Evaluation of HPV-16 and HPV-18 Genotyping for the Triage of Women With High-Risk HPV+ Cytology-Negative Results

Wright, Thomas; Stoler, Mark H.; Sharma, Abha; Zhang, Guili; Behrens, Catherine M.; Wright, Teresa L.

doi:10.1309/ajcptus5exas6dkz

Cited by 207 publications

(192 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

168

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Triaging HPV-positive women with cytology and baseline HPV 16/18 genotyping has the advantage, compared with repeat cytology, that it identifies women with a high risk of underlying high-grade disease at baseline (5,15,18,19). Therefore, no additional doctor's visit is required, and no associated risk of losing women to follow-up during triage is present (20,21).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Five-Year Cervical (Pre)Cancer Risk of Women Screened by HPV and Cytology Testing

Uijterwaal

Polman

Kemenade

et al. 2015

Cancer Prevention Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Primary human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical screening will be introduced in the Netherlands in 2016. We assessed the 5-year cervical (pre)cancer risk of women with different combinations of HPV and cytology test results. Special attention was paid to risks for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 and 2 or more (CIN3þ/2þ) of HPV-positive women with a negative triage test, because this determines the safety of a 5-year screening interval for HPV-positive, triage test-negative women. In addition, agerelated effects were studied. A total of 25,553 women were screened by HPV testing and cytology in a screening setting. Women were managed on the presence of HPV and/or abnormal cytology. Five-year cumulative incidences for CIN3þ/2þ were calculated. Five-year CIN3þ(2þ) risk was 10.0% (17.7%) among HPV-positive women. When stratified by cytology, the CIN3þ (CIN2þ) risk was 7.9% (12.9%) for women with normal cytology and 22.2% (45.3%) for women with equivocal or mildly abnormal (i.e., BMD) cytology. For HPV-negative women, the 5-year CIN3þ(2þ) risk was 0.09% (0.21%). Additional triage of HPVpositive women with normal cytology by repeat cytology at 12 months showed a 5-year CIN3þ(2þ) risk of 4.1% (7.0%). HPVnon 16/18-positive women with normal cytology at baseline had comparable risks of 3.5% (7.9%). HPV-non 16/18-positive women with normal baseline cytology and normal repeat cytology had a 5-year CIN3þ risk of 0.42%. No age-related effects were detected. In conclusion, HPV-positive women with normal cytology and a negative triage test, either repeat cytology after 12 months or baseline HPV 16/18 genotyping, develop a nonnegligible CIN3þ risk over 5 years. Therefore, extension of the screening interval over 5 years only seems possible for HPV screen-negative women. Cancer Prev Res; 8(6); 502-8. Ó2015 AACR.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This test used a cocktail of probes to detect 13 high-risk HPV genotypes: 16,18,31,33,35,39,45,51,52,56,58,59, and 68. Samples were considered positive if they had an HC2 outcome of 1 RLU/CO.…”

Section: Patients and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Five-Year Cervical (Pre)Cancer Risk of Women Screened by HPV and Cytology Testing

Uijterwaal

Polman

Kemenade

et al. 2015

Cancer Prevention Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Update of the ASCCP guideline recommended these cytological negative/HPV positive cases to be triaged by high-risk HPV typing (Apgar et al, 2009). The guideline was validated by a study of the ATHENA (Addressing THE Need for Advanced HPV Diagnostics) Study Group (Wright et al, 2011). In the present study, we compared the diagnostic characteristics of cytology analysis, HC2 HPV DNA test, TERC amplification test and their combinations to explore an optimal strategy for cervical cancer screening.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Significance of Human Telomerase RNA Gene Amplification Detection for Cervical Cancer Screening

Chen

Lin²,

Liu³

et al. 2012

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: Liquid-based cytology is the most often used method for cervical cancer screening, but it is relatively insensitive and frequently gives equivocal results. Used as a complementary procedure, the high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA test is highly sensitive but not very specific. The human telomerase RNA gene (TERC) is the most often amplified oncogene that is observed in cervical precancerous lesions. We assessed genomic amplification of TERC in liquid-based cytological specimens to explore the optimal strategy of using this for cervical cancer screening. Methods: Six hundred and seventy-one residual cytological specimens were obtained from outpatients aged 25 to 64 years. The specimens were evaluated by the Digene Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) HPV DNA test and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) with a chromosome probe to TERC (3q26). Colposcopic examination and histological evaluation were performed where indicated. Results: The TERC positive rate was higher in the CIN2+ (CIN2, CIN3 and SCC) group than in the normal and CIN 1 groups (90.0% vs. 10.4%, p < 0.01). In comparison with the HC2 HPV DNA test, the TERC amplification test had lower sensitivity but higher specificity (90.0% vs. 100.0%, 89.6% vs. 44.0%, respectively). TERC amplification test used in conjunction with the HC2 HPV DNA test showed a combination of 90.0% sensitivity and 92.2% specificity. Conclusion: The TERC amplification test can be used to diagnose cervical precancerous lesions. TERC and HPV DNA co-testing shows an optimal combination of sensitivity and specificity for cervical cancer screening.

show abstract

“…Among the 32 260 women aged 30 years or older with a negative Pap test result, the overall prevalence of HR-HPV detected with the cobas HPV Test was 6.7% and the overall prevalence rates for HPV16, HPV18, and 12 other HR-HPV genotypes were 1.0%, 0.5%, and 5.2%, respectively. 13 Women with ASC-US Pap test results had 32.6% HR-HPV-positive results (14 genotypes), with 8.2% HPV16 and 2.9% HPV18 prevalence. 10 Our 2014 survey data demonstrated that the median reporting rate of HPV16 and/or HPV18 positivity was 20.6% for women with negative Pap/positive HR-HPV test results regardless of age (Table 7) 16 The differences in these results may be reflective of the populations tested or the HPV platform.…”

Section: Ofmentioning

confidence: 95%

Human Papillomavirus Genotyping Testing Practice in 2014: Results of a College of American Pathologists National Survey

Zhao

Crothers

Ghofrani³

et al. 2016

Archives of Pathology &Amp; Laboratory Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context.-College of American Pathologists (CAP) surveys are used to establish national benchmarks for laboratories.Objective.-To investigate human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping testing practice patterns in laboratories in 2014.Design.-Data were analyzed from the CAP HPV Genotyping Practices Supplemental Questionnaire distributed to 749 laboratories participating in the CAP Human Papillomavirus (High Risk) for Cytology Program.Results.-Six hundred four of 749 laboratories (80.6%) responded to the survey. More laboratories offered HPV genotyping testing and performed in-house HPV genotyping testing as compared to previous surveys. The Roche cobas HPV test was the most commonly used genotyping method (37.0%; 160 of 433), followed by Hologic Aptima HPV16 18/45 (26.1%; 113 of 433) and Hologic Cervista HPV16/18 (14.3%; 62 of 433). Most laboratories (287 of 399; 71.9%) offered HPV genotyping for high-risk HPV cases regardless of Papanicolaou (Pap) test results and patient age; this pattern was more common in laboratories using cobas. The remaining laboratories specifically offered testing to women with a negative Pap test result at age 30 years and older (65.2%, 73 of 112) or all ages (37.5%, 42 of 112). The median reporting rates of HPV16 and/or HPV18 positivity were 20.6%, 25.7%, 21.1%, and 57.4% for women with positive high-risk HPV adjunctive negative Pap results, atypical squamous cells of undermined significance, low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, and high-grade squamous lesion, respectively.Conclusions.-Human papillomavirus genotyping testing has increased. Roche cobas and Hologic Aptima genotype methods were the most common, and laboratories using cobas usually offered genotyping regardless of Pap test result and age. The data provide a baseline and trend of HPV genotyping test practices in

show abstract

Evaluation of HPV-16 and HPV-18 Genotyping for the Triage of Women With High-Risk HPV+ Cytology-Negative Results

Cited by 207 publications

References 22 publications

Five-Year Cervical (Pre)Cancer Risk of Women Screened by HPV and Cytology Testing

Five-Year Cervical (Pre)Cancer Risk of Women Screened by HPV and Cytology Testing

Significance of Human Telomerase RNA Gene Amplification Detection for Cervical Cancer Screening

Human Papillomavirus Genotyping Testing Practice in 2014: Results of a College of American Pathologists National Survey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About