Should we use risk selection tests for HPV 16 and/or 18 positive cases: Comparison of p16/Ki67 and cytology.
CIN
HPV 16 and 18
cervical cancer screening
high-risk HPV
p16/Ki67 dual staining
triage
Journal
Journal of medical virology
ISSN: 1096-9071
Titre abrégé: J Med Virol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7705876
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2024
Mar 2024
Historique:
revised:
15
02
2024
received:
24
12
2023
accepted:
21
02
2024
medline:
5
3
2024
pubmed:
5
3
2024
entrez:
5
3
2024
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Major screening abnormalities in precolposcopic stage are tests results that imply direct referral to colposcopy (and/or expedited treatment) without performing additional high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or worse (HSIL+) risk selection testing. Currently, both clinically validated HSIL+ risk selection tests, reflex cytology and reflex p16/Ki67 dual staining (DS), are being compared for use in primary human papillomavirus (HPV)-based screening to avoid possible overtreatment, but there is still no sufficient data available for their performance. Among 30 066 liquid-based cervical cancer screening tests results, a group of 332 women was selected with available high-risk types of HPV tests results with 16/18 limited genotyping, liquid-based cytology, DS, and histology results from standardized colposcopy with biopsy. In HPV 16/18+ cases, three triage approaches were retrospectively analyzed. Predictive values for detection of HSIL+ were calculated and number of colposcopies required in each strategy. Both triage models with DS used (reflex cytology followed by DS, and reflex DS alone in all cases) had significantly higher positive predictive value for HSIL+ than strategy with reflex cytology alone (44.2%/45.7% vs. 28.3%; p < 0.0001). In models with DS, less colposcopies were required (95/92 vs. 152) and less colposcopies were needed per HSIL+ detection (2.26/2.19 vs. 3.54). Only one HSIL+ case was missed in both triage models with DS incorporation. p16/Ki67 dual-stain may be an effective, alone or combined with cytology, triage test to detect HSIL+ in patients with major screening abnormalities in primary HPV-based cervical cancer screening. Performing cytology as the first triage test improves the strategy by enabling referrals to expedited treatment in selected cases.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e29500Informations de copyright
© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394-424.
Published correction appears in CA Cancer J Clin. 2020;70(4):313. doi:10.3322/caac.21492
Lin S, Gao K, Gu S, et al. Worldwide trends in cervical cancer incidence and mortality, with predictions for the next 15 years. Cancer. 2021;127(21):4030-4039. doi:10.1002/cncr.33795
Van Doorslaer K, Chen Z, Bernard HU, et al. ICTV Virus Taxonomy Profile: Papillomaviridae. J Gen Virol. 2018;99(8):989-990. doi:10.1099/jgv.0.001105
Schiffman M, Castle PE, Jeronimo J, Rodriguez AC, Wacholder S. Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. Lancet. 2007;370(9590):890-907. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61416-0
Bosch FX, de Sanjosé S. The epidemiology of human papillomavirus infection and cervical cancer. Dis Markers. 2007;23(4):213-227. doi:10.1155/2007/914823
Schiffman M, Wentzensen N, Wacholder S, Kinney W, Gage JC, Castle PE. Human papillomavirus testing in the prevention of cervical cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103(5):368-383. doi:10.1093/jnci/djq562
Ronco G, Dillner J, Elfström KM, et al. Efficacy of HPV-based screening for prevention of invasive cervical cancer: follow-up of four European randomised controlled trials. Lancet. 2014;383(9916):524-532.
Published correction appears in Lancet. 2015;386(10002):1446. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62218-7
Bhatla N, Singhal S. Primary HPV screening for cervical cancer. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2020;65:98-108. doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2020.02.008
Cuzick J, Clavel C, Petry KU, et al. Overview of the European and North American studies on HPV testing in primary cervical cancer screening. Int J Cancer. 2006;119(5):1095-1101. doi:10.1002/ijc.21955
Saraiya M, Unger ER, Thompson TD, et al. US assessment of HPV types in cancers: implications for current and 9-valent HPV vaccines. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015;107(6):djv086. doi:10.1093/jnci/djv086
Malagutti N, Rotondo JC, Cerritelli L, et al. High human papillomavirus DNA loads in inflammatory middle ear diseases. Pathogens. 2020;9(3):224. doi:10.3390/pathogens9030224
Kostov S, Dzhenkov D, Metodiev D, et al. A case of human papillomavirus infection and vulvar cancer in a young patient - “hit and run” theory. Gynecol Oncol Rep. 2021;36:100760. doi:10.1016/j.gore.2021.100760
Schiffman M, Doorbar J, Wentzensen N, et al. Carcinogenic human papillomavirus infection. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016;2:16086. doi:10.1038/nrdp.2016.86
Lv N, Zhao Y, Song Y, Ji M, Zhou Y. Development of a sensitive droplet digital PCR according to the HPV infection specificity in Chinese population. BMC Cancer. 2023;23(1):1022. doi:10.1186/s12885-023-11529-3
Rotondo JC, Oton-Gonzalez L, Mazziotta C, et al. Simultaneous detection and viral DNA load quantification of different human papillomavirus types in clinical specimens by the high analytical droplet digital PCR method. Front Microbiol. 2020;11:591452. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2020.591452
Castle PE, Stoler MH, Wright Jr., TC, Sharma A, Wright TL, Behrens CM. Performance of carcinogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) testing and HPV16 or HPV18 genotyping for cervical cancer screening of women aged 25 years and older: a subanalysis of the ATHENA study. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(9):880-890. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70188-7
Arbyn M, Ronco G, Anttila A, et al. Evidence regarding human papillomavirus testing in secondary prevention of cervical cancer. Vaccine. 2012;30(suppl 5):F88-F99.
Published correction appears in Vaccine. 2013;31(52):6266. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.06.095
Maver PJ, Poljak M. Primary HPV-based cervical cancer screening in Europe: implementation status, challenges, and future plans. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020;26(5):579-583. doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2019.09.006
Perkins RB, Guido RS, Castle PE, et al. 2019 ASCCP risk-based management consensus guidelines: updates through 2023. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2024;28(1):3-6. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000788
Perkins RB, Guido RS, Castle PE, et al. 2019 ASCCP risk-based management consensus guidelines for abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2020;24(2):102-131.
Published correction appears in J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2020;24(4):427. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000525
Perkins RB, Wentzensen N, Guido RS, Schiffman M. Cervical cancer screening: a review. JAMA. 2023;330(6):547-558. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.13174
Giorgi Rossi P, Carozzi F, Ronco G, et al. p16/ki67 and E6/E7 mRNA accuracy and prognostic value in triaging HPV DNA-Positive women. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2021;113(3):292-300. published correction appears in J Natl Cancer Inst. 2021. doi:10.1093/jnci/djaa105
Premarket Approval (PMA). 2020. Accessed 12 May 2023. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpma/pma.cfm?id=P190024
Wentzensen N, Schiffman M, Palmer T, Arbyn M. Triage of HPV positive women in cervical cancer screening. J Clin Virol. 2016;76(suppl 1):S49-S55. doi:10.1016/j.jcv.2015.11.015
Zhang R, Ge X, You K, et al. p16/Ki67 dual staining improves the detection specificity of high-grade cervical lesions. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2018;44(11):2077-2084. doi:10.1111/jog.13760
Wright Jr., TC, Behrens CM, Ranger-Moore J, et al. Triaging HPV-positive women with p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology: results from a sub-study nested into the ATHENA trial. Gynecol Oncol. 2017;144(1):51-56. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.10.031
Luttmer R, Dijkstra MG, Snijders PJF, et al. p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology for detecting cervical (pre)cancer in a HPV-positive gynecologic outpatient population. Mod Pathol. 2016;29(8):870-878. doi:10.1038/modpathol.2016.80
Jach R, Mazurec M, Trzeszcz M, Zimmer M, Kedzia W, Wolski H. Cervical cancer screening in Poland in current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: interim guidelines of the Polish Society of Gynecologists and Obstetricians and the Polish Society of Colposcopy and Cervical Pathophysiology-a summary January 2021. Ginekol Pol. 2021;92(2):165-173. doi:10.5603/GP.2021.0043
Accessed 11 February 2024. https://www.nfz.gov.pl/dla-pacjenta/programy-profilaktyczne/dane-o-realizacji-programow/
Michalek IM, Manczuk M, Caetano Dos Santos FL, Macios A, Didkowska J, Nowakowski A. Self-reported participation in cervical cancer screening among Polish women in 2004-2019. Ginekol Pol. 2023. In press. doi:10.5603/gpl.96634
Monaghan TF, Rahman SN, Agudelo CW, et al. Foundational statistical principles in medical research: sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. Medicina. 2021;57(5):503. doi:10.3390/medicina57050503
Trevethan R. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values: foundations, pliabilities, and pitfalls in research and practice. Front Public Health. 2017;5:307. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2017.00307
Trzeszcz M, Mazurec M, Jach R, et al. p16/Ki67 dual stain triage versus cytology in primary human papillomavirus-based cervical cancer screening with limited genotyping. J Med Virol. 2023;95(11):e29271. doi:10.1002/jmv.29271
Mazurec K, Trzeszcz M, Mazurec M, Streb J, Halon A, Jach R. Triage strategies for non-16/non-18 HPV-positive women in primary HPV-based cervical cancer screening: p16/Ki67 dual stain vs. cytology. Cancers. 2023;15(20):5095. doi:10.3390/cancers15205095
Trzeszcz M, Mazurec M, Jach R, et al. Is primary HPV with secondary p16/Ki67 dual-stain an alternative HSIL-risk detection strategy in cervical cancer screening for women under 30 years? Diagnostics. 2021;11(11):2012. doi:10.3390/diagnostics11112012
Trzeszcz M, Mazurec M, Jach R, et al. Liquid-based screening tests results: HPV, liquid-based cytology, and P16/Ki67 dual-staining in private-based opportunistic cervical cancer screening. Diagnostics. 2021;11(8):1420. doi:10.3390/diagnostics11081420
Loghavi S, Walts AE, Bose S. CINtec® PLUS dual immunostain: a triage tool for cervical pap smears with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance and low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion. Diagn Cytopathol. 2013;41(7):582-587. doi:10.1002/dc.22900
National Cervical Cancer Screening Programme in Poland Coordinating Centre; Polish Gynaecological Society; Polish Society of Pathologists; Polish Society of Colposcopy and Uterine Cervix Pathology. Management of abnormal pap smear-consensus guidelines of the National Cervical Cancer Screening Programme in Poland Coordinating Centre, the Polish Gynaecological Society, the Polish Society of Pathologists, and Polish Society of Colposcopy and Uterine Cervix Pathology. Ginekol Pol. 2009;80(2):129-138.
Krajowa Izba Diagnostów Laboratoryjnych; Polskie Towarzystwo Ginekologiczne. Wytyczne dotyczace aplikacji testów molekularnych identyfikujacych DNA HPV HR w profilaktyce szyjki macicy. Stanowisko ekspertów PTG i KIDL [Guidelines for application of molecular tests identyfying HR HPV DNA in the prevention of cervical cancer. Statement of experts from PGS (PTG) and NCLD (KIDL)]. Ginekol Pol. 2013;84(5):395-399.
Massad LS, Einstein MH, Huh WK, et al. 2012 updated consensus guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;121(4):829-846. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182883a34
Huh WK, Ault KA, Chelmow D, et al. Use of primary high-risk human papillomavirus testing for cervical cancer screening: interim clinical guidance. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(2):330-337. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000000669
Darragh TM, Colgan TJ, Thomas Cox J, et al. The lower anogenital squamous terminology standardization project for HPV-associated lesions: background and consensus recommendations from the College of American Pathologists and the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2013;32(1):76-115.
Published correction appears in Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2013;32(2):241. doi:10.1097/PGP.0b013e31826916c7
Kurman RJ, Carcangiu ML, Herrington CS. WHO Classification of Tumours of Female Reproductive Organs. 4th ed. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC); 2014.
Leisenring W, Alono T, Pepe MS. Comparisons of predictive values of binary medical diagnostic tests for paired designs. Biometrics. 2000;56(2):345-351. doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00345.x
Hamers FF, Poullié AI, Arbyn M. Updated evidence-based recommendations for cervical cancer screening in France. Eur J Cancer Prev. 2022;31(3):279-286. doi:10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000701
Wright Jr., TC, Stoler MH, Ranger-Moore J, et al. Clinical validation of p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology triage of HPV-positive women: results from the IMPACT trial. Int J Cancer. 2022;150(3):461-471. doi:10.1002/ijc.33812
Øvestad IT, Dalen I, Andersland MS, et al. Triaging HPV-positive cervical samples with p16 and Ki-67 dual stained cytology within an organized screening program-a prospective observational study from Western Norway. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(8):7158. doi:10.3390/ijms24087158
Naucler P, Ryd W, Tornberg S, et al. Efficacy of HPV DNA testing with cytology triage and/or repeat HPV DNA testing in primary cervical cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101(2):88-99. doi:10.1093/jnci/djn444
El-Zein M, Bouten S, Louvanto K, et al. Predictive value of HPV testing in self-collected and clinician-collected samples compared with cytology in detecting high-grade cervical lesions. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2019;28(7):1134-1140. doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-18-1338
McGee AE, Alibegashvili T, Elfgren K, et al. European consensus statement on expert colposcopy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2023;290:27-37. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2023.08.369