Cargando…

Clinical Utility of Human Papillomavirus Genotyping in Cervical Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review

Thirteen human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes are associated with the highest risk of cervical disease/cancer; however, the risk of disease progression and cancer is genotype dependent. The objective of this systematic review was to examine evidence for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bonde, Jesper H., Sandri, Maria-Teresa, Gary, Devin S., Andrews, Jeffrey C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6924950/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31714325
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/LGT.0000000000000494
_version_ 1783481824919420928
author Bonde, Jesper H.
Sandri, Maria-Teresa
Gary, Devin S.
Andrews, Jeffrey C.
author_facet Bonde, Jesper H.
Sandri, Maria-Teresa
Gary, Devin S.
Andrews, Jeffrey C.
author_sort Bonde, Jesper H.
collection PubMed
description Thirteen human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes are associated with the highest risk of cervical disease/cancer; however, the risk of disease progression and cancer is genotype dependent. The objective of this systematic review was to examine evidence for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (≥CIN 3) risk discrimination using HPV genotyping. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of English and non-English articles through MEDLINE, Cochrane, clinicaltrials.gov, and abstracts presented at relevant professional society conferences were searched from 2000 to 2019. Search terms included: cervical cancer screening, HPV genotyping, CIN, HPV persistence, humans, and colposcopy; prospective, controlled trials, observational studies, and retrospective studies of residual specimens; evidence included HPV genotyping (beyond genotypes 16/18/45) results. Data were obtained independently by authors using predefined fields. Risk of bias was evaluated with a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology facilitated overall quality of evidence evaluation for risk estimation. The study protocol was registered with the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42018091093). The primary outcome was CIN 3 or worse risk both at baseline and at different follow-up periods. RESULTS: Of 236 identified sources, 60 full texts were retrieved and 16 articles/sources were included. Risk of bias was deemed low; the overall quality of evidence for CIN 3 or worse risk with negative for intraepithelial lesions or malignancies or low-grade squamous intraepithelial cytology was assessed as moderate; that with atypical squamous cells-undetermined significance and “all cytology” was assessed as high. Clinical and methodological heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis. Human papillomavirus genotyping discriminated risk of CIN 3 or worse to a clinically significant degree, regardless of cytology result. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence supports a clinical utility for HPV genotyping in risk discrimination during cervical cancer screening.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6924950
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69249502020-01-23 Clinical Utility of Human Papillomavirus Genotyping in Cervical Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review Bonde, Jesper H. Sandri, Maria-Teresa Gary, Devin S. Andrews, Jeffrey C. J Low Genit Tract Dis Cervical Disease Thirteen human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes are associated with the highest risk of cervical disease/cancer; however, the risk of disease progression and cancer is genotype dependent. The objective of this systematic review was to examine evidence for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (≥CIN 3) risk discrimination using HPV genotyping. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of English and non-English articles through MEDLINE, Cochrane, clinicaltrials.gov, and abstracts presented at relevant professional society conferences were searched from 2000 to 2019. Search terms included: cervical cancer screening, HPV genotyping, CIN, HPV persistence, humans, and colposcopy; prospective, controlled trials, observational studies, and retrospective studies of residual specimens; evidence included HPV genotyping (beyond genotypes 16/18/45) results. Data were obtained independently by authors using predefined fields. Risk of bias was evaluated with a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology facilitated overall quality of evidence evaluation for risk estimation. The study protocol was registered with the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42018091093). The primary outcome was CIN 3 or worse risk both at baseline and at different follow-up periods. RESULTS: Of 236 identified sources, 60 full texts were retrieved and 16 articles/sources were included. Risk of bias was deemed low; the overall quality of evidence for CIN 3 or worse risk with negative for intraepithelial lesions or malignancies or low-grade squamous intraepithelial cytology was assessed as moderate; that with atypical squamous cells-undetermined significance and “all cytology” was assessed as high. Clinical and methodological heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis. Human papillomavirus genotyping discriminated risk of CIN 3 or worse to a clinically significant degree, regardless of cytology result. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence supports a clinical utility for HPV genotyping in risk discrimination during cervical cancer screening. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2019-11-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6924950/ /pubmed/31714325 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/LGT.0000000000000494 Text en Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the ASCCP. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Cervical Disease
Bonde, Jesper H.
Sandri, Maria-Teresa
Gary, Devin S.
Andrews, Jeffrey C.
Clinical Utility of Human Papillomavirus Genotyping in Cervical Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review
title Clinical Utility of Human Papillomavirus Genotyping in Cervical Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review
title_full Clinical Utility of Human Papillomavirus Genotyping in Cervical Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review
title_fullStr Clinical Utility of Human Papillomavirus Genotyping in Cervical Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Clinical Utility of Human Papillomavirus Genotyping in Cervical Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review
title_short Clinical Utility of Human Papillomavirus Genotyping in Cervical Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review
title_sort clinical utility of human papillomavirus genotyping in cervical cancer screening: a systematic review
topic Cervical Disease
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6924950/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31714325
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/LGT.0000000000000494
work_keys_str_mv AT bondejesperh clinicalutilityofhumanpapillomavirusgenotypingincervicalcancerscreeningasystematicreview
AT sandrimariateresa clinicalutilityofhumanpapillomavirusgenotypingincervicalcancerscreeningasystematicreview
AT garydevins clinicalutilityofhumanpapillomavirusgenotypingincervicalcancerscreeningasystematicreview
AT andrewsjeffreyc clinicalutilityofhumanpapillomavirusgenotypingincervicalcancerscreeningasystematicreview