HPV screening performance indicators in women who previously tested HPV-negative: The second round of Vallecamonica screening programme, Northern Italy

OBJECTIVE

To present performance indicators from the second round of the Vallecamonica-Sebino HPV screening programme in women who had tested negative about four years earlier (mean 45 months).

METHODS

From 2010 to 2012, the target female population (aged 25-64) was invited to the first HPV screening round. In 2013-2017, women were rescreened for the second round. HPV-negative women at the first round were initially rescreened after three years. The interval was gradually increased to five years. HPV-positive women underwent cytology triage: positives were referred to colposcopy and negatives to repeat testing after one year. If HPV was persistently positive, women were referred to colposcopy, if negative, to normal interval rescreening.

RESULTS

In the second round, of 13,824 previously HPV-negative women, 598 were HPV-positive (4.3%), of whom 297 were positive at cytology triage. Of those referred to one-year HPV test, 291 complied (98.0%), 133 (50.2%) of whom were persistently positive. Total referral was 3.1% compared with 6.6% in the first round (age-adjusted relative referral 0.59, 95% CI: 0.53-0.65). There were 24 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2+ (three cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3+). Detection was 0.17%, compared with 0.9% in the first round. Age-adjusted relative detections were 0.25 (95% CI: 0.16-0.39) and 0.18 (95% CI: 0.05-0.61) for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2+ and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3+, respectively. Positive predictive value was 5.7%, compared with 14.6% in the first round.

CONCLUSIONS

At second round, referral was half that at first round, while cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2+ detection decreased nine-fold. Consequently, positive predictive value decreased dramatically. Rescreening four years after an HPV-negative test makes the process inefficient due to the low prevalence of lesions.

Clinical Performance of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Testing versus Cytology for Cervical Cancer Screening: Results of a Large Danish Implementation Study

Background

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is increasingly used as the primary cervical cancer screening test. In a large pilot implementation, we compared participation, referrals and detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) in HPV- versus cytology-based cervical cancer screening.

Methods

The implementation was embedded into the routine screening program at Lillebaelt Hospital, Department of Pathology, Vejle, Denmark. Based on the area of residence, women aged 30–59 years were screened by either HPV testing (with HPV16/18 genotyping and cytology triage) or cytology (with HPV triage for minor abnormalities). Our analysis includes women invited or screened during May 2017–May 2018 (invited: n=35,081; screened: n=28,352) with 6 months of follow-up. Information on screening results and sociodemographic characteristics were obtained from registers. Using logistic regression, we estimated odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of participation, referral and CIN3+-detection in HPV- versus cytology-based screening, adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics.

Results

Participation was virtually identical in the HPV- and cytology group (58.4% vs 58.8%; OR_adjusted=0.97, 95% CI, 0.93–1.01). Referral to colposcopy was more common in the HPV- than cytology group (3.8% vs 2.1%; OR_adjusted=1.88, 95% CI, 1.63–2.17). More cases of CIN3+ were detected in the HPV- than cytology group (1.0% vs 0.7%, OR_adjusted=1.47; 95% CI, 1.13–1.91).

Conclusion

Participation did not differ between HPV- and cytology-based screening. HPV-based screening detected more cases of CIN3+, but in this initial screening round also led to more colposcopies than cytology-based screening.

Primary cervical screening with high risk human papillomavirus testing: observational study

OBJECTIVE

To provide the first report on the main outcomes from the prevalence and incidence rounds of a large pilot of routine primary high risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing in England, compared with contemporaneous primary liquid based cytology screening.

DESIGN

Observational study.

SETTING

The English Cervical Screening Programme.

PARTICIPANTS

578 547 women undergoing cervical screening in primary care between May 2013 and December 2014, with follow-up until May 2017; 183 970 (32%) were screened with hrHPV testing.

INTERVENTIONS

Routine cervical screening with hrHPV testing with liquid based cytology triage and two early recalls for women who were hrHPV positive and cytology negative, following the national screening age and interval recommendations.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Frequency of referral for a colposcopy; adherence to early recall; and relative detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse from hrHPV testing compared with liquid based cytology in two consecutive screening rounds.

RESULTS

Baseline hrHPV testing and early recall required approximately 80% more colposcopies, (adjusted odds ratio 1.77, 95% confidence interval 1.73 to 1.82), but detected substantially more cervical intraepithelial neoplasia than liquid based cytology (1.49 for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse, 1.43 to 1.55; 1.44 for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse, 1.36 to 1.51) and for cervical cancer (1.27, 0.99 to 1.63). Attendance at early recall and colposcopy referral were 80% and 95%, respectively. At the incidence screen, the 33 506 women screened with hrHPV testing had substantially less cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse than the 77 017 women screened with liquid based cytology (0.14, 0.09 to 0.23).

CONCLUSIONS

In England, routine primary hrHPV screening increased the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse and cervical cancer by approximately 40% and 30%, respectively, compared with liquid based cytology. The very low incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse after three years supports extending the screening interval.

Cervical human papilloma virus (HPV) DNA primary screening test: Results of a population-based screening programme in central Italy

Objective To present the results of the first and second round human papilloma virus (HPV)-based screening programme in the Umbria region after three years. Methods From August 2010 to November 2011, the entire female population aged 35-64 in a local health district was invited for HPV testing (HPV-DNA cobas4800 on a liquid-based cytology sample). HPV-negative women were re-invited after three years. For HPV-positive women, a slide was prepared and interpreted. Positive cytologies were referred to colposcopy; negatives were referred to repeat HPV after one year. If HPV was persistently positive, women were referred to colposcopy; if negative, to normal screening. Indicators of the first and second round are compared with those of cytology screening in the same area in the preceding three years. Results Participation was 56.5%, the same as cytology (56.6%). HPV-positivity was 6.4% (396/6272), cytology triage positivity was 35.6%; 251 cytology negative women were referred to one-year HPV retesting, 84.1% complied, and 55.5% were positive. Total colposcopy referral was 4.1%, and for cytology 1%. The detection rate for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe was 10‰, compared with 3.7‰ using cytology. After three years, HPV-positivity was 3.4% (129/3831), overall colposcopy referral was 2.3% (most at one-year follow-up), and detection rate was 0.5/1000. Conclusions The first round detection rate was more than twice that of cytology screening, while colposcopy referral increased fourfold. At the second round, the detection rate decreased dramatically, showing that longer interval and more conservative protocols are needed.

Screening women for cervical cancer carcinoma with a HPV mRNA test: first results from the Venice pilot program

Background:

HPV DNA-based screening is more effective than a Pap test in preventing cervical cancer, but the test is less specific. New HPV tests have been proposed for primary screening. The HPV mRNA test showed a similar or slightly lower sensitivity than the HPV DNA tests but with a higher specificity. We report the results of an organised HPV mRNA-based screening pilot program in Venice, Italy.

Methods:

From October 2011 to May 2014, women aged 25–64 years were invited to undergo a HPV mRNA test (Aptima). Those testing positive underwent cytological triage. Women with positive cytology were referred to colposcopy, whereas those with negative cytology were referred to repeat the HPV mRNA test 1 year later. The results of the HPV mRNA test program were compared with both the local historical cytology-based program and with four neighbouring DNA HPV-based pilot projects.

Results:

Overall, 23 211 women underwent a HPV mRNA test. The age-standardised positivity rate was 7.0%, higher than in HPV DNA programs (6.8% relative rate (RR) 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05–1.17). The total colposcopy referral was 5.1%, double than with cytology (2.6% RR 2.02, 95% CI 1.82–2.25) but similar to the HPV DNA programs (4.8% RR 1.02; 95% CI 0.96–1.08). The cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ detection rate with HPV mRNA was greater than in the HPV DNA programs at baseline (RR 1.50; 95% CI 1.19–1.88) and not significantly lower at the 1-year repeat (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.40–1.16). The overall RR was 1.29 (95% CI 1.05–1.59), which was much higher than with cytology (detection rate 5.5‰ vs 2.1‰ RR 2.50, 95% CI 1.76–3.62).

Conclusions:

A screening programme based on the HPV mRNA obtained results similar to those observed with the HPV DNA test. In routine screening programmes, even a limited increase in HPV prevalence may conceal the advantage represented by the higher specificity of HPV mRNA.

Use of Cytology, E6/E7 mRNA, and p16INK4a-Ki-67 to Define the Management of Human Papillomavirus (HPV)-Positive Women in Cervical Cancer Screening

OBJECTIVES

We measured the accuracy of p16(INK4a)-Ki67 (CINtec PLUS, Roche, Mannheim, Germany), and E6/E7mRNA (types 16/18/31/33/45 NucliSENS easyQ, bioMérieux, Boxtel, The Netherlands) as triage test, alone and combined with cytology.

METHODS

Six thousand two hundred and seventy two women were recruited in a population-based screening using HPV DNA as primary test; 396 were positive and were tested for cytology and biomarkers. All tests were performed on the same sample. Cytology-positive women were referred to colposcopy; cytology-negative women were referred to one-year HPV re-testing. The endpoint was CIN2+ at baseline or follow up.

RESULTS

Sensitivity was 77.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 65.3-86.7) and 53.2% (95%CI: 40.3-65.4) for cytology at atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) and high-grade threshold, and 87.6% (95%CI:75.7-93.6), and 80.8% (95%CI: 67.6-89.8) for p16INK4a-Ki67, and E6/E7mRNA, respectively. Colposcopy referral was 36% (95%CI: 31.2-40.9) and 11.2% (95%CI: 7.8-14.1) for cytology at ASC-US and high-grade threshold, respectively, and 36.0% (95%CI: 29.9-29.6), and 47.5% (95%CI: 32.5-42.4) for p16(INK4a)-Ki67, and E6/E7mRNA, respectively. Strategies referring high-grade cytology or biomarker positive women to colposcopy reached sensitivity close to 100%, with modest increase in colposcopy referral.

CONCLUSIONS

The high sensitivity of combined strategies probably allows longer intervals in HPV-positive, triage-negative women.

HPV prevalence and risk of pre-cancer and cancer in regular immigrants in Italy: results from HPV DNA test-based screening pilot programs

ᅟ: Immigrants from low- and medium-income countries have a higher risk of cervical cancer due both to barriers in access to screening and to higher human papillomavirus (HPV) prevalence. In the near future many screening programmes in industrialised countries will replace Pap test with HPV as primary test. In order to plan future interventions, it is essential to understand how the HPV screening performs in immigrant women.

METHODS

We conducted a survey on the main performance indicators from some of the HPV DNA-based pilot programmes in Italy, comparing regular immigrant women, identified as women resident in Italy who were born abroad, with women who were born in Italy. All the programmes applied the same protocol, with HPV as stand-alone test starting for women of 25 or 35 to 64 years of age. Cytology triage is performed for positive women; those ASC-US or more severe are referred directly to colposcopy; negative women are referred to repeat HPV after one year.

RESULTS

Overall, 162,829 women were invited, of whom 22,814 were born abroad. Participation was higher for Italy-born than born abroad (52.2% vs. 43.6%), particularly for women over 45 years. HPV positivity rate was higher in immigrants: 7.8% vs. 6.1%, age-adjusted Relative Risk (age-adj RR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.13-1.22. The proportion of women with positive cytology triage was similar in the two groups (42%). Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or more severe detection rate was higher for born abroad (age-adj RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.45-1.89). The difference was stronger when considering only CIN3 or more severe (age-adj RR 2.29, 95% CI 1.90-2.75). Both HPV positivity and CIN2 or more severe detection rate had a different age curve in born abroad compared with Italy-born: in the former, the risk was almost flat, while in the latter it declined rapidly with age.

CONCLUSION

Compliance with HPV screening is lower for migrant women, who are affected by higher HPV positivity and CIN3 cancer detection rates.

Self-sampling to increase participation in cervical cancer screening: an RCT comparing home mailing, distribution in pharmacies, and recall letter

Background:

We performed a multicentre randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effect on participation in organised screening programmes of a self-sampling device mailed home or picked up at a pharmacy compared with the standard recall letter.

Methods:

Women aged 30–64 non-responding to screening invitation were eligible. Response rate to first invitation ranged from 30% to 60% between centres. The control was the standard reminder letter to undergo the test used by the programme (Pap test in three centres and HPV DNA test in three other centres). Home mailing of the self-sampler was preceded by a letter with a leaflet about HPV. The analysis was intention-to-treat.

Results:

In all, 14 041 women were randomised and recruited: 5012 in the control arm, 4516 to receive the self-sampler at home, and 4513 to pick up the self-sampler at a pharmacy. Participation was 11.9% in the control, 21.6% (relative participation: 1.75; 95% CI 1.60–1.93) in home, and 12.0% (relative participation: 0.96; 95% CI 0.86–1.07) in the pharmacy arms, respectively. The heterogeneity between centres was high (excess heterogeneity of that expected due to chance, i.e., I², 94.9% and 94.1% for home and pharmacy arm, respectively). The estimated impact on the overall coverage was +4.3% for home mail self-sampling compared with +2.2% for standard reminder.

Conclusions:

Home mailing of self-sampler proved to be an effective way to increase participation in screening programmes, even in those with HPV as primary testing. Picking up at pharmacies showed effects varying from centre to centre.

Cervical cancer screening with HPV testing in the Valcamonica (Italy) screening programme

OBJECTIVE

We present the results of the first screening round and the first year of the second round of the Valcamonica Human Papillomavirus (HPV) pilot screening project.

SETTING

From 2010 to 2012, the entire target female population (aged 25-64) was invited to the first HPV screening round in an area where Pap test screening had been active since 2002.

METHODS

For HPV-negative women, the interval was three years. For HPV-positive women, a cytological smear was stained and interpreted. Positive cytologies were referred to colposcopy; negatives were referred to repeat HPV after one year. If HPV was persistently positive, women were referred to colposcopy; if negative, to normal screening.

RESULTS

In 2010-12 18728 women were screened, slightly higher participation than with Pap test (18233 64.7%); 1633 were HPV-positive (8.7%); 843 were positive at cytology triage (referral rate at baseline 4.5%). Of those referred at the one year HPV test, 84% complied (660/780); 356 were persistently positive (1.9%). The total referral rate was 6.4% compared with 3.7% for the Pap test. The detection rate was 9.2/1000 compared with 5.0% for the Pap test. The HPV positivity rate during the second round in women previously negative was 3.9% and the detection rate in HPV-positive cytology-positive women was 0.8/1000.

CONCLUSIONS

HPV-based screening increases colposcopies at the first round, but also strongly increases the detection rate. At the second round, HPV prevalence was much lower and the detection rate also fell, corroborating the need for longer screening intervals in HPV-negative women.

The Possible Effects on Socio-Economic Inequalities of Introducing HPV Testing as Primary Test in Cervical Cancer Screening Programs

Background: Screening with HPV is more effective than Pap test in preventing cervical cancer. HPV as primary test will imply longer intervals and a triage test for HPV positive women. It will also permit the development of self-sampling devices. These innovations may affect population coverage, participation, and compliance to protocols, and likely in a different way for less educated, poorer, and disadvantaged women.

Aim: To describe the impact on inequalities, actual or presumed, of the introduction of HPV-based screening.

Methods: The putative HPV-based screening algorithm has been analyzed to identify critical points for inequalities. A systematic review of the literature has been conducted searching PubMed on HPV screening coverage, participation, and compliance. Results were summarized in a narrative synthesis.

Results: Knowledge about HPV and cervical cancer was lower in women with low socio-economic status and in disadvantaged groups. A correct communication can reduce differences. Longer intervals will make it easier to achieve high-population coverage, but higher cost of the test in private providers could reduce the use of opportunistic screening by disadvantaged women. There are some evidences that inviting for HPV test instead of Pap increases participation, but there are no data on social differences. Self-sampling devices are effective in increasing participation and coverage. Some studies showed that the acceptability of self-sampling is higher in more educated women, but there is also an effect on hard-to-reach women. Communication of HPV positivity may increase anxiety and impact on sexual behaviors, the effect is stronger in low educated and disadvantaged women. Finally, many studies found indirect evidence that unvaccinated women are or will be more probably under-screened.

Conclusion: The introduction of HPV test may increase population coverage, but non-compliance to protocols and interaction with opportunistic screening can increase the existing inequalities.

Cervical cancer screening by high risk HPV testing in routine practice: results at one year recall of high risk HPV-positive and cytology-negative women

Objective

Cervical cancer screening by human papillomavirus (HPV) testing requires the use of additional triage and follow-up analyses. We evaluated women’s compliance with and the performance of this strategy in a routine setting.

Setting

Five cervical service screening programmes in North-East Italy.

Methods

Eligible women aged 25-64 invited for a new screening episode underwent HPV testing for high risk types (hrHPV by Hybrid Capture 2) and cytology triage. Women with positive HPV and cytology results were referred for colposcopy; women with positive HPV but negative cytology results were referred to 1-year repeat hrHPV testing.

Results

Of 46,694 women screened by HPV testing up to December 2011, 3,211 (6.9%) tested hrHPV positive; 45% of these had a positive triage cytology. Those with negative cytology were invited for 1-yr repeat testing. Compliance with invitation was 61.6% at baseline and 85.3% at 1-yr repeat. Rate of persistent hrHPV positivity was 58% (830/1,435). Colposcopy performed in women with a positive hrHPV test at 1-yr repeat accounted for 36% of all colposcopies performed within the screening programmes. Cumulatively, a histological high-grade lesion was detected in 276 women (5.9‰ detection rate), 234 at baseline (85%), and 42 (15%) at 1-yr repeat.

Conclusions

Compliance with hrHPV-based screening programmes was high both at baseline and at 1-yr repeat. Compared with the randomized trials, a higher proportion of triage cytology was read as positive, and only a small number of high-grade lesions were detected among the group of hrHPV positive cytology negative women who repeated testing 1-yr after baseline.