Top

Published in:

01-05-2017 | Gynecologic Oncology

Diagnostic accuracy of high-risk HPV DNA genotyping for primary cervical cancer screening and triage of HPV-positive women, compared to cytology: preliminary results of the PIPAVIR study

Authors: Kimon Chatzistamatiou, Theodoros Moysiadis, Eleftherios Angelis, Andreas Kaufmann, Alkmini Skenderi, Pidder Jansen-Duerr, Irini Lekka, Vasilis Kilintzis, Stamatia Angelidou, Evangelia Katsiki, Ingke Hagemann, Athena Tsertanidou, Isabel Koch, Oliver Boecher, Erwin Soutschek, Nikolaos Maglaveras, Theodoros Agorastos

Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics | Issue 5/2017

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of the presented PIPAVIR (persistent infections with human papillomaviruses; http://www.pipavir.com) subanalysis is to assess the performance of high-risk (hr) HPV-DNA genotyping as a method of primary cervical cancer screening and triage of HPV positive women to colposcopy compared to liquid-based cytology (LBC) in an urban female population.

Methods

Women, aged 30–60, provided cervicovaginal samples at the Family-Planning Centre, Hippokratio Hospital of Thessaloniki, Greece, and the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics in Mare Klinikum, Kiel, Germany. Cytology and HPV genotyping was performed using LBC and HPV Multiplex Genotyping (MPG), respectively. Women positive for cytology [atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) or worse] or hrHPV were referred for colposcopy.

Results

Among 1723/1762 women included in the final analysis, hrHPV and HPV16/18 prevalence was 17.7 and 9.6%, respectively. Cytology was ASCUS or worse in 7.6%. Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) was detected in 28 women (1.6%). Sensitivity of cytology (ASCUS or worse) and HPV DNA testing for the detection of CIN2+ was 50.0 and 100%, and specificity was 94.49 and 85.49%, respectively. The screening approach according to which only women positive for HPV16/18 and for hrHPV(non16/18) with ASCUS or worse were referred to colposcopy presented 78.57% sensitivity and 13.17% positive predictive value (PPV).

Conclusions

HPV testing represents a more sensitive methodology for primary cervical cancer screening compared to cytology. For triage of HPV positive women to colposcopy, partial HPV genotyping offers better sensitivity than cytology, at the cost of higher number of colposcopies.

Quinn M, Babb P, Jones J, Allen E (1999) Effect of screening on incidence of and mortality from cancer of cervix in England: evaluation based on routinely collected statistics. Bmj 318(7188):904–908CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Jemal A, Ward E, Thun M (2010) Declining death rates reflect progress against cancer. PLoS One 5(3):e9584. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0009584 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A (2015) Cancer statistics, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin 65(1):5–29. doi:10.3322/caac.21254 CrossRefPubMed

Cuzick J, Clavel C, Petry KU, Meijer CJ, Hoyer H, Ratnam S, Szarewski A, Birembaut P, Kulasingam S, Sasieni P, Iftner T (2006) Overview of the European and North American studies on HPV testing in primary cervical cancer screening. Int J Cancer 119(5):1095–1101. doi:10.1002/ijc.21955 CrossRefPubMed

Cuzick J (2008) Routine audit of large-scale cervical cancer screening programs. J Natl Cancer Inst 100(9):605–606. doi:10.1093/jnci/djn131 CrossRefPubMed

zur Hausen H (1977) Human papillomaviruses and their possible role in squamous cell carcinomas. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol 78:1–30

Bosch FX, Munoz N, Shah KV, Meheus A (1992) Second international workshop on the epidemiology of cervical cancer and human Papillomaviruses. Int J Cancer 52(2):171–173CrossRefPubMed

Dillner J (2013) Primary human papillomavirus testing in organized cervical screening. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 25(1):11–16. doi:10.1097/GCO.0b013e32835c5d10 CrossRefPubMed

Gage JC, Schiffman M, Katki HA, Castle PE, Fetterman B, Wentzensen N, Poitras NE, Lorey T, Cheung LC, Kinney WK (2014) Reassurance against future risk of precancer and cancer conferred by a negative human papillomavirus test. J Natl Cancer Inst 106 (8). doi:10.1093/jnci/dju153

10.

Ronco G, Dillner J, Elfstrom KM, Tunesi S, Snijders PJ, Arbyn M, Kitchener H, Segnan N, Gilham C, Giorgi-Rossi P, Berkhof J, Peto J, Meijer CJ, International HPVswg (2014) Efficacy of HPV-based screening for prevention of invasive cervical cancer: follow-up of four European randomised controlled trials. Lancet 383(9916):524–532. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62218-7 CrossRefPubMed

11.

Wright TC, Stoler MH, Behrens CM, Sharma A, Zhang G, Wright TL (2015) Primary cervical cancer screening with human papillomavirus: end of study results from the ATHENA study using HPV as the first-line screening test. Gynecol Oncol 136(2):189–197. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.11.076 CrossRefPubMed

12.

Agorastos T, Chatzistamatiou K, Katsamagkas T, Koliopoulos G, Daponte A, Constantinidis T, Constantinidis TC, the Hsg (2015) Primary screening for cervical cancer based on high-risk human Papillomavirus (HPV) detection and HPV 16 and HPV 18 Genotyping, in Comparison to Cytology. PLoS One 10(3):e0119755. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0119755 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, Moriarty A, O’Connor D, Prey M, Raab S, Sherman M, Wilbur D, Wright T Jr, Young N, Forum Group M, Bethesda W (2002) The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA J Am Med Assoc 287(16):2114–2119CrossRef

14.

Schmitt M, Bravo IG, Snijders PJ, Gissmann L, Pawlita M, Waterboer T (2006) Bead-based multiplex genotyping of human papillomaviruses. J Clin Microbiol 44(2):504–512. doi:10.1128/JCM.44.2.504-512.2006 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Schmitt M, Dondog B, Waterboer T, Pawlita M (2008) Homogeneous amplification of genital human alpha papillomaviruses by PCR using novel broad-spectrum GP5 + and GP6 + primers. J Clin Microbiol 46(3):1050–1059. doi:10.1128/JCM.02227-07 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Geraets DT, Cuschieri K, de Koning MN, van Doorn LJ, Snijders PJ, Meijer CJ, Quint WG, Arbyn M (2014) Clinical evaluation of a GP5+/6+-based luminex assay having full high-risk human papillomavirus genotyping capability and an internal control. J Clin Microbiol 52(11):3996–4002. doi:10.1128/JCM.01962-14 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Agorastos T, Koutkias V, Falelakis M, Lekka I, Mikos T, Delopoulos A, Mitkas PA, Tantsis A, Weyers S, Coorevits P, Kaufmann AM, Kurzeja R, Maglaveras N (2009) Semantic integration of cervical cancer data repositories to facilitate multicenter association studies: the ASSIST approach. Cancer informatics 8:31–44PubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Bornstein J, Bentley J, Bosze P, Girardi F, Haefner H, Menton M, Perrotta M, Prendiville W, Russell P, Sideri M, Strander B, Tatti S, Torne A, Walker P (2012) 2011 colposcopic terminology of the International Federation for Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy. Obstet Gynecol 120(1):166–172. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e318254f90c CrossRefPubMed

19.

Massad LS, Einstein MH, Huh WK, Katki HA, Kinney WK, Schiffman M, Solomon D, Wentzensen N, Lawson HW, Conference ACG (2013) 2012 updated consensus guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors. Obstet Gynecol 121(4):829–846. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182883a34 CrossRefPubMed

20.

Kitchener HC, Gilham C, Sargent A, Bailey A, Albrow R, Roberts C, Desai M, Mather J, Turner A, Moss S, Peto J (2011) A comparison of HPV DNA testing and liquid based cytology over three rounds of primary cervical screening: extended follow up in the ARTISTIC trial. Eur J Cancer 47(6):864–871. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2011.01.008 CrossRefPubMed

21.

Heineman M, Mancini J, Villeret J, Agostini A, Houvenaeghel G, Boubli L, Carcopino X (2016) Treatment failure following excision therapy of CIN: the impact of direct colposcopic vision during procedure. Arch Gynecol Obstet 293(4):825–831. doi:10.1007/s00404-015-3887-7 CrossRefPubMed

22.

Zhou Xiao-Hua ONA, McClish Donna K (2011) Statistical methods in diagnostic medicine, 2nd edn. Wiley, HobokenCrossRef

23.

McNemar Q (1947) Note on the sampling error of the difference between correlated proportions or percentages. Psychometrika 12(2):153–157CrossRefPubMed

24.

Kosinski AS (2013) A weighted generalized score statistic for comparison of predictive values of diagnostic tests. Stat Med 32(6):964–977. doi:10.1002/sim.5587 CrossRefPubMed

25.

Walboomers JM, Jacobs MV, Manos MM, Bosch FX, Kummer JA, Shah KV, Snijders PJ, Peto J, Meijer CJ, Muñoz N (1999) Human papillomavirus is a necessary cause of invasive cervical cancer worldwide. J Pathol 189(1):12–19. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1096-9896(199909)189:1<12::AID-PATH431>3.0.CO;2-F CrossRefPubMed

26.

de Sanjose S, Quint WG, Alemany L, Geraets DT, Klaustermeier JE, Lloveras B, Tous S, Felix A, Bravo LE, Shin H-R, Vallejos CS, de Ruiz PA, Lima MA, Guimera N, Clavero O, Alejo M, Llombart-Bosch A, Cheng-Yang C, Tatti SA, Kasamatsu E, Iljazovic E, Odida M, Prado R, Seoud M, Grce M, Usubutun A, Jain A, Suarez GAH, Lombardi LE, Banjo A, Menéndez C, Domingo EJ, Velasco J, Nessa A, Chichareon SCB, Qiao YL, Lerma E, Garland SM, Sasagawa T, Ferrera A, Hammouda D, Mariani L, Pelayo A, Steiner I, Oliva E, Meijer CJ, Al-Jassar WF, Cruz E, Wright TC, Puras A, Llave CL, Tzardi M, Agorastos T, Garcia-Barriola V, Clavel C, Ordi J, Andújar M, Castellsagué X, Sánchez GI, Nowakowski AM, Bornstein J, Muñoz N, Bosch FX, Retrospective International S, Group HPVTTS (2010) Human papillomavirus genotype attribution in invasive cervical cancer: a retrospective cross-sectional worldwide study. Lancet Oncol 11(11):1048–1056. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70230-8 CrossRefPubMed

27.

Munoz N, Bosch FX, de Sanjose S, Herrero R, Castellsague X, Shah KV, Snijders PJ, Meijer CJ, International Agency for Research on Cancer Multicenter Cervical Cancer Study G (2003) Epidemiologic classification of human papillomavirus types associated with cervical cancer. N Engl J Med 348(6):518–527. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa021641 CrossRefPubMed

28.

Wright TC, Stoler MH, Behrens CM, Sharma A, Zhang G, Wright TL (2015) Primary cervical cancer screening with human papillomavirus: End of study results from the ATHENA study using HPV as the first-line screening test. Gynecol Oncol. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.11.076

29.

Castle PE, Stoler MH, Wright TC Jr, Sharma A, Wright TL, Behrens CM (2011) 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 12(9):880–890. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70188-7 CrossRefPubMed

30.

Rijkaart DC, Berkhof J, Rozendaal L, van Kemenade FJ, Bulkmans NW, Heideman DA, Kenter GG, Cuzick J, Snijders PJ, Meijer CJ (2012) Human papillomavirus testing for the detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cancer: final results of the POBASCAM randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 13(1):78–88. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70296-0 CrossRefPubMed

31.

Kitchener HC, Canfell K, Gilham C, Sargent A, Roberts C, Desai M, Peto J (2014) The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of primary human papillomavirus cervical screening in England: extended follow-up of the ARTISTIC randomised trial cohort through three screening rounds. Health Technol Assess (Rockv) 18(23):1–196. doi:10.3310/hta18230

32.

Ronco G, Giorgi-Rossi P, Carozzi F, Confortini M, Dalla Palma P, Del Mistro A, Ghiringhello B, Girlando S, Gillio-Tos A, De Marco L, Naldoni C, Pierotti P, Rizzolo R, Schincaglia P, Zorzi M, Zappa M, Segnan N, Cuzick J, New Technologies for Cervical Cancer screening Working G (2010) Efficacy of human papillomavirus testing for the detection of invasive cervical cancers and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 11(3):249–257. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70360-2 CrossRefPubMed

33.

Cox JT, Castle PE, Behrens CM, Sharma A, Wright TC, Jr., Cuzick J, Athena HPVSG (2013) Comparison of cervical cancer screening strategies incorporating different combinations of cytology, HPV testing, and genotyping for HPV 16/18: results from the ATHENA HPV study. Am J Obstetrics Gynecol 208(3):184 e181-184 e111. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2012.11.020

34.

Chatzistamatiou K, Moysiadis T, Moschaki V, Panteleris N, Agorastos T (2016) Comparison of cytology, HPV DNA testing and HPV 16/18 genotyping alone or combined targeting to the more balanced methodology for cervical cancer screening. Gynecol Oncol doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.04.027

35.

Huh WK, Ault KA, Chelmow D, Davey DD, Goulart RA, Garcia FA, Kinney WK, Massad LS, Mayeaux EJ, Saslow D, Schiffman M, Wentzensen N, Lawson HW, Einstein MH (2015) Use of primary high-risk human papillomavirus testing for cervical cancer screening: interim clinical guidance. Obstet Gynecol 125(2):330–337. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000000669 CrossRefPubMed

36.

Saslow D, Solomon D, Lawson HW, Killackey M, Kulasingam SL, Cain J, Garcia FA, Moriarty AT, Waxman AG, Wilbur DC, Wentzensen N, Downs LS Jr, Spitzer M, Moscicki AB, Franco EL, Stoler MH, Schiffman M, Castle PE, Myers ER, American Cancer S, American Society for C, Cervical P, American Society for Clinical P (2012) American Cancer Society, American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and American Society for Clinical Pathology screening guidelines for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer. Am J Clin Pathol 137 (4):516–542. doi:10.1309/AJCPTGD94EVRSJCG CrossRefPubMed

37.

Korfage IJ, Essink-Bot ML, Westenberg SM, Helmerhorst T, Habbema JD, van Ballegooijen M (2014) How distressing is referral to colposcopy in cervical cancer screening?: a prospective quality of life study. Gynecol Oncol 132(1):142–148. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.11.001 CrossRefPubMed

38.

Kwan TT, Cheung AN, Lo SS, Lee PW, Tam KF, Chan KK, Ngan HY (2011) Psychological burden of testing positive for high-risk human papillomavirus on women with atypical cervical cytology: a prospective study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 90(5):445–451. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0412.2011.01092.x CrossRefPubMed

39.

Solomon D (2003) Chap. 14: Role of triage testing in cervical cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 31:97–101

40.

Agorastos T, Chatzistamatiou K, Zafrakas M, Siamanta V, Katsamagkas T, Constantinidis TC, Lampropoulos AF, group Ls (2014) Epidemiology of HPV infection and current status of cervical cancer prevention in Greece: final results of the LYSISTRATA cross-sectional study. Eur J Cancer Prevent Off J Eur Cancer Prevent Organ (ECP) 23(5):425–431. doi:10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000060 CrossRef

41.

Arbyn M, Depuydt C, Benoy I, Bogers J, Cuschieri K, Schmitt M, Pawlita M, Geraets D, Heard I, Gheit T, Tommasino M, Poljak M, Bonde J, Quint W (2016) VALGENT: A protocol for clinical validation of human papillomavirus assays. J Clin Virol Off Publ Pan Am Soc Clin Virol 76(Suppl 1):S14–S21. doi:10.1016/j.jcv.2015.09.014 CrossRef

Title: Diagnostic accuracy of high-risk HPV DNA genotyping for primary cervical cancer screening and triage of HPV-positive women, compared to cytology: preliminary results of the PIPAVIR study
Authors: Kimon Chatzistamatiou
Theodoros Moysiadis
Eleftherios Angelis
Andreas Kaufmann
Alkmini Skenderi
Pidder Jansen-Duerr
Irini Lekka
Vasilis Kilintzis
Stamatia Angelidou
Evangelia Katsiki
Ingke Hagemann
Athena Tsertanidou
Isabel Koch
Oliver Boecher
Erwin Soutschek
Nikolaos Maglaveras
Theodoros Agorastos
Publication date: 01-05-2017
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics / Issue 5/2017
Print ISSN: 0932-0067
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0711
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-017-4324-x

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Diagnostic accuracy of high-risk HPV DNA genotyping for primary cervical cancer screening and triage of HPV-positive women, compared to cytology: preliminary results of the PIPAVIR study

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2017

Risk factors and peripartum outcomes of failed epidural: a prospective cohort study

Elective Caesarean section on maternal request in Germany: factors affecting decision making concerning mode of delivery

Major and minor complications after anterior rectal resection for deeply infiltrating endometriosis

Total bilateral salpingectomy versus partial bilateral salpingectomy for permanent sterilization during cesarean delivery

Double-balloon catheter for induction of labour in women with a previous cesarean section, could it be the best choice?

Fetal growth restriction: current knowledge