A study of type-specific HPV natural history and implications for contemporary cervical cancer screening programs.
AGC, Atypical glandular cells
AIS, Adenocarcinoma in-situ
ASC-H+, Atypical squamous cells - cannot exclude HSIL
ASC-US, Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance
BD, Becton Dickinson
CIN, Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia
HC2, Hybrid Capture 2
HPV genotype
HPV outcome, Clearance
HPV, human papillomavirus
KPNC, Kaiser Permanente Northern California
LSIL, Low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion
NCI, National Cancer Institute
NILM, Negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy
PCR, Polymerase chain reaction
PaP, Persistence and Progression
Persistence
Progression
STM, Specimen transport medium
Journal
EClinicalMedicine
ISSN: 2589-5370
Titre abrégé: EClinicalMedicine
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101733727
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2020
May 2020
Historique:
received:
28
10
2019
revised:
11
02
2020
accepted:
11
02
2020
entrez:
9
6
2020
pubmed:
9
6
2020
medline:
9
6
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
HPV testing is replacing cytology for cervical cancer screening because of greater sensitivity and superior reassurance following negative tests for the dozen HPV genotypes that cause cervical cancer. Management of women testing positive is unresolved. The need for identification of individual HPV genotypes for clinical use is debated. Also, it is unclear how long to observe persistent infections when precancer is not initially found. In the longitudinal NCI-Kaiser Permanente Northern California Persistence and Progression (PaP) Study, we observed the clinical outcomes (clearance, progression to CIN3+, or persistence without progression) of 11,573 HPV-positive women aged 30-65 yielding 14,158 type-specific infections. Risks of CIN3+ progression differed substantially by type, with HPV16 conveying uniquely elevated risk (26% of infections with seven-year CIN3+ risk of 22%). The other carcinogenic HPV types fell into 3 distinct seven-year CIN3+ risk groups: HPV18, 45 (13% of infections, risks >5%, with known elevated cancer risk); HPV31, 33, 35, 52, 58 (39%, risks >5%); and HPV39, 51, 56, 59, 68 (23%, risks <5%). In the absence of progression, HPV clearance rates were similar by type, with 80% of infections no longer detected within three years; persistence to seven years without progression was uncommon. The predictive value of abnormal cytology was most evident for prevalent CIN3+, but less evident in follow-up. A woman's age did not modify risk; rather it was the duration of persistence that was important. HPV type and persistence are the major predictors of progression to CIN3+; at a minimum, distinguishing HPV16 is clinically important. Dividing the other HPV types into three risk-groups is worth considering.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
HPV testing is replacing cytology for cervical cancer screening because of greater sensitivity and superior reassurance following negative tests for the dozen HPV genotypes that cause cervical cancer. Management of women testing positive is unresolved. The need for identification of individual HPV genotypes for clinical use is debated. Also, it is unclear how long to observe persistent infections when precancer is not initially found.
METHODS
METHODS
In the longitudinal NCI-Kaiser Permanente Northern California Persistence and Progression (PaP) Study, we observed the clinical outcomes (clearance, progression to CIN3+, or persistence without progression) of 11,573 HPV-positive women aged 30-65 yielding 14,158 type-specific infections.
FINDINGS
RESULTS
Risks of CIN3+ progression differed substantially by type, with HPV16 conveying uniquely elevated risk (26% of infections with seven-year CIN3+ risk of 22%). The other carcinogenic HPV types fell into 3 distinct seven-year CIN3+ risk groups: HPV18, 45 (13% of infections, risks >5%, with known elevated cancer risk); HPV31, 33, 35, 52, 58 (39%, risks >5%); and HPV39, 51, 56, 59, 68 (23%, risks <5%). In the absence of progression, HPV clearance rates were similar by type, with 80% of infections no longer detected within three years; persistence to seven years without progression was uncommon. The predictive value of abnormal cytology was most evident for prevalent CIN3+, but less evident in follow-up. A woman's age did not modify risk; rather it was the duration of persistence that was important.
INTERPRETATION
CONCLUSIONS
HPV type and persistence are the major predictors of progression to CIN3+; at a minimum, distinguishing HPV16 is clinically important. Dividing the other HPV types into three risk-groups is worth considering.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32510043
doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100293
pii: S2589-5370(20)30037-7
pii: 100293
pmc: PMC7264956
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
100293Informations de copyright
© 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The following disclosure statements were reported: Dr. Demarco, Dr. Gage, Dr. Schiffman, and Dr. Wentzensen report that the NCI has received masked HPV and cytology test results at no cost from Roche Molecular Systems, BD Diagnostics, and Qiagen for independent evaluations of these technologies. Dr. Raine-Bennett reports other contracts from National Cancer Institute, during the conduct of the study. Dr. Campos reports other salary support from 10.13039/100000054National Cancer Institute, during the conduct of the study, and personal fees from Basic Health International, outside the submitted work. Dr. Coutlee reports grants from Réseau FRSQ SIDA-MI, during the conduct of the study. Dr. Burk reports grants from NIH, during the conduct of the study. Dr. Castle reports discounted or free HPV tests and assays for research from Roche, Becton Dickinson, Cepheid, and Arbor Vita Corporation. Dr. Hyun, Dr. Carter-Pokras, Dr. Cheung, Dr. Chen, Dr. Hammer, Dr. Kinney, Dr. Befano, Dr. Perkins, Dr. He, Dr. Dallal, Dr. Chen, Dr. Poitras, Dr. Lorey, and Dr. Mayrand have nothing to disclose.
Références
Am J Epidemiol. 2003 Sep 1;158(5):486-94
pubmed: 12936904
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Sep 21;103(18):1387-96
pubmed: 21900119
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2013 Jun;22(6):1095-101
pubmed: 23603204
J Clin Microbiol. 2018 Apr 25;56(5):
pubmed: 29491018
Int J Cancer. 2020 May 4;:
pubmed: 32363580
J Infect Dis. 2007 Jun 1;195(11):1582-9
pubmed: 17471427
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2011 Jul;20(7):1398-409
pubmed: 21602310
Int J Cancer. 2014 Aug 1;135(3):624-34
pubmed: 24226935
Proc Natl Cancer Conf. 1972;7:219-22
pubmed: 4764902
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016 Dec 01;2:16086
pubmed: 27905473
Infect Agent Cancer. 2009 Jun 01;4:8
pubmed: 19486508
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005 May;14(5):1149-56
pubmed: 15894665
Clin Cancer Res. 2018 May 1;24(9):2194-2202
pubmed: 29420222
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008 Apr 2;100(7):513-7
pubmed: 18364507
Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Feb;125(2):330-7
pubmed: 25569009
J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2016 Jan;20(1):1-7
pubmed: 26704326
J Infect Dis. 2002 Oct 15;186(8):1169-72
pubmed: 12355370
Vaccine. 2013 Dec 31;31 Suppl 7:H1-31
pubmed: 24332295
Br J Cancer. 2007 May 7;96(9):1419-24
pubmed: 17342094
Health Technol Assess. 2019 Jun;23(28):1-44
pubmed: 31219027
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012 Nov 21;104(22):1738-49
pubmed: 23093560
Prev Med. 2018 Jun;111:429-435
pubmed: 29222045
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020 May;26(5):579-583
pubmed: 31539637
Stat Med. 2017 Sep 30;36(22):3583-3595
pubmed: 28660629
Biomed Res Int. 2013;2013:578276
pubmed: 24298551
BMJ. 2008 Oct 13;337:a1754
pubmed: 18852164
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2011 May;20(5):946-53
pubmed: 21415357
BMJ. 2002 Sep 14;325(7364):572
pubmed: 12228133
J Infect Dis. 2005 Jun 1;191(11):1808-16
pubmed: 15871112
J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc. 2015 Oct 1;178(4):903-923
pubmed: 26556961
Br J Cancer. 2019 Sep;121(6):455-463
pubmed: 31409912
Int J Cancer. 2016 Dec 1;139(11):2606-15
pubmed: 27509172
Ann Appl Stat. 2017 Jun;11(2):1063-1084
pubmed: 31223347
BJOG. 2020 Jan;127(1):58-68
pubmed: 31541495