Previous Papanicolaou and Hybrid Capture 2 human papillomavirus testing results of 5699 women with histologically diagnosed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2/3

Outcomes of prior cervical cytology and HR-HPV testing in women subsequently diagnosed with CIN1, CIN2/3, and invasive cervical cancer: a 4-year routine clinical experience after implementation of systematic training and quality control programs

“…Another study from West China also reported that the rate of positive results was significantly higher for cytology (95.7%) than for HR-HPV testing (89.9%) in 1094 CIN2/3 patients [ 36 ]. The screening results of CIN2/3 patients in this study and the two other studies [ 35 , 36 ] from China are inconsistent with the results from dozens of randomized, controlled trials, which found that HR-HPV testing is more sensitive than cytology for identifying cervical cancer and its precursors during population screening [ 14 , 37 – 39 ]. Additionally, a study of 14,261 cases from multiple US clinical centers [ 40 ] reported a 91.4% rate of positive results for cervical cytology and a 95.8% rate for HR-HPV testing performed within 1 year prior to the histological diagnosis; these results are discordant with the above Chinese data.…”

“…Co-testing has been shown to not only detect significantly more CIN2/3 or worse lesions but also results in significantly lower rates of ICC and its precursor lesions in subsequent rounds of screening [13,14,17]. In the present study, we also found that the cytology and HR-HPV combination (99.8%) had significantly higher sensitivity than either cytology alone or HR-HPV testing alone in CIN2/3 detection, which is consistent with the three aforementioned retrospective studies from China [35,36] and the US [40], which reported rates of positive co-testing results in 98.1, 99.6, and 99.4% of cases, respectively. Furthermore, co-testing (99.6%) in this study was significantly more sensitive than cytology alone and HR-HPV testing alone for ICC detection.…”

“…Our data revealed that the rate of abnormal results was marginally higher for cytology alone (97.2%) than for HR-HPV testing alone (95.4%) in the CIN2/3 group, which is comparable to the data from the Cytopathology Department of Guangzhou KD (GKD), which is the headquarters of KD with full CAP certification in China [35]. GKD is in strict conformity with the laboratory workload standards and QC practices issued in the CAP Laboratory Accreditation Program checklists [10].…”

“…Developed countries have established wellorganized cervical cytology training and QC programs to guarantee the efficiency of cytological screening [4,5]. The data of this study and the GKD data [35,42] indicate that systematic training and QC programs can markedly increase the screening effectiveness of cervical cytology in China. Of note, many challenges still exist in using cytology as a first-line method for cervical cancer screening in China.…”

“…In this study, all HR-HPV tests were carried out in the standardized molecular laboratory of JKD by using one of two methods: Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2; Qiagen, Hinden, Germany) and HPV genotyping (Yanengbio, Shenzhen, China) [27][28][29]. The HC2 assay is an in vitro nucleic acid hybridization method, which can semiquantitatively test for 13 HR-HPV genotypes (i.e., 16,18,31,33,35,39,45,51,52,56,58,59, and 68). The HPV genotyping assay is an in vitro diagnostic kit using PCRreverse dot blot hybridization measurement, and it can detect 14 HR-HPV genotypes (i.e., 16,18,31,33,35,39,45,51,52,56,58,59, 66, and 68) and 9 low-or uncertain-risk HPV genotypes (6, 11, 42, 43, 53, 73, 81, 82, and 83).…”