to cancer. Viral load measured at a single time-point is a poor predictor of the natural history of HPV infections. However the profile of viral load evolution over time could distinguish nonprogressive from progressive (carcinogenic) infections. A retrospective natural history study was set up using a Belgian laboratory database including more than 800,000 liquid cytology specimens. All samples were submitted to qPCR identifying E6/E7 genes of 18 HPV types. Viral load changes over time were assessed by the linear regression slope. Database search identified 261 untreated women with persistent type-specific HPV DNA detected (270 infections) in at least three of the last smears for a average period of 3.2 years. Using the coefficient of determination (R²) infections could be subdivided in a latency group (n = 143; R² < 0.85) and a regressing group (n = 127; R² ≥ 0.85). In (≥ 3) serial viral load measurements, serial transient infections with latency is characterized by a nonlinear limited difference in decrease or increase of type-specific viral load (R² < 0.85 and slopes between 2 measurements 0.0010 and -0.0010 HPV copies/cell per day) over a longer period of time (1553 days), whereas regression of a clonal cell population is characterized by a linear (R² ≥ 0.85) decrease (-0.0033 HPV copies/cell per day) over a shorter period of time (708 days; P < 0.001). Using serial HPV type-specific viral load measurements we could for the first time identify regressing CIN2 and CIN3 lesions. Evolution of the viral load is an objective measurable indicator of the natural history of HPV infections and could be used for future triage in HPV-based cervical screening programs.

Human papillomavirus typing by single tube multiplex amplification in real time (SMART): the PapillomaFinder® SMART 20 assay

BACKGROUND

High-risk (hr) human papillomavirus (HPV) infections play a causal role in the development of cervical cancer. The detection of hrHPV is, therefore, advocated in cervical cancer screening programs.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to determine the performance of a novel HPV typing assay, PapillomaFinder® SMART 20. This is a one-tube-per-sample method, to be performed on standard real-time PCR platforms, using melting curve analysis to distinguish targets. The assay detects all 14 hrHPV types, of which 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 52, 56 and 58 individually. HrHPV types 51, 59, 66 and 68 are detected in an hrHPV pool, and low-risk (lr) HPV types 6, 11, 40, 42, 43 and 44 in an lrHPV pool.

STUDY DESIGN

The method was tested on HPV plasmid models, WHO and QCMD proficiency panels and a series of clinical cytological samples (n=45), the latter in comparison with a clinically validated real-time quantitative PCR.

RESULTS

Type-specificity of the test was 100% using plasmids, the WHO and QCMD panels. Sensitivity for hrHPV in single infections was 100% using the WHO and QCMD panels and cytological samples, with an analytical sensitivity of 10-25 copies per reaction for all HPV types tested. Of the 34 HPV types present in the 8 multiple infections in the WHO panel, 30 were detected. In all cytological samples at least one hrHPV type was found, in concordance with the clinically validated method. Only when the viral load of the dominant HPV types in multiple infections greatly exceeded that of the other types in the infection, those other types were not always detected.

CONCLUSIONS

PapillomaFinder® SMART 20 is a rapid, easy to perform, single tube HPV typing assay. The assay detects the 14 hrHPV types, and the 6 most important lrHPV types with a high sensitivity and type-specificity.

Clinical evaluation of a GP5+/6+-based luminex assay having full high-risk human papillomavirus genotyping capability and an internal control

The LMNX genotyping kit HPV GP (LMNX) is based on the clinically validated GP5+/6+ PCR, with a genotyping readout as an alternative for the more established enzyme immunoassay (EIA) detection of 14 targeted high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) types. LMNX is additionally provided with an internal control probe. Here, we present an analysis of the clinical performance of the LMNX using a sample panel and infrastructure provided by the international VALGENT (Validation of Genotyping Tests) project. This panel consisted of cervical specimens from approximately 1,000 women attending routine screening, "enriched" with 300 women with abnormal cytology. Cases were defined as women classified with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2+ (CIN2+) (n = 102) or CIN3+ (n = 55) within the previous 18 months. Controls were women who had normal cytology results over two subsequent screening rounds at a 3-year interval (n = 746). The GP5+/6+-PCR EIA (EIA) was used as a comparator assay and showed sensitivities of 94.1% and 98.2% for CIN2+ and CIN3+, respectively, with a clinical specificity of 92.4% among women aged ≥ 30 years. The LMNX demonstrated clinical sensitivities of 96.1% for CIN2+ and of 98.2% for CIN3+ and a clinical specificity of 92.6% for women aged ≥ 30 years. The LMNX and EIA were in high agreement (Cohen's kappa = 0.969) for the detection of 14 hrHPVs in aggregate, and no significant difference was observed (McNemar's P = 0.629). The LMNX internal control detected 0.6% inadequate specimens. Based on our study results, we consider the LMNX, similarly to the EIA, useful for HPV-based cervical cancer screening.