Clinically validated HPV assays offer comparable long-term safety in primary cervical cancer screening: A 9-year follow-up of a population-based screening cohort.
HPV testing
cervical cancer
cervical screening
cytology
Journal
International journal of cancer
ISSN: 1097-0215
Titre abrégé: Int J Cancer
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0042124
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 Sep 2024
24 Sep 2024
Historique:
revised:
06
09
2024
received:
26
06
2024
accepted:
12
09
2024
medline:
24
9
2024
pubmed:
24
9
2024
entrez:
24
9
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Molecular testing for human papillomaviruses (HPV) is gradually replacing cytology in cervical cancer screening. In this longitudinal population-based cohort study, 4140 women 20 to 64 years old attending organized screening were tested at baseline by five different screening methods and followed for 9 years. To assess long-term safety, the cumulative risks of CIN2+/CIN3+ were estimated after a negative baseline result obtained by conventional cytology and four clinically validated HPV assays: Hybrid Capture 2 (hc2), RealTime High Risk HPV assay (RealTime), cobas 4800 HPV Test (cobas_4800), and Alinity m HR HPV (Alinity). HPV-negative women at baseline had a substantially lower risk for CIN2+ compared to those with normal baseline cytology: 0.84% (95% CI, 0.46-1.22), 0.90% (95% CI, 0.51-1.29), 0.78% (95% CI, 0.42-1.15), and 0.75% (95% CI, 0.39-1.11) for hc2, RealTime, cobas_4800, and Alinity, respectively, compared to 2.46% (95% CI, 1.88-3.03) for cytology. No differences were observed between HPV assays in longitudinal sensitivity (range: 86.21%-90.36%) and negative predictive values (range: 99.54%-99.70%) for CIN2+ in women ≥30 years, but were significantly different from cytology (p < .05). The 9-year cumulative risk of CIN2+ differed significantly between HPV genotypes, reaching 32.1% (95% CI, 14.5-46.1) for HPV16, 24.9% (95% CI, 4.7-40.8) for HPV18/45, 27.2% (95% CI, 14.6-37.8) for HPV31/33/35/52/58, and 8.1% (95% CI, 0.0-16.7) for HPV39/51/56/59. Four clinically validated HPV assays showed comparable safety and better assurance against precancerous lesions than cytology, but some important differences were identified in the performance characteristics of HPV assays impacting the referral rate. Information about the HPV genotype is valuable for guiding further clinical action in HPV-based screening programs.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : Javna Agencija za Raziskovalno Dejavnost RS
ID : P3-00083
Organisme : Horizon 2020 Framework Programme
ID : 847845
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). International Journal of Cancer published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of UICC.
Références
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.
Gage JC, Schiffman M, Katki HA, et al. Reassurance against future risk of precancer and cancer conferred by a negative human papillomavirus test. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106:dju153.
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;383:524‐532.
Ronco G, Segnan N, Giorgi‐Rossi P, et al. Human papillomavirus testing and liquid‐based cytology in primary cervical screening: results at recruitment from the New Technologies for Cervical Cancer randomized controlled trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98:765‐774.
Mayrand MH, Duarte‐Franco E, Rodrigues I, et al. Human papillomavirus DNA versus Papanicolaou screening tests for cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:1579‐1588.
Naucler P, Ryd W, Törnberg S, et al. Human papillomavirus and Papanicolaou tests to screen for cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:1589‐1597.
Kitchener HC, Almonte M, Thomson C, et al. HPV testing in combination with liquid‐based cytology in primary cervical screening (ARTISTIC): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10:672‐682.
Leinonen M, Nieminen P, Kotaniemi‐Talonen L, et al. Age‐specific evaluation of primary human papillomavirus screening vs conventional cytology in a randomized setting. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:1612‐1623.
Sankaranarayanan R, Nene BM, Shastri SS, et al. HPV screening for cervical cancer in rural India. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1385‐1394.
Ronco G, Giorgi‐Rossi P, Carozzi F, et al. Efficacy of human papillomavirus testing for the detection of invasive cervical cancers and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:249‐257.
Ogilvie GS, Krajden M, van Niekerk DJ, et al. Primary cervical cancer screening with HPV testing compared with liquid‐based cytology: results of round 1 of a randomised controlled trial—the HPV FOCAL study. Br J Cancer. 2012;107:1917‐1924.
Elfström KM, Smelov V, Johansson AL, et al. Long term duration of protective effect for HPV negative women: follow‐up of primary HPV screening randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2014;348:g130.
Cuzick J, Szarewski A, Mesher D, et al. Long‐term follow‐up of cervical abnormalities among women screened by HPV testing and cytology—results from the Hammersmith study. Int J Cancer. 2008;122:2294‐2300.
Dillner J, Rebolj M, Birembaut P, et al. Long term predictive values of cytology and human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screening: joint European cohort study. BMJ. 2008;337:a1754.
Katki HA, Kinney WK, Fetterman B, et al. Cervical cancer risk for women undergoing concurrent testing for human papillomavirus and cervical cytology: a population‐based study in routine clinical practice. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12:663‐672.
Castle PE, Glass AG, Rush BB, et al. Clinical human papillomavirus detection forecasts cervical cancer risk in women over 18 years of follow‐up. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:3044‐3050.
Uijterwaal MH, Polman NJ, Van Kemenade FJ, et al. Five‐year cervical (pre)cancer risk of women screened by HPV and cytology testing. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2015;8:502‐508.
Vink MA, Bogaards JA, Meijer CJ, Berkhof J. Primary human papillomavirus DNA screening for cervical cancer prevention: can the screening interval be safely extended? Int J Cancer. 2015;137:420‐427.
Bruni L, Serrano B, Roura E, et al. Cervical cancer screening programmes and age‐specific coverage estimates for 202 countries and territories worldwide: a review and synthetic analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2022;10:e1115‐e1127.
Poljak M, Oštrbenk Valenčak A, Cuschieri K, Bohinc KK, Arbyn M. 2023 global inventory of commercial molecular tests for human papillomaviruses (HPV). J Clin Virol. 2024;172:105671.
Meijer CJ, Berkhof J, Castle PE, et al. Guidelines for human papillomavirus DNA test requirements for primary cervical cancer screening in women 30 years and older. Int J Cancer. 2009;124:516‐520.
Arbyn M, Simon M, Peeters E, et al. 2020 list of human papillomavirus assays suitable for primary cervical cancer screening. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021;27:1083‐1095.
Strang THR, Gottschlich A, Cook DA, et al. Long‐term cervical precancer outcomes after a negative DNA‐ or RNA‐based human papillomavirus test result. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;225(511):e1‐e7.
Castle PE, Kinney WK, Xue X, et al. Effect of several negative rounds of human papillomavirus and cytology co‐testing on safety against cervical cancer: an observational cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2018;168:20‐29.
Isidean SD, Mayrand MH, Ramanakumar AV, et al. Human papillomavirus testing versus cytology in primary cervical cancer screening: end‐of‐study and extended follow‐up results from the Canadian cervical cancer screening trial. Int J Cancer. 2016;139:2456‐2466.
Dijkstra MG, van Zummeren M, Rozendaal L, et al. Safety of extending screening intervals beyond five years in cervical screening programmes with testing for high risk human papillomavirus: 14 year follow‐up of population based randomised cohort in the Netherlands. BMJ. 2016;355:i4924.
Gottschlich A, van Niekerk D, Smith LW, et al. Assessing 10‐year safety of a single negative HPV test for cervical cancer screening: evidence from FOCAL‐DECADE cohort. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2021;30:22‐29.
Inturrisi F, Rozendaal L, Veldhuijzen NJ, Heideman DAM, Meijer CJLM, Berkhof J. Risk of cervical precancer among HPV‐negative women in the Netherlands and its association with previous HPV and cytology results: a follow‐up analysis of a randomized screening study. PLoS Med. 2022;19:e1004115.
Cuzick J, Bergeron C, von Knebel DM, et al. New technologies and procedures for cervical cancer screening. Vaccine. 2012;30(Suppl 5):F107‐F116.
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.
Schiffman M, Hyun N, Raine‐Bennett TR, et al. A cohort study of cervical screening using partial HPV typing and cytology triage. Int J Cancer. 2016;139:2606‐2615.
Bonde JH, Sandri MT, Gary DS, Andrews JC. Clinical utility of human papillomavirus genotyping in cervical cancer screening: a systematic review. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2020;24:1‐13.
Cuzick J, Adcock R, Carozzi F, et al. Combined use of cytology, p16 immunostaining and genotyping for triage of women positive for high‐risk human papillomavirus at primary screening. Int J Cancer. 2020;147:1864‐1873.
Song F, Yan P, Huang X, et al. Roles of extended human papillomavirus genotyping and multiple infections in early detection of cervical precancer and cancer and HPV vaccination. BMC Cancer. 2022;22:42.
Stoler MH, Parvu V, Yanson K, Andrews J, Vaughan L. Risk stratification of HPV‐positive results using extended genotyping and cytology: data from the baseline phase of the Onclarity trial. Gynecol Oncol. 2023;174:68‐75.
Poljak M, Ostrbenk A, Seme K, et al. Comparison of clinical and analytical performance of the Abbott Realtime High Risk HPV test to the performance of hybrid capture 2 in population‐based cervical cancer screening. J Clin Microbiol. 2011;49:1721‐1729.
Poljak M, Oštrbenk A, Seme K, Šterbenc A, Jančar N, Vrtačnik BE. Three‐year longitudinal data on the clinical performance of the Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV test in a cervical cancer screening setting. J Clin Virol. 2016;76(Suppl 1):S29‐S39.
McNemar Q. Note on the sampling error of the difference between correlated proportions or percentages. Psychometrika. 1947;12:153‐157.
Adriaensen WJ, Matheï C, Buntinx FJ, Arbyn M. A framework provided an outline toward the proper evaluation of potential screening strategies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:639‐647.
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Cervical cancer screening. IARC Handb Cancer Prev. 2022;18:1‐456.
Combes JD, Guan P, Franceschi S, Clifford GM. Judging the carcinogenicity of rare human papillomavirus types. Int J Cancer. 2015;136:740‐742.
World Health Organization. Target Product Profiles. Global Observatory on Health R&D. WHO; 2024. Accessed August 2024. https://www.who.int/news‐room/articles‐detail/public‐review‐of‐the‐target‐product‐profiles‐(tpp)‐for‐human‐papillomavirus‐(hpv)‐screening‐tests‐to‐detect‐cervical‐precancer‐and‐cancer
Gilham C, Sargent A, Kitchener HC, Peto J. HPV testing compared with routine cytology in cervical screening: long‐term follow‐up of ARTISTIC RCT. Health Technol Assess. 2019;23:1‐44.
Iftner T, Neis KJ, Castanon A, et al. Longitudinal clinical performance of the RNA‐based Aptima human papillomavirus (AHPV) assay in comparison to the DNA‐based hybrid capture 2 HPV test in two consecutive screening rounds with a 6‐year interval in Germany. J Clin Microbiol. 2019;57:e01177‐18.
Rebolj M, Cuschieri K, Mathews CS, et al. Extension of cervical screening intervals with primary human papillomavirus testing: observational study of English screening pilot data. BMJ. 2022;377:e068776.
Bulkmans NW, Rozendaal L, Voorhorst FJ, Snijders PJ, Meijer CJ. Long‐term protective effect of high‐risk human papillomavirus testing in population‐based cervical screening. Br J Cancer. 2005;92:1800‐1802.
Poljak M, Marin IJ, Seme K, Vince A. Hybrid capture II HPV test detects at least 15 human papillomavirus genotypes not included in its current high‐risk probe cocktail. J Clin Virol. 2002;25(Suppl 3):S89‐S97.
Castle PE, Solomon D, Wheeler CM, Gravitt PE, Wacholder S, Schiffman M. Human papillomavirus genotype specificity of hybrid capture 2. J Clin Microbiol. 2008;46:2595‐2604.
Poljak M, Kocjan BJ, Kovanda A, et al. Human papillomavirus genotype specificity of hybrid capture 2 low‐risk probe cocktail. J Clin Microbiol. 2009;47:2611‐2615.
Yilmaz E, Eklund C, Lagheden C, et al. First international proficiency study on human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screening. J Clin Virol. 2023;167:105581.
Rebolj M, Preisler S, Ejegod DM, Rygaard C, Lynge E, Bonde J. Disagreement between human papillomavirus assays: an unexpected challenge for the choice of an assay in primary cervical screening. PLoS One. 2014;9:e86835.
Smelov V, Elfström KM, Johansson AL, et al. Long‐term HPV type‐specific risks of high‐grade cervical intraepithelial lesions: a 14‐year follow‐up of a randomized primary HPV screening trial. Int J Cancer. 2015;136:1171‐1180.