Cargando…

High‐risk HPV testing vs liquid‐based cytology for cervical cancer screening among 25‐ to 30‐year‐old women: A historical cohort study

INTRODUCTION: High‐risk human papilloma virus (hrHPV) DNA testing is more sensitive than cytology screening, achieving greater protection against cervical cancer. Controversy exists regarding the preferred screening method for women 25–30 years of age. At this age, infection with HPV is common and u...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Feldstein, Ohad, Gali‐Zamir, Hadar, Schejter, Eduardo, Feinberg, Tali, Yehuda‐Shnaidman, Einav, Bornstein, Jacob, Levy, Tally
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9889323/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36478537
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aogs.14482
_version_ 1784880704538017792
author Feldstein, Ohad
Gali‐Zamir, Hadar
Schejter, Eduardo
Feinberg, Tali
Yehuda‐Shnaidman, Einav
Bornstein, Jacob
Levy, Tally
author_facet Feldstein, Ohad
Gali‐Zamir, Hadar
Schejter, Eduardo
Feinberg, Tali
Yehuda‐Shnaidman, Einav
Bornstein, Jacob
Levy, Tally
author_sort Feldstein, Ohad
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: High‐risk human papilloma virus (hrHPV) DNA testing is more sensitive than cytology screening, achieving greater protection against cervical cancer. Controversy exists regarding the preferred screening method for women 25–30 years of age. At this age, infection with HPV is common and usually transient. Consequently, hrHPV screening in this age group is fraught with high false‐positive screening results, leading to more colposcopies and unnecessary treatments with the potential for harm. In the present study, we aimed to compare the results of two screening methods in relation to high‐grade cervical intraepithelial lesion detection rate in the young age group of 25–30 years. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective information on cervical cytology, hrHPV testing, colposcopy referrals and histologic results, from one screening round, were retrieved from the Maccabi HealthCare Health Maintenance Organization centralized database during the study period from March 1, 2017 to April 1, 2019 for 25‐ to 30‐year‐old women. Screening with hrHPV testing for types 16, 18 and 12 other hrHPV types was compared with the conventional PAP liquid‐based cytology (LBC) test. Odds ratio (OR) of detection with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 3 or higher (CIN 3+). RESULTS: During the study period, 42 244 women 25–30 years old underwent cervical cancer screening; of them, 20 997 were screened with LBC between March 1, 2017 and March 1, 2018 and compared with 21 247 who were screened with hrHPV between April 1, 2018 and April 1, 2019. Testing for hrHPV resulted in a higher colposcopy referral rate compared with primary LBC screening: 9.8% vs 7.8%, respectively; (OR 1.28; 95% CI 1.2–1.37; p < 0.001). Screening with hrHPV led to significantly higher detection of CIN 3+ lesions (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.2–1.6; p < 0.001) compared with LBC. HPV infections with non‐16/18 hrHPV (other hrHPV) were the most prevalent (84.8%). CONCLUSIONS: In women 25–30 years old, primary hrHPV screening was associated with a higher detection rate of CIN 3+ compared with cytology screening and should be considered for primary screening in this age group.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9889323
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98893232023-02-02 High‐risk HPV testing vs liquid‐based cytology for cervical cancer screening among 25‐ to 30‐year‐old women: A historical cohort study Feldstein, Ohad Gali‐Zamir, Hadar Schejter, Eduardo Feinberg, Tali Yehuda‐Shnaidman, Einav Bornstein, Jacob Levy, Tally Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand Global Health INTRODUCTION: High‐risk human papilloma virus (hrHPV) DNA testing is more sensitive than cytology screening, achieving greater protection against cervical cancer. Controversy exists regarding the preferred screening method for women 25–30 years of age. At this age, infection with HPV is common and usually transient. Consequently, hrHPV screening in this age group is fraught with high false‐positive screening results, leading to more colposcopies and unnecessary treatments with the potential for harm. In the present study, we aimed to compare the results of two screening methods in relation to high‐grade cervical intraepithelial lesion detection rate in the young age group of 25–30 years. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective information on cervical cytology, hrHPV testing, colposcopy referrals and histologic results, from one screening round, were retrieved from the Maccabi HealthCare Health Maintenance Organization centralized database during the study period from March 1, 2017 to April 1, 2019 for 25‐ to 30‐year‐old women. Screening with hrHPV testing for types 16, 18 and 12 other hrHPV types was compared with the conventional PAP liquid‐based cytology (LBC) test. Odds ratio (OR) of detection with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 3 or higher (CIN 3+). RESULTS: During the study period, 42 244 women 25–30 years old underwent cervical cancer screening; of them, 20 997 were screened with LBC between March 1, 2017 and March 1, 2018 and compared with 21 247 who were screened with hrHPV between April 1, 2018 and April 1, 2019. Testing for hrHPV resulted in a higher colposcopy referral rate compared with primary LBC screening: 9.8% vs 7.8%, respectively; (OR 1.28; 95% CI 1.2–1.37; p < 0.001). Screening with hrHPV led to significantly higher detection of CIN 3+ lesions (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.2–1.6; p < 0.001) compared with LBC. HPV infections with non‐16/18 hrHPV (other hrHPV) were the most prevalent (84.8%). CONCLUSIONS: In women 25–30 years old, primary hrHPV screening was associated with a higher detection rate of CIN 3+ compared with cytology screening and should be considered for primary screening in this age group. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-12-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9889323/ /pubmed/36478537 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aogs.14482 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology (NFOG). https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Global Health
Feldstein, Ohad
Gali‐Zamir, Hadar
Schejter, Eduardo
Feinberg, Tali
Yehuda‐Shnaidman, Einav
Bornstein, Jacob
Levy, Tally
High‐risk HPV testing vs liquid‐based cytology for cervical cancer screening among 25‐ to 30‐year‐old women: A historical cohort study
title High‐risk HPV testing vs liquid‐based cytology for cervical cancer screening among 25‐ to 30‐year‐old women: A historical cohort study
title_full High‐risk HPV testing vs liquid‐based cytology for cervical cancer screening among 25‐ to 30‐year‐old women: A historical cohort study
title_fullStr High‐risk HPV testing vs liquid‐based cytology for cervical cancer screening among 25‐ to 30‐year‐old women: A historical cohort study
title_full_unstemmed High‐risk HPV testing vs liquid‐based cytology for cervical cancer screening among 25‐ to 30‐year‐old women: A historical cohort study
title_short High‐risk HPV testing vs liquid‐based cytology for cervical cancer screening among 25‐ to 30‐year‐old women: A historical cohort study
title_sort high‐risk hpv testing vs liquid‐based cytology for cervical cancer screening among 25‐ to 30‐year‐old women: a historical cohort study
topic Global Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9889323/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36478537
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aogs.14482
work_keys_str_mv AT feldsteinohad highriskhpvtestingvsliquidbasedcytologyforcervicalcancerscreeningamong25to30yearoldwomenahistoricalcohortstudy
AT galizamirhadar highriskhpvtestingvsliquidbasedcytologyforcervicalcancerscreeningamong25to30yearoldwomenahistoricalcohortstudy
AT schejtereduardo highriskhpvtestingvsliquidbasedcytologyforcervicalcancerscreeningamong25to30yearoldwomenahistoricalcohortstudy
AT feinbergtali highriskhpvtestingvsliquidbasedcytologyforcervicalcancerscreeningamong25to30yearoldwomenahistoricalcohortstudy
AT yehudashnaidmaneinav highriskhpvtestingvsliquidbasedcytologyforcervicalcancerscreeningamong25to30yearoldwomenahistoricalcohortstudy
AT bornsteinjacob highriskhpvtestingvsliquidbasedcytologyforcervicalcancerscreeningamong25to30yearoldwomenahistoricalcohortstudy
AT levytally highriskhpvtestingvsliquidbasedcytologyforcervicalcancerscreeningamong25to30yearoldwomenahistoricalcohortstudy