Factors associated with anal cancer screening follow-up by high-resolution anoscopy

To Improve Motivational Barriers to Retention in High Resolution Anoscopy, Patients and Providers Recommend Social and Environmental Changes: A Sequential Explanatory Mixed-Methods Pilot Study in a Federally Qualified Health Center

Loss to follow-up (LTFU) in high-resolution anoscopy (HRA) programs jeopardizes the procedure's potential to help prevent anal cancer. We explored quality improvement factors to understand how to address this LTFU. Using the transtheoretical COM-B Model (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, and Behavior) and a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design, we surveyed and interviewed 13 patients who remained engaged in HIV care but who delayed their HRA monitoring or treatment visits in the same community clinic, and 6 HRA clinicians and medical assistants. Analyses involved descriptive statistics and rapid qualitative analysis. Patients were racially, ethnically, and economically representative of the LTFU population, and were generally experienced with HRA (Mean HRA visits = 4.6, SD = 2.8, mdn = 3). Providers were experienced clinicians and medical assistants (Mean years providing HRA = 6.0, SD = 2.2). Analyses revealed two primary, related barriers: (A) motivational barriers such as physical pain, discomfort, embarrassment, and anxiety; which were largely borne from (B) opportunity barriers such as difficulties with scheduling, inconsistent after-care (particularly for pain and discomfort), anxiety-inducing exam rooms and equipment, and internalized and anticipated stigma. Capability barriers, such as limited health literacy about HRA, were less common and, like motivational barriers, linked to opportunity barriers. Participants recommended potential facilitators, including easier scheduling, standardization of pain management and after-care services, and examination room modifications to reduce anxiety. To retain HRA patients in community settings, interventions should address social and physical opportunity barriers that strongly determine motivational and capability barriers. Improving convenience, standardizing pain management, and introducing stigma interventions specific to HRA, could alleviate both motivational and capability barriers.

Commonly Drawn Immunologic and Inflammatory Markers as Risk Predictors for Anal Cancer in Veterans Living With HIV

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to determine if immune inflammatory markers (neutrophil lymphocyte ratio [NLR], platelet lymphocyte ratio [PLR], and prognostic nutritional index [PNI]) correlate with anal cancer risk in people living with HIV and to compare these markers with the CD4/CD8 ratio.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a regional retrospective cohort study of veterans living with HIV who were screened for or diagnosed with anal neoplasia or cancer from 2001 to 2019. The NLR, PLR, PNI, and CD4/CD8 ratio within 1 year of anal pathology results were computed. Patients with anal cancer were compared to patients without anal cancer. Regression modeling was used to estimate the odds of developing anal cancer.

RESULTS

Three hundred thirty-four patients were included (37 with anal cancer, 297 without anal cancer). In patients with anal cancer, NLR and PLR were higher (2.17 vs 1.69, p = .04; 140 vs 110, p = .02, respectively), while PNI and CD4/CD8 ratio were lower (44.65 vs 50.01, p < .001; 0.35 vs 0.80, p < .001, respectively). On multivariate logistic regression modeling, only PNI (odds ratio, 0.90; p = .001) and CD4/CD8 ratio (odds ratio, 0.05; p < .001) were associated with increased anal cancer risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Although NLR and PLR independently correlate with anal cancer risk, when controlling for other risk predictors, only PNI and CD4/CD8 ratio were statistically significant biomarkers for anal cancer. The CD4/CD8 ratio is the strongest immune inflammatory marker that predicts risk of anal cancer among veterans living with HIV.

The influence of home versus clinic anal human papillomavirus sampling on high-resolution anoscopy uptake in the Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study

Background Anal cancer disproportionately affects sexual and gender minority individuals living with HIV. High-resolution anoscopy (HRA) is an in-clinic procedure to detect precancerous anal lesions and cancer, yet prospective data on factors associated with HRA attendance are lacking. We examined whether anal HPV sampling at home versus in a clinic impacts HRA uptake and assessed HRA acceptability. Methods Sexual and gender minority individuals were randomised to home-based self-sampling or clinical sampling. All were asked to attend in-clinic HRA 1year later. We regressed HRA attendance on study arm using multivariable Poisson regression and assessed HRA acceptability using χ 2 tests. Results A total of 62.8% of 196 participants who engaged in screening attended HRA. Although not significant (P =0.13), a higher proportion of participants who engaged in clinic-based screening attended HRA (68.5%) compared to home-based participants (57.9%). Overall, HRA uptake was higher among participants with anal cytology history (aRR 1.40, 95% CI 1.07-1.82), and lower among participants preferring a versatile anal sex position versus insertive (aRR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53-0.91), but did not differ by race or HIV serostatus. In the clinic arm, persons living with HIV had lower HRA attendance (42.9%) versus HIV-negative participants (73.3%) (P =0.02) and Black non-Hispanic participants had lower HRA attendance (41.7%) than White non-Hispanic participants (73.1%), (P =0.04). No differences in attendance by race or HIV status were observed in the home arm. Conclusions HRA uptake differed significantly by race and HIV status in the clinic arm but not the home arm.

Human Oncogenic Viruses: Characteristics and Prevention Strategies-Lessons Learned from Human Papillomaviruses

Approximately 12% of human cancers worldwide are associated with infectious agents, which are classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as Group 1 within the agents that are carcinogenic to humans. Most of these agents are viruses. Group 1 oncogenic viruses include hepatitis C virus, hepatitis B virus (HBV), human T-cell lymphotropic virus type 1, Epstein-Barr virus, Kaposi sarcoma-associated herpesvirus, human immunodeficiency virus-1 and high-risk human papillomaviruses (HPVs). In addition, some human polyomaviruses are suspected of inducing cancer prevalently in hosts with impaired immune responses. Merkel cell polyomavirus has been associated with Merkel cell carcinoma and included by the IARC in Group 2A (i.e., probably carcinogenic to humans). Linking viruses to human cancers has allowed for the development of diagnostic, prophylactic and therapeutic measures. Vaccination significantly reduced tumours induced by two oncogenic viruses as follows: HBV and HPV. Herein, we focus on mucosal alpha HPVs, which are responsible for the highest number of cancer cases due to tumour viruses and against which effective prevention strategies have been developed to reduce the global burden of HPV-related cancers.

The influence of home versus clinic anal human papillomavirus sampling on high-resolution anoscopy uptake in the Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study

Background

Anal cancer disproportionately affects men who have sex with men (MSM) living with HIV. High-resolution anoscopy (HRA) is an in-clinic procedure to detect precancerous anal lesions and cancer, yet prospective data on factors associated with HRA attendance are lacking. We examined whether anal HPV sampling at home versus in a clinic impacts HRA uptake and assessed HRA acceptability.

Method

MSM and trans persons 25 years and older were randomized to home-based self-sampling or clinical sampling. All were asked to attend in-clinic HRA one year later. We regressed HRA attendance on study arm using multivariable Poisson regression and assessed HRA acceptability using χ 2 tests.

Results

62.8% of 196 participants who engaged in screening attended HRA. Although not significant ( p =0.13), a higher proportion of participants who engaged in clinic-based screening attended HRA (68.5%) compared to home-based participants (57.9%). Overall, HRA uptake was higher among participants with anal cytology history (aRR 1.44, 95% CI 1.11 - 1.87) and lower among participants preferring versatile anal sex position versus insertive (aRR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53 - 0.91), but did not differ by race or HIV serostatus. In the clinic arm, persons living with HIV had lower HRA attendance (42.9%) versus HIV-negative participants (73.3%) ( p =0.02) and Black non-Hispanic participants had lower HRA attendance (41.7%) than White non-Hispanic participants (73.1%), ( p =0.04); however, no differences in attendance by race or HIV status were observed in the home arm.

Conclusions

HRA uptake differed significantly by race and HIV status in the clinic arm but not the home arm.

Barriers and facilitators to anal cancer screening among people living with HIV in Puerto Rico

BACKGROUND

Anal cancer (AC) disproportionally affects people living with HIV (PLWH). Although there are no consensus-based AC screening guidelines, experts recommend anal pap as a primary screening tool in settings where high-resolution anoscopy (HRA) is available. We aimed to assess barriers and facilitators to anal cancer screening in a sample of Hispanic PLWH in Puerto Rico.

METHODS

To assess their knowledge and attitudes, we conducted a cross-sectional survey from 2020-2021 among PLWH in Puerto Rico (n = 212). Data was collected through a telephone interview that assessed information on sociodemographics, knowledge, and attitudes about AC, and the history of AC screening. The chi-square test, Fisher exact test, and logistic regression models were used to assess factors associated with screening uptake.

RESULTS

Anal Pap and HRA awareness were 60.4% and 30.7%, respectively. Anal Pap and HRA uptake was 51.5% and 19.3%, respectively. The most common barriers for anal Pap and HRA were lack of knowledge about the test and lack of physician recommendation. MSM were more likely to have heard of anal Pap (OR: 2.15, 95% CI:1.30-3.54) than MSW. MSM (OR: 3.04, 95% CI: 1.79-5.19) and women (OR: 3.00, 95% CI: 1.72-5.20) were also more likely to have undergone anal Pap. Similarly, individuals with a history of genital warts were more likely to have heard of anal Pap and HRA and have undergone anal Pap and HRA. Awareness of where to go for concerns about anal health was positively associated with having received anal Pap and HRA.

CONCLUSIONS

With emerging evidence on the effectiveness of screening and treatment for anal cancer, several organizations are steering toward generating consensus-based anal cancer screening recommendations. Our study provides foundational data on barriers and facilitators to anal cancer screening in Puerto Rico that will be critical to informing screening implementation in this US territory.

Evaluation of the validity of the HPV viral load compared to conventional techniques for the detection of high-grade anal intraepithelial lesions in men with HIV who have sex with men

Background

The incidence of high-grade anal intraepithelial lesions (HSILs) has increased in recent years among men who have sex with men with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). This work evaluated the validity of the human papilloma virus viral load (HPV-VL) versus cytological and qualitative HPV results to detect HSILs.

Methods

From May 2017 to January 2020, 93 men who have sex with men and HIV were included in an anal cancer screening program from the Infectious Diseases Unit at a tertiary-care hospital in Alicante (Spain). The gold-standard for the screening of anal HSILs is the anal biopsy using high-resolution anoscopy. The diagnostic methods compared against gold-standard were HPV-16-VL, HPV-18-VL, and HPV-16-18-VL co-testing, anal cytology, and qualitative HPV detection. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and cut-off points for HPV-VL were calculated. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and Cohen's Kappa coefficient (κ) were also calculated.

Results

The mean patient age was 44.6 ± 9.5 years. All of them received antiretroviral treatment, 96.8% had an HIV viral load of <50 copies/mL and 17.2% had a previous diagnosis of AIDS. The diagnosis of the anal biopsies were: 19.4% (n = 18) HSIL, 29.1% (n = 27) LSIL, and 51.6% (n = 48) negative. An HPV-16-VL >6.2 copies/cell was detected in the HSIL biopsy samples (p = 0.007), showing a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 46.2%. HPV-18-VL and HPV16-18-VL co-testing showed a sensitivity of 75% and 76.9% and a specificity of 72.7% and 61.3%, respectively. The highest PPV was 50% obtained with the cytology and HPV-18-VL. The HPV-16-VL showed a NPV of 100%, followed by 88.9% in the HPV-18-VL and 87% in the abnormal cytology. Cohen's Kappa coefficient were: HPV-18-VL (κ = 0.412), abnormal cytology (κ = 0.353) and HPV-16-VL (κ = 0.338).

Conclusions

HPV-VL testing improved the detection sensitivity but not the specificity for HSIL biopsies compared to anal cytology and the qualitative detection of HPV. In men who have sex with men and HIV the HPV-VL could be an useful tool for diagnosis of HSILs in anal cancer screening programs. Further studies will be needed to evaluate the clinical implications of HPV-VL in these programs.

Do immune inflammatory markers correlate with anal dysplasia and anal cancer risk in patients living with HIV?

PURPOSE

People living with HIV (PLWH) are at an elevated risk for developing anal cancer. As screening is invasive, markers predicting those at highest risk for anal cancer could guide individualized screening. Neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and prognostic nutritional index (PNI) are surrogate inflammatory/immune markers known to correlate with cancer outcomes. This study aims to assess whether these markers correlate with anal cancer risk in PLWH.

METHODS

This is a retrospective single-institution cohort study of PLWH at a single academic medical center who were diagnosed with or screened for anal dysplasia between 2001 and 2019. Aforementioned markers collected within one year of diagnosis were recorded. Regression modeling was used to estimate odds of anal cancer. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was utilized to determine optimal cutoff for screening values.

RESULTS

Five-hundred-fourteen patients were included. NLR and PNI were significantly associated with cancer risk on univariate (p = 0.03, p = 0.001) and multivariate analyses (p = 0.03, p = 0.01). NLR increased across all grades of dysplasia. PLR was not associated with cancer risk. A NLR of ≥ 1.64 can be utilized to capture 76% of cancer patients in our cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

NLR values in patients living with HIV correlate with risk of anal cancer and increasing grades of dysplasia. A cutoff NLR of ≥ 1.64 can be used to help capture those at risk. NLR is a promising marker of risk of anal cancer and progression of anal dysplasia in patients with HIV infection and could be used to risk-stratify screening and surveillance intervals.

Detection of Circulating HPV16 DNA as a Biomarker for Cervical Cancer by a Bead-Based HPV Genotyping Assay

Human papillomavirus (HPV) circulating tumor DNA (HPV ctDNA) was proposed as a biomarker for the detection and disease monitoring of HPV-related cancers. One hundred eighty plasma samples obtained from women diagnosed with HPV16-positive cervical cancer (CC) (n = 100), HPV16-positive premalignant lesions (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 [CIN3]) (n = 20), and HPV DNA-negative controls (n = 60) were randomly selected from the archives for evaluating the performance of a bead-based HPV genotyping assay (E7 type-specific multiplex genotyping assay [E7-MPG]) in detecting HPV16 ctDNA. The performance of the E7-MPG was compared with those of DNA detection by droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) and detection of HPV16 E6 antibodies evaluated in an independent study. Internal controls to assess DNA quality were included in the molecular assays, i.e., beta-globin and ESR1, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of E7-MPG and/or E6 antibodies to detect HPV16-positive CCs were evaluated. HPV16 ctDNA was detected using the E7-MPG in 42.3% of all plasma samples and in 74.7% of plasma samples from HPV16-positive CC cases. The validation of E7-MPG data by ddPCR showed that the sensitivity of the E7-MPG test for HPV16-positive CC detection was higher than that of ddPCR (74.7% versus 63.1%; P < 0.001). When both HPV16 ctDNA and E6 antibodies were considered, the sensitivity for HPV16-positive CC detection increased from 74.7% to 86.1%, while the specificity was unchanged at 97.8%. The performance of E7-MPG for the detection of HPV16 ctDNA appears to be at least as sensitive as that of ddPCR, offering an additional tool for ctDNA detection of HPV16-positive CC. The use of an additional blood marker of HPV infection, such as E6 antibodies, further improved the detection of CC. IMPORTANCE The validity of HPV ctDNA as a marker of HPV-driven cancers has been previously reported. Herein we validated an alternative to ddPCR for HPV16 ctDNA detection, using a bead-based HPV genotyping assay that offers the potential advantage of reducing the cost of clinical management due to the multiplex capability of the test, thus facilitating its use in clinical settings. In addition, we analyzed HPV ctDNA in the context of E6 antibodies as an additional HPV marker. The HPV16 ctDNA biomarker appeared to be highly specific and, to a lesser extent, sensitive for the detection of CC, mainly indicated for those at an advanced tumor stage. In this proof-of-principle study, E6 antibodies were mainly detected in early tumor stages of CC, while HPV ctDNA was mainly positive at advanced tumor stages.

The other side of screening: predictors of treatment and follow-up for anal precancers in a large health system

BACKGROUND

Anal cancer disproportionately affects people with HIV (PWH). High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) are cancer precursors and treating them might prevent anal cancer. Data on adherence to HSIL treatment and surveillance is limited but needed to identify deficiencies of screening strategies.

METHODS

We collected data on high-resolution anoscopy (HRA) attendance and outcomes from 2009 to 2019 in a large urban anal cancer-screening program. Patients with an initial HSIL diagnosis were followed for return for HSIL electrocautery ablation within 6 months of index HSIL diagnosis, and follow-up HRA within 18 months of index HSIL diagnosis. We also evaluated predictors of these outcomes in univariable and multivariable analyses.

RESULTS

One thousand one hundred and seventy-nine unique patients with an anal HSIL diagnosis were identified and 684 (58%) returned for electrocautery ablation. Of those treated, only 174 (25%) and only 9% of untreated HSIL patients (47 of 495) underwent surveillance HRA within 18 months of index HSIL diagnosis. In multivariable analyses, black patients and PWH regardless of virologic control were less likely to undergo HSIL ablation within 6 months of HSIL diagnosis whereas patients with commercial insurance were more likely to be treated within 6 months of diagnosis. Among treated HSIL patients, PWH with viremia had a lower likelihood of engaging in post-treatment surveillance within 18 months of HSIL diagnosis.

DISCUSSION

Even in large specialized anal cancer screening programs adherence to HSIL treatment and surveillance is low. Psychosocial and economic determinants of health may impact retention in care. Addressing both personal and structural barriers to patient engagement may improve the effectiveness of anal cancer screening.