Cargando…

Pooled Analysis of a Self-Sampling HPV DNA Test as a Cervical Cancer Primary Screening Method

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, one-seventh of cervical cancers occur in China, which lacks a national screening program. By evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of self-collected cervicovaginal specimens tested for human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA (Self-HPV testing) in China, we sought to determine whether Self...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhao, Fang-Hui, Lewkowitz, Adam K., Chen, Feng, Lin, Margaret J., Hu, Shang-Ying, Zhang, Xun, Pan, Qin-Jing, Ma, Jun-Fei, Niyazi, Mayineur, Li, Chang-Qing, Li, Shu-Min, Smith, Jennifer S., Belinson, Jerome L., Qiao, You-Lin, Castle, Philip E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3274511/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22271765
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djr532
_version_ 1782223083028873216
author Zhao, Fang-Hui
Lewkowitz, Adam K.
Chen, Feng
Lin, Margaret J.
Hu, Shang-Ying
Zhang, Xun
Pan, Qin-Jing
Ma, Jun-Fei
Niyazi, Mayineur
Li, Chang-Qing
Li, Shu-Min
Smith, Jennifer S.
Belinson, Jerome L.
Qiao, You-Lin
Castle, Philip E.
author_facet Zhao, Fang-Hui
Lewkowitz, Adam K.
Chen, Feng
Lin, Margaret J.
Hu, Shang-Ying
Zhang, Xun
Pan, Qin-Jing
Ma, Jun-Fei
Niyazi, Mayineur
Li, Chang-Qing
Li, Shu-Min
Smith, Jennifer S.
Belinson, Jerome L.
Qiao, You-Lin
Castle, Philip E.
author_sort Zhao, Fang-Hui
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Worldwide, one-seventh of cervical cancers occur in China, which lacks a national screening program. By evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of self-collected cervicovaginal specimens tested for human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA (Self-HPV testing) in China, we sought to determine whether Self-HPV testing may serve as a primary cervical cancer screening method in low-resource settings. METHODS: We compiled individual patient data from five population-based cervical cancer–screening studies in China. Participants (n = 13 140) received Self-HPV testing, physician-collected cervical specimens for HPV testing (Physician-HPV testing), liquid-based cytology (LBC), and visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA). Screen-positive women underwent colposcopy and confirmatory biopsy. We analyzed the accuracies of pooled Self-HPV testing, Physician-HPV testing, VIA, and LBC to detect biopsy-confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe (CIN2+) and CIN3+. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Of 13 004 women included in the analysis, 507 (3.9%) were diagnosed as CIN2+, 273 (2.1%) as CIN3+, and 37 (0.3%) with cervical cancer. Self-HPV testing had 86.2% sensitivity and 80.7% specificity for detecting CIN2+ and 86.1% sensitivity and 79.5% specificity for detecting CIN3+. VIA had statistically significantly lower sensitivity for detecting CIN2+ (50.3%) and CIN3+ (55.7%) and higher specificity for detecting CIN2+ (87.4%) and CIN3+ (86.9%) (all P values < .001) than Self-HPV testing, LBC had lower sensitivity for detecting CIN2+ (80.7%, P = .015), similar sensitivity for detecting CIN3+ (89.0%, P = .341), and higher specificity for detecting CIN2+ (94.0%, P < .001) and CIN3+ (92.8%, P < .001) than Self-HPV testing. Physician-HPV testing was more sensitive for detecting CIN2+ (97.0%) and CIN3+ (97.8%) but similarly specific for detecting CIN2+ (82.7%) and CIN3+ (81.3%) (all P values <.001) than Self-HPV testing. CONCLUSIONS: The sensitivity of Self-HPV testing compared favorably with that of LBC and was superior to the sensitivity of VIA. Self-HPV testing may complement current screening programs by increasing population coverage in settings that do not have easy access to comprehensive cytology-based screening.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3274511
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32745112012-02-08 Pooled Analysis of a Self-Sampling HPV DNA Test as a Cervical Cancer Primary Screening Method Zhao, Fang-Hui Lewkowitz, Adam K. Chen, Feng Lin, Margaret J. Hu, Shang-Ying Zhang, Xun Pan, Qin-Jing Ma, Jun-Fei Niyazi, Mayineur Li, Chang-Qing Li, Shu-Min Smith, Jennifer S. Belinson, Jerome L. Qiao, You-Lin Castle, Philip E. J Natl Cancer Inst Articles BACKGROUND: Worldwide, one-seventh of cervical cancers occur in China, which lacks a national screening program. By evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of self-collected cervicovaginal specimens tested for human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA (Self-HPV testing) in China, we sought to determine whether Self-HPV testing may serve as a primary cervical cancer screening method in low-resource settings. METHODS: We compiled individual patient data from five population-based cervical cancer–screening studies in China. Participants (n = 13 140) received Self-HPV testing, physician-collected cervical specimens for HPV testing (Physician-HPV testing), liquid-based cytology (LBC), and visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA). Screen-positive women underwent colposcopy and confirmatory biopsy. We analyzed the accuracies of pooled Self-HPV testing, Physician-HPV testing, VIA, and LBC to detect biopsy-confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe (CIN2+) and CIN3+. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Of 13 004 women included in the analysis, 507 (3.9%) were diagnosed as CIN2+, 273 (2.1%) as CIN3+, and 37 (0.3%) with cervical cancer. Self-HPV testing had 86.2% sensitivity and 80.7% specificity for detecting CIN2+ and 86.1% sensitivity and 79.5% specificity for detecting CIN3+. VIA had statistically significantly lower sensitivity for detecting CIN2+ (50.3%) and CIN3+ (55.7%) and higher specificity for detecting CIN2+ (87.4%) and CIN3+ (86.9%) (all P values < .001) than Self-HPV testing, LBC had lower sensitivity for detecting CIN2+ (80.7%, P = .015), similar sensitivity for detecting CIN3+ (89.0%, P = .341), and higher specificity for detecting CIN2+ (94.0%, P < .001) and CIN3+ (92.8%, P < .001) than Self-HPV testing. Physician-HPV testing was more sensitive for detecting CIN2+ (97.0%) and CIN3+ (97.8%) but similarly specific for detecting CIN2+ (82.7%) and CIN3+ (81.3%) (all P values <.001) than Self-HPV testing. CONCLUSIONS: The sensitivity of Self-HPV testing compared favorably with that of LBC and was superior to the sensitivity of VIA. Self-HPV testing may complement current screening programs by increasing population coverage in settings that do not have easy access to comprehensive cytology-based screening. Oxford University Press 2012-02-08 2012-01-23 /pmc/articles/PMC3274511/ /pubmed/22271765 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djr532 Text en © The Author(s) 2012. Published by Oxford University Press. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Articles
Zhao, Fang-Hui
Lewkowitz, Adam K.
Chen, Feng
Lin, Margaret J.
Hu, Shang-Ying
Zhang, Xun
Pan, Qin-Jing
Ma, Jun-Fei
Niyazi, Mayineur
Li, Chang-Qing
Li, Shu-Min
Smith, Jennifer S.
Belinson, Jerome L.
Qiao, You-Lin
Castle, Philip E.
Pooled Analysis of a Self-Sampling HPV DNA Test as a Cervical Cancer Primary Screening Method
title Pooled Analysis of a Self-Sampling HPV DNA Test as a Cervical Cancer Primary Screening Method
title_full Pooled Analysis of a Self-Sampling HPV DNA Test as a Cervical Cancer Primary Screening Method
title_fullStr Pooled Analysis of a Self-Sampling HPV DNA Test as a Cervical Cancer Primary Screening Method
title_full_unstemmed Pooled Analysis of a Self-Sampling HPV DNA Test as a Cervical Cancer Primary Screening Method
title_short Pooled Analysis of a Self-Sampling HPV DNA Test as a Cervical Cancer Primary Screening Method
title_sort pooled analysis of a self-sampling hpv dna test as a cervical cancer primary screening method
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3274511/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22271765
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djr532
work_keys_str_mv AT zhaofanghui pooledanalysisofaselfsamplinghpvdnatestasacervicalcancerprimaryscreeningmethod
AT lewkowitzadamk pooledanalysisofaselfsamplinghpvdnatestasacervicalcancerprimaryscreeningmethod
AT chenfeng pooledanalysisofaselfsamplinghpvdnatestasacervicalcancerprimaryscreeningmethod
AT linmargaretj pooledanalysisofaselfsamplinghpvdnatestasacervicalcancerprimaryscreeningmethod
AT hushangying pooledanalysisofaselfsamplinghpvdnatestasacervicalcancerprimaryscreeningmethod
AT zhangxun pooledanalysisofaselfsamplinghpvdnatestasacervicalcancerprimaryscreeningmethod
AT panqinjing pooledanalysisofaselfsamplinghpvdnatestasacervicalcancerprimaryscreeningmethod
AT majunfei pooledanalysisofaselfsamplinghpvdnatestasacervicalcancerprimaryscreeningmethod
AT niyazimayineur pooledanalysisofaselfsamplinghpvdnatestasacervicalcancerprimaryscreeningmethod
AT lichangqing pooledanalysisofaselfsamplinghpvdnatestasacervicalcancerprimaryscreeningmethod
AT lishumin pooledanalysisofaselfsamplinghpvdnatestasacervicalcancerprimaryscreeningmethod
AT smithjennifers pooledanalysisofaselfsamplinghpvdnatestasacervicalcancerprimaryscreeningmethod
AT belinsonjeromel pooledanalysisofaselfsamplinghpvdnatestasacervicalcancerprimaryscreeningmethod
AT qiaoyoulin pooledanalysisofaselfsamplinghpvdnatestasacervicalcancerprimaryscreeningmethod
AT castlephilipe pooledanalysisofaselfsamplinghpvdnatestasacervicalcancerprimaryscreeningmethod