TY - JOUR
T1 - The clinical performance of primary HPV screening, primary HPV screening plus cytology cotesting, and cytology alone at a tertiary care hospital
AU - Choi, Jung-Woo
AU - Kim, Younghye
AU - Lee, Ju-Han
AU - Kim, Young Sik
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was supported by grants from Korea University (grant K1421351) and by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea funded by the Ministry of Science, Information and Communications Technologies, and Future Planning (grant 2013R1A1A1058146).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 American Cancer Society.
PY - 2016/2/1
Y1 - 2016/2/1
N2 - BACKGROUND: Algorithms for primary human papillomavirus (HPV) screening, primary HPV screening plus cytology cotesting, and cytology alone were evaluated previously in large cohort trials for cervical cancer detection, although the quality of cytology in those studies was controversial. To investigate whether these 3 algorithms would be applicable in routine practice at a tertiary care hospital, the authors compared their clinical performance. In addition, the prevalence of HPV genotypes was determined. METHODS: Cervical cytology samples (n = 1000) were tested using liquid-based cytology (LBC), a nucleic acid hybridization assay, real-time polymerase chain reaction analysis, and direct HPV DNA sequencing. The clinical performance of the 3 algorithms was compared among women in different age groups (age range, 17-86 years; median age, 44.7 years). RESULTS: For cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN 2+), the sensitivity of primary HPV screening alone, cotesting, and LBC alone was 71.7%, 72.5%, and 63.8%, respectively; whereas the specificity was 87.5%, 96.5%, and 97.4%, respectively. Cotesting and LBC alone had slightly higher positive predictive values for CIN 2 + (97.8% and 98.9%, respectively) than primary HPV screening alone (91%), whereas primary HPV screening alone and cotesting demonstrated higher negative predictive values (63.6% and 62.5%, respectively) than LBC alone (43.2%). High-risk HPV types were detected in 24.3% of individuals. The most common type was HPV type 16 (HPV-16) followed by multiple HPV infections and HPV-58, HPV-52, HPV-31, HPV-35, HPV-51, HPV-39, HPV-56, HPV-33, HPV-18, HPV-59, and HPV-45. CONCLUSIONS: Primary HPV screening alone in a tertiary care hospital demonstrated a performance that was equivalent to that of cotesting for CIN 2+, irrespective of patient age. With regard to the distribution of HPV genotypes, the nonavalent HPV vaccine would prevent approximately 60% of high-risk HPV.
AB - BACKGROUND: Algorithms for primary human papillomavirus (HPV) screening, primary HPV screening plus cytology cotesting, and cytology alone were evaluated previously in large cohort trials for cervical cancer detection, although the quality of cytology in those studies was controversial. To investigate whether these 3 algorithms would be applicable in routine practice at a tertiary care hospital, the authors compared their clinical performance. In addition, the prevalence of HPV genotypes was determined. METHODS: Cervical cytology samples (n = 1000) were tested using liquid-based cytology (LBC), a nucleic acid hybridization assay, real-time polymerase chain reaction analysis, and direct HPV DNA sequencing. The clinical performance of the 3 algorithms was compared among women in different age groups (age range, 17-86 years; median age, 44.7 years). RESULTS: For cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN 2+), the sensitivity of primary HPV screening alone, cotesting, and LBC alone was 71.7%, 72.5%, and 63.8%, respectively; whereas the specificity was 87.5%, 96.5%, and 97.4%, respectively. Cotesting and LBC alone had slightly higher positive predictive values for CIN 2 + (97.8% and 98.9%, respectively) than primary HPV screening alone (91%), whereas primary HPV screening alone and cotesting demonstrated higher negative predictive values (63.6% and 62.5%, respectively) than LBC alone (43.2%). High-risk HPV types were detected in 24.3% of individuals. The most common type was HPV type 16 (HPV-16) followed by multiple HPV infections and HPV-58, HPV-52, HPV-31, HPV-35, HPV-51, HPV-39, HPV-56, HPV-33, HPV-18, HPV-59, and HPV-45. CONCLUSIONS: Primary HPV screening alone in a tertiary care hospital demonstrated a performance that was equivalent to that of cotesting for CIN 2+, irrespective of patient age. With regard to the distribution of HPV genotypes, the nonavalent HPV vaccine would prevent approximately 60% of high-risk HPV.
KW - cervical intraepithelial neoplasia
KW - genotype
KW - human papillomavirus (HPV)
KW - real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR)
KW - screening
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84958743787&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/cncy.21632
DO - 10.1002/cncy.21632
M3 - Article
C2 - 26457676
AN - SCOPUS:84958743787
SN - 1934-662X
VL - 124
SP - 144
EP - 152
JO - Cancer cytopathology
JF - Cancer cytopathology
IS - 2
ER -