Cargando…

HrHPV testing vs liquid-based cytology in cervical cancer screening among women aged 50 and older: a prospective study

INTRODUCTION: Evidence supports high-risk human papilloma virus (HPV) testing as the primary cervical cancer screening tool. However, benefits and harms should be carefully considered before replacing liquid-based cytology. In women age 50 and older, we evaluated how a commercially available DNA amp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Andersen, Berit, Njor, Sisse Helle, Jensen, Anne Marie Schak, Johansen, Tonje, Jeppesen, Ulla, Svanholm, Hans
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7656146/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33037107
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2020-001457
_version_ 1783608320759693312
author Andersen, Berit
Njor, Sisse Helle
Jensen, Anne Marie Schak
Johansen, Tonje
Jeppesen, Ulla
Svanholm, Hans
author_facet Andersen, Berit
Njor, Sisse Helle
Jensen, Anne Marie Schak
Johansen, Tonje
Jeppesen, Ulla
Svanholm, Hans
author_sort Andersen, Berit
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Evidence supports high-risk human papilloma virus (HPV) testing as the primary cervical cancer screening tool. However, benefits and harms should be carefully considered before replacing liquid-based cytology. In women age 50 and older, we evaluated how a commercially available DNA amplification HPV test compares with routine liquid-based cytology. METHODS: This prospective study included 4043 patients who had a cervical sample analyzed from September 2011 to September 2012. Patients were followed between 64 and 76 months (median: 70 months). Samples were analyzed using both liquid-based cytology and the Cobas 4800 HPV DNA test. We calculated the diagnostic efficacy of liquid-based cytology and HPV, with or without the opposite test as triage, using cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+/CIN3+) as reference. RESULTS: The patients had a median age of 58 years, (range; 50–90). At baseline, HPV prevalence was 8.0%: a total of 3.7% of patients had atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse (ASCUS+). Positive test results were 1.9% for liquid-based cytology with HPV triage and 3.0% for HPV with liquid-based cytology triage. The cumulative incidence of CIN3+ was 1.0% (40/4043). Sensitivities for CIN3+ were: liquid-based cytology 47.5% (31.5%–63.9%); liquid-based cytology with HPV triage 45.0% (29.3%–61.5%); HPV 90.0% (76.3%–97.2%); and HPV with liquid-based cytology triage 67.5% (50.9%–81.4%). Corresponding specificities were: liquid-based cytology 96.6% (96.0%–97.2%); liquid-based cytology with HPV triage 98.5% (98.0%–98.8%); HPV 92.8% (92.0%–93.6%); and HPV with liquid-based cytology triage 97.7% (97.2%–98.1%). At baseline, HPV testing overlooked five cases of gynecological cancer other than cervical cancer. Five cervical cancers were detected, two had been overlooked at baseline by liquid-based cytology and two by HPV testing CONCLUSION: HPV screening using DNA amplification is a promising alternative to liquid-based cytology in women age 50 and older, but evaluation of alternative triage methods is warranted. The risk of overlooking cancers needs consideration when replacing liquid-based cytology with HPV testing as a method for primary screening.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7656146
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76561462020-11-17 HrHPV testing vs liquid-based cytology in cervical cancer screening among women aged 50 and older: a prospective study Andersen, Berit Njor, Sisse Helle Jensen, Anne Marie Schak Johansen, Tonje Jeppesen, Ulla Svanholm, Hans Int J Gynecol Cancer Original Research INTRODUCTION: Evidence supports high-risk human papilloma virus (HPV) testing as the primary cervical cancer screening tool. However, benefits and harms should be carefully considered before replacing liquid-based cytology. In women age 50 and older, we evaluated how a commercially available DNA amplification HPV test compares with routine liquid-based cytology. METHODS: This prospective study included 4043 patients who had a cervical sample analyzed from September 2011 to September 2012. Patients were followed between 64 and 76 months (median: 70 months). Samples were analyzed using both liquid-based cytology and the Cobas 4800 HPV DNA test. We calculated the diagnostic efficacy of liquid-based cytology and HPV, with or without the opposite test as triage, using cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+/CIN3+) as reference. RESULTS: The patients had a median age of 58 years, (range; 50–90). At baseline, HPV prevalence was 8.0%: a total of 3.7% of patients had atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse (ASCUS+). Positive test results were 1.9% for liquid-based cytology with HPV triage and 3.0% for HPV with liquid-based cytology triage. The cumulative incidence of CIN3+ was 1.0% (40/4043). Sensitivities for CIN3+ were: liquid-based cytology 47.5% (31.5%–63.9%); liquid-based cytology with HPV triage 45.0% (29.3%–61.5%); HPV 90.0% (76.3%–97.2%); and HPV with liquid-based cytology triage 67.5% (50.9%–81.4%). Corresponding specificities were: liquid-based cytology 96.6% (96.0%–97.2%); liquid-based cytology with HPV triage 98.5% (98.0%–98.8%); HPV 92.8% (92.0%–93.6%); and HPV with liquid-based cytology triage 97.7% (97.2%–98.1%). At baseline, HPV testing overlooked five cases of gynecological cancer other than cervical cancer. Five cervical cancers were detected, two had been overlooked at baseline by liquid-based cytology and two by HPV testing CONCLUSION: HPV screening using DNA amplification is a promising alternative to liquid-based cytology in women age 50 and older, but evaluation of alternative triage methods is warranted. The risk of overlooking cancers needs consideration when replacing liquid-based cytology with HPV testing as a method for primary screening. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-11 2020-10-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7656146/ /pubmed/33037107 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2020-001457 Text en © IGCS and ESGO 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, an indication of whether changes were made, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Research
Andersen, Berit
Njor, Sisse Helle
Jensen, Anne Marie Schak
Johansen, Tonje
Jeppesen, Ulla
Svanholm, Hans
HrHPV testing vs liquid-based cytology in cervical cancer screening among women aged 50 and older: a prospective study
title HrHPV testing vs liquid-based cytology in cervical cancer screening among women aged 50 and older: a prospective study
title_full HrHPV testing vs liquid-based cytology in cervical cancer screening among women aged 50 and older: a prospective study
title_fullStr HrHPV testing vs liquid-based cytology in cervical cancer screening among women aged 50 and older: a prospective study
title_full_unstemmed HrHPV testing vs liquid-based cytology in cervical cancer screening among women aged 50 and older: a prospective study
title_short HrHPV testing vs liquid-based cytology in cervical cancer screening among women aged 50 and older: a prospective study
title_sort hrhpv testing vs liquid-based cytology in cervical cancer screening among women aged 50 and older: a prospective study
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7656146/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33037107
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2020-001457
work_keys_str_mv AT andersenberit hrhpvtestingvsliquidbasedcytologyincervicalcancerscreeningamongwomenaged50andolderaprospectivestudy
AT njorsissehelle hrhpvtestingvsliquidbasedcytologyincervicalcancerscreeningamongwomenaged50andolderaprospectivestudy
AT jensenannemarieschak hrhpvtestingvsliquidbasedcytologyincervicalcancerscreeningamongwomenaged50andolderaprospectivestudy
AT johansentonje hrhpvtestingvsliquidbasedcytologyincervicalcancerscreeningamongwomenaged50andolderaprospectivestudy
AT jeppesenulla hrhpvtestingvsliquidbasedcytologyincervicalcancerscreeningamongwomenaged50andolderaprospectivestudy
AT svanholmhans hrhpvtestingvsliquidbasedcytologyincervicalcancerscreeningamongwomenaged50andolderaprospectivestudy