Long-term cervical precancer outcomes after a negative DNA- or RNA-based human papillomavirus test result

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer, a preventable disease associated with the human papillomavirus, is responsible for significant morbidity and mortality globally. Primary human papillomavirus testing is more sensitive in detecting precancerous cervical lesions than cytologic screening and can be conducted using either DNA- or RNA-based assays. Screening programs must select the most appropriate assay from several available assays for their population. It is not yet known whether these assays perform equivalently in the long term, particularly among women with a negative human papillomavirus test result. This study aims to compare long-term safety after a negative human papillomavirus test result across both DNA- and RNA-based testing assays.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare long-term high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher) outcomes of 2 DNA-based assays (Digene Hybrid Capture 2 High-Risk HPV DNA Test and cobas 4800 HPV Test) and 1 messenger RNA-based assay (Aptima HPV Assay) using data from the Human Papillomavirus For Cervical Cancer Trial-DECADEl (FOCAL-DECADE) cohort, by first comparing the positive and negative rates between the assays and then investigating the cumulative incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 and higher and grade 3 or higher detection among participants in the FOCAL DECADE cohort over follow-up according to human papillomavirus testing assays.

STUDY DESIGN

The FOCAL Trial was a randomized controlled trial that evaluated human papillomavirus testing for primary cervical cancer screening. The FOCAL-DECADE cohort subsequently followed FOCAL Trial participants passively through the British Columbia Cervix Screening Program Database for approximately 10 years after the FOCAL Trial study exit to examine the rates of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher. For this study, eligible participants had baseline human papillomavirus-negative results from at least 1 assay and had 1 or more cytologic screens after baseline (9509 participants for DNA-based and 3473 participants for DNA- vs RNA-based assay comparisons). We constructed cumulative incidence curves and compared the hazard ratios for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher detection according to the assays.

RESULTS

Over 10 years of follow-up, the cumulative incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher did not significantly differ between the DNA-based assays (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.06; P=.35 and hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-1.01; P=.06 for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or higher, respectively) or between the DNA- and RNA-based assays (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.87-1.06; P=.48 and hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-1.13; P=.52 for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or higher, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Among participants who tested negative for human papillomavirus at baseline, the long-term risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher did not significantly differ regardless of whether DNA- or RNA-based human papillomavirus testing assays were used. Screening program decision makers can be confident that for women who test negative for human papillomavirus, DNA- and RNA-based assays exhibit similar cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher outcomes over several years.

Evaluation of a validated methylation triage signature for human papillomavirus positive women in the HPV FOCAL cervical cancer screening trial

Human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening requires triage of HPV positive women to identify those at risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) or worse. We conducted a blinded case-control study within the HPV FOCAL randomized cervical cancer screening trial of women aged 25-65 to examine whether baseline methylation testing using the S5 classifier provided triage performance similar to an algorithm relying on cytology and HPV genotyping. Groups were randomly selected from women with known HPV/cytology results and pathology outcomes. Group 1: 104 HPV positive (HPV+), abnormal cytology (54 CIN2/3; 50 Collapse

Key Words

• cervical cancer
• cervical cancer screening
• colposcopy triage
• human papillomavirus
• methylation

Collapse

MESH Headings

• Adult
• Aged
• Case-Control Studies
• Cell Biology
• Early Detection of Cancer/methods
• Europe
• Female
• Human papillomavirus 16/genetics
• Human papillomavirus 16/pathogenicity
• Human papillomavirus 18/genetics
• Human papillomavirus 18/pathogenicity
• Humans
• Methylation
• Middle Aged
• Papillomavirus Infections/complications
• Papillomavirus Infections/genetics
• Risk
• United States
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/etiology
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/genetics

Collapse

Grants

• 16891 Cancer Research UK
• C569/A10404 Cancer Research UK

Collapse

Comparative performance of human papillomavirus messenger RNA versus DNA screening tests at baseline and 48 months in the HPV FOCAL trial

BACKGROUND

HPV FOCAL is a randomized trial comparing high-risk HPV [Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2)] vs. liquid-based cytology (LBC) for primary cervical screening.

OBJECTIVE

The present study objective was to compare Aptima HPV (AHPV) and HC2 assay performance at the intervention arm baseline and 48 mo. screens in relation to the rates of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or worse (CIN2+).

STUDY DESIGN

Women enrolled after December 2010 (n = 3475) were screened at baseline with both AHPV and HC2 (AHPV was blinded). Women with CIN2+ exited the trial; HC2 negative (-) women and those HC2 positive (+) with <CIN2 returned for 48 mo. screening with AHPV, HC2, and LBC.

RESULTS

At baseline, 7.2% were AHPV + vs. 8.4% for HC2 (p = 0.06). Round 1 AHPV CIN2+ sensitivity (relative to HC2) was 96.0% (95%CI: 86.5-99.0; p = 0.15) and 100% (95%CI: 82.4-100) for CIN3+. AHPV and HC2 specificities (<CIN2) were 94.1% vs. 93.0% respectively (p = 0.05). At 48 mo., 4.8% and 5.2% were AHPV+ and HC2+ respectively (p = 0.41), and both tests had the same CIN2+ and CIN3+ sensitivities (87.5% and 85.0% respectively). AHPV specificity (95.8%) was higher, but not significantly, than HC2 (95.3%; p = 0.38). Of 3226 baseline AHPV- women, 12/2,858 (0.4%) had CIN2+ vs. 13/2821 (0.5%) for the 3184 baseline HC2- women.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in CIN2+ detection for AHPV vs. HC2 at baseline or at 48 mo. Baseline AHPV- and HC2- women had similar CIN2+ rates at 48 mo., demonstrating the safety of a four year screening interval for AHPV- women.

Aptima HPV Assay versus Hybrid Capture® 2 HPV test for primary cervical cancer screening in the HPV FOCAL trial

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer screening programs are switching from Pap screening to high-risk HPV testing.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the Aptima HPV Assay (AHPV) with the Hybrid Capture^® 2 High-Risk HPV DNA Test^® (HC2) for primary cervical screening.

STUDY DESIGN

HPV FOCAL is a randomized trial comparing HC2 to liquid-based cytology (LBC) for screening women aged 25-65. AHPV and HC2 were compared at the baseline screen (n=3473). Genotyping was by the Aptima HPV 16 18/45 Genotype Assay. We assessed HPV genotyping and reflex LBC for colposcopy triage.

RESULTS

AHPV/HC2 agreement was 96.5% (kappa 0.76); positive agreement was 77.4%. The AHPV positive rate was 7.2% vs. 8.4% for HC2 (p=0.06). Based on HC2 screening, round 1 CIN2 and CIN3+ rates were 9.2/1000 and 5.2/1000 respectively. Using HC2 as the comparator test, AHPV CIN2+ and CIN3+ relative sensitivities were 0.96 and 1.00 (p=1.00) respectively. High-grade reflex LBC and HPV 16 infection were significantly associated with CIN3+. AHPV specificity was 0.94 vs. 0.93 (p=0.05) for HC2. Compared with triage of HC2+ with abnormal cytology or HPV persistence for 12 months, colposcopy referral would be significantly reduced (38.3/1000 vs. 60.8/1000; p<0.001) if AHPV+ women with abnormal LBC and HPV 16/18/45 were referred at baseline. CIN2+ and CIN3+ detection rates were not significantly different for the two strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

AHPV vs. HC2 screening had equivalent CIN2+ and CIN3+ detection. Triage of AHPV+ by abnormal reflex LBC and the presence of HPV 16/18/45 would result in a significantly lower colposcopy referral rate with similar CIN2+ and CIN3+ detection rates as the overall HC2+ referral algorithm.

Comparison of the Roche cobas® 4800 and Digene Hybrid Capture® 2 HPV tests for primary cervical cancer screening in the HPV FOCAL trial

BACKGROUND

HPV FOCAL is a randomized trial (ISRCTN79347302, registered 20 Apr 2007) comparing high-risk (hr) HPV testing vs. liquid-based cytology (LBC) for cervical cancer screening of women aged 25-65. We compared the Digene Hybrid Capture® 2 High-Risk HPV DNA Test® (HC2) and the Roche cobas® 4800 HPV Test (COBAS) for primary screening.

METHODS

Women (n=6,172) were screened at baseline by HC2 and COBAS and by LBC 24 months later. We assessed HPV genotyping and reflex LBC for colposcopy triage of baseline HPV positive women.

RESULTS

Overall HC2/COBAS agreement was 96.1% (kappa 0.75) and positive agreement was 77.5%. Baseline CIN2 and CIN3+ rates based on HPV screening were 8.6/1,000 and 6.6/1,000 respectively; 24 month rates were 0.7/1,000 and 0.4/1,000 (LBC screening). HC2 and COBAS were concordant positive for 91% of round 1 CIN2 and 98% of CIN3+. CIN3+ was significantly associated with HPV 16 (Odds Ratio [OR] 5.11; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.30, 11.37), but not HPV 18 (OR 2.62; 95% CI 0.73, 9.49), vs. non-HPV 16/18 HPV at baseline. There was no significant association between HPV genotype and CIN2. CIN3+ was significantly more likely for high-grade (OR 5.99; 95% CI 2.53, 14.18), but not low-grade (OR 0.54; 95% CI 0.20, 1.49), vs. negative LBC. No significant association was observed between LBC grade and CIN2. HPV 16 and 18 were associated with 33% of CIN2 and 68% of CIN3+ identified at baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

For hrHPV positive women, abnormal reflex LBC is appropriate for colposcopy triage. In addition, immediate referral of women with HPV 16/18 and normal cytology may allow for earlier detection of CIN2+ lesions which would not be detected until after follow-up testing.

Reduction in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in young women in British Columbia after introduction of the HPV vaccine: An ecological analysis

We report on the rates of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) in young women aged 15-22 years of age in British Columbia before and after the introduction of an HPV vaccine program. Rates of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2+ for each age stratum (15-22) in the calendar years 2004-2012 for the province of British Columbia were obtained from the BC Cancer Agency's population-based cervical cancer program. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) of CIN2+ were described and compared before and after HPV vaccine program introduction in cohorts born in vaccine eligible years, and in non-vaccine eligible years using piece-wise Poisson regression analysis, and adjusted for age. Between 2004 and 2012, rates of CIN2 and CIN2+ in young women aged 15-22 years in the province of British Columbia have decreased overall. After the introduction of the HPV vaccine program, the age adjusted IRR for CIN2+ for young women aged 15-17 years decreased significantly from 0.91 (95% CI: 0.86-0.98 p < 0.01) to 0.36 (95% CI: 0.18-0.73 p < 0.01). During the same time period, no similar reduction was found in young women 18-22 years. After introduction of HPV vaccine program, IRR for CIN2+ in young women 15-17 was significantly reduced for CIN2+ (0.14; 95% CI: 0.04- 0.47; p < 0.01) and CIN2 (0.1; 95% CI: 0.02-0.54; p < 0.01). This ecological analysis shows a significant reduction in CIN2+ lesions in young women aged 15-17 years in British Columbia after the introduction of the HPV vaccine in young women despite vaccine uptake levels below 70%.

Women's intentions to self-collect samples for human papillomavirus testing in an organized cervical cancer screening program

Background

Mounting evidence affirms HPV testing as an effective cervical cancer screening tool, and many organized screening programs are considering adopting it as primary testing. HPV self-collection has comparable sensitivity to clinician collected specimens and is considered a feasible option in hard-to-reach women. We explored women’s intentions to HPV self-collect for cervical cancer screening from a cohort participating in a Canadian randomized controlled cervical cancer screening trial.

Methods

Women aged 25–65 were invited to complete an online survey assessing intentions to be screened with HPV testing instead of the Pap smear. The survey was based in the Theory of Planned Behaviour and questions were included to assess women’s intentions to self-collect for HPV. Demographic characteristics of women who intended to self-collect were compared with those who did not. Demographic and scale variables achieving a p-value <0.1 in the univariate and bivariate analyses were included in the stepwise logistic regression model. The final model was created to predict factors associated with women’s intentions to self-collect an HPV specimen for cervical cancer. Odds ratios were calculated with 95% confidence intervals to identify variables associated with a woman’s intention to self-collect for cervical cancer screening.

Results

The overall survey response rate was 63.8% (981/1538) with 447 (45.6%) reporting they intended to self-collect, versus 534 (54.4%) reporting they did not. In the univariate analysis, women with more than high school education were more likely to self-collect. Women who intended to receive HPV testing versus the Pap smear were 1.94 times as likely to be in favour of self-collection and those who intended to self-collect had significantly higher attitudinal scores towards HPV self-collection. The adjusted odds ratio and 95% confidence interval from the multivariate analysis demonstrated attitude towards self-collection was the only significant variable predicting a woman’s intention to self-collect (OR 1.25; 95% CI: 1.22, 1.29).

Conclusions

The primary predictor of a woman’s intention to HPV self-collect for cervical cancer screening was her attitude towards the procedure. From a program planning perspective, these results indicate that education and awareness may be significant contributing factors to improving acceptance of self-collection and subsequently, improving screening attendance rates.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-1060) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Women's intentions to receive cervical cancer screening with primary human papillomavirus testing

We explored the potential impact of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing on women's intentions to be screened for cervical cancer in a cohort of Canadian women. Participants aged 25-65 years from an ongoing trial were sent a questionnaire to assess women's intentions to be screened for cervical cancer with HPV testing instead of Pap smears and to be screened every 4 years or after 25 years of age. We created scales for attitudes about HPV testing, perceived behavioral control, and direct and indirect subjective norms. Demographic data and scales that were significantly different (p < 0.1) between women who intended to be screened with HPV and those who did not intend were included in a stepwise logistic regression model. Of the 2,016 invitations emailed, 1,538 were received, and 981 completed surveys for a response rate of 63% (981/1,538). Eighty-four percent of women (826/981) responded that they intended to attend for HPV-based cervical cancer screening, which decreased to 54.2% when the screening interval was extended, and decreased further to 51.4% when screening start was delayed to age of 25. Predictors of intentions to undergo screening were attitudes (odds ratio [OR]: 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15, 1.30), indirect subjective norms (OR: 1.02; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.03) and perceived behavioral control (OR: 1.16; 95% CI: 1.10; 1.22). Intentions to be screened for cervical cancer with HPV testing decreased substantially when the screening interval was extended and screening started at age of 25. Use of primary HPV testing may optimize the screening paradigm, but programs should ensure robust planning and education to mitigate any negative impact on screening attendance rates.

Simplifying the implant treatment for an unrestorable premolar with a one-piece implant: a clinical report

The routine and frequent use of dental implants to replace missing teeth is accompanied by high expectations from patients. These expectations are not limited to function and esthetics but extend to patient comfort and time spent receiving treatment. Replacement of an unrestorable maxillary premolar can be challenging when considering the concerns of patients. This clinical report describes a short, simple, and cost-effective treatment option for replacing an unrestorable premolar tooth with a 1-piece implant.