34
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      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

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background:

          Round 1 data of human papillomavirus (HPV) FOCAL, a three-arm, randomised trial, which aims to establish the efficacy of HPV DNA testing as a primary screen for cervical cancer, are presented.

          Methods:

          The three arms are: Control arm – liquid based cytology with atypical squamous cells of unknown significance (ASC-US) triage with hrHPV testing; Intervention Arm – hrHPV at entry with liquid-based cytology (LBC) triage of hrHPV positives, with exit screen at 4 years; Safety check arm – hrHPV at entry with LBC triage of hrHPV positives with exit screen at 2 years.

          Results:

          A total of 6154 women were randomised to the control arm and 12 494 to the HPV arms (intervention and safety check). In the HPV arm, the baseline cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)2+ and CIN3+ rate was 9.2/1000 (95%CI; 7.4, 10.9) and 4.8/1000 (95%CI; 3.6, 6.1), which increased to 16.1/1000 (95%CI 13.2, 18.9) for CIN2+ and to 8.0/1000 (95%CI; 5.9, 10.0) for CIN3+ after subsequent screening of HPV-DNA-positive/cytology-negative women. Detection rate in the control arm remained unchanged after subsequent screening of ASC-US-positive/hrHPV DNA-negative women at 11.0/1000 for CIN2+ and 5.0/1000 for CIN3+.

          Conclusion:

          After subsequent screening of women who were either hrHPV positive/cytology negative or ASC-US positive/HPV negative, women randomised to the HPV arms had increased CIN2+ detection compared with women randomised to the cytology arm.

          Related collections

          Most cited references11

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Long term predictive values of cytology and human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screening: joint European cohort study

          Objective To obtain large scale and generalisable data on the long term predictive value of cytology and human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for development of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or cancer (CIN3+). Design Multinational cohort study with joint database analysis. Setting Seven primary HPV screening studies in six European countries. Participants 24 295 women attending cervical screening enrolled into HPV screening trials who had at least one cervical cytology or histopathology examination during follow-up. Main outcome measure Long term cumulative incidence of CIN3+. Results The cumulative incidence rate of CIN3+ after six years was considerably lower among women negative for HPV at baseline (0.27%, 95% confidence interval 0.12% to 0.45%) than among women with negative results on cytology (0.97%, 0.53% to 1.34%)). By comparison, the cumulative incidence rate for women with negative cytology results at the most commonly recommended screening interval in Europe (three years) was 0.51% (0.23% to 0.77%). The cumulative incidence rate among women with negative cytology results who were positive for HPV increased continuously over time, reaching 10% at six years, whereas the rate among women with positive cytology results who were negative for HPV remained below 3%. Conclusions A consistently low six year cumulative incidence rate of CIN3+ among women negative for HPV suggests that cervical screening strategies in which women are screened for HPV every six years are safe and effective.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Overview of human papillomavirus-based and other novel options for cervical cancer screening in developed and developing countries.

            Screening for cervical cancer precursors by cytology has been very successful in countries where adequate resources exist to ensure high quality and good coverage of the population at risk. Mortality reductions in excess of 50% have been achieved in many developed countries; however the procedure is generally inefficient and unworkable in many parts of the world where the appropriate infrastructure is not achievable. A summary and update of recently published meta-analyses and systematic reviews on four possible clinical applications of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing is provided in this article: (1) triage of women with equivocal or low-grade cytological abnormalities; (2) follow-up of women with abnormal screening results who are negative at colposcopy/biopsy; (3) prediction of the therapeutic outcome after treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), and most importantly (4) primary screening HPV DNA test, solely or in combination with Pap smear to detect cervical cancer precursors. There are clear benefits for the use of HPV DNA testing in the triage of equivocal smears, low-grade smears in older women and in the post-treatment surveillance of women after treatment for CIN. However, there are still issues regarding how best to use HPV DNA testing in primary screening. Primary screening with Hybrid Capture((R)) 2 (HC2) generally detects more than 90% of all CIN2, CIN3 or cancer cases, and is 25% (95% CI): 15-36%) relatively more sensitive than cytology at a cut-off of abnormal squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) (or low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL) if ASC-US unavailable), but is 6% (95% CI: 4-7%) relatively less specific. Several approaches are currently under evaluation to deal with the lower specificity of HPV DNA testing as associated with transient infection. These include HPV typing for HPV-16 and -18/45, markers of proliferative lesions such as p16 and mRNA coding for the viral E6 and/or E7 proteins, with a potential clinical use recommending more aggressive management in those who are positive. In countries where cytology is of good quality, the most attractive option for primary screening is to use HPV DNA testing as the sole screening modality with cytology reserved for triage of HPV-positive women. Established cytology-based programmes should also be gradually moving towards a greater use of HPV DNA testing to improve their efficacy and safely lengthen the screening interval. The greater sensitivity of HPV DNA testing compared to cytology argues strongly for using HPV DNA testing as the primary screening test in newly implemented programmes, except where resources are extremely limited and only programmes based on visual inspection are affordable. In such countries, use of a simple HPV DNA test followed by immediate 'screen and treat' algorithms based on visual inspection in those who are HPV-positive are needed to minimise the number of visits and make best use of limited resources. A review of studies for visual inspection methods is presented. The fact that HPV is a sexually transmitted infection may lead to anxiety and concerns about sexual relationships. These psychosocial aspects and the need for more information and educational programmes about HPV are also discussed in this article.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Age-specific evaluation of primary human papillomavirus screening vs conventional cytology in a randomized setting.

              Human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing has shown higher sensitivity than cytology for detecting cervical lesions, but it is uncertain whether the higher sensitivity is dependent on the age of the woman being screened. We compared the age-specific performance of primary HPV DNA screening with that of conventional cytology screening in the setting of an organized population-based cervical cancer screening program in Finland. From January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2005, randomized invitations were sent to women aged 25-65 years for routine cervical cancer screening by primary high-risk HPV DNA testing (n = 54 207) with a Hybrid Capture 2 assay followed by cytology triage for women who were HPV DNA positive or by conventional cytology screening (n = 54 218). In both screening arms, cytology results of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or worse triggered a referral for colposcopy. Relative rates (RRs) of detection to assess test sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive values (PPVs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the histological endpoints of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 1 or higher (CIN 1+), CIN grade 2 or higher (CIN 2+), and CIN grade 3 or higher (CIN 3+). All statistical tests were two-sided. The overall frequency of colposcopy referrals was 1.2% in both screening arms. Women younger than 35 years were referred more often in the HPV DNA screening vs the conventional screening arm (RR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.60). The prevalence of histologically confirmed CIN or cancer was 0.59% in the HPV DNA screening arm vs 0.43% in the conventional screening arm. The relative rates of detection for CIN 1, CIN 2, and CIN 3+ for HPV DNA screening with cytology triage vs conventional screening were 1.44 (95% CI = 0.99 to 2.10), 1.39 (95% CI = 1.03 to 1.88), and 1.22 (95% CI = 0.78 to 1.92), respectively. The specificity of the HPV DNA test with cytology triage was equal to that of conventional screening for all age groups (99.2% vs 99.1% for CIN 2+, P = .13). Among women aged 35 years or older, the HPV DNA test with cytology triage tended to have higher specificity than conventional screening. The PPVs for HPV DNA screening with cytology triage were consistently higher than those for conventional screening. In both screening arms, the test specificities increased with increasing age of the women being screening, whereas the highest PPVs were observed among the youngest women being screened. Overall, 7.2% of women in the HPV DNA screening arm vs 6.6% of women in the conventional screening arm were recommended for intensified follow-up, and the percentages were highest among 25- to 29-year-olds (21.9% vs 10.0%, respectively). Primary HPV DNA screening with cytology triage is more sensitive than conventional screening. Among women aged 35 years or older, primary HPV DNA screening with cytology triage is also more specific than conventional screening and decreases colposcopy referrals and follow-up tests.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Br J Cancer
                Br. J. Cancer
                British Journal of Cancer
                Nature Publishing Group
                0007-0920
                1532-1827
                04 December 2012
                20 November 2012
                4 December 2012
                : 107
                : 12
                : 1917-1924
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Family Practice, University of British Columbia , Vancouver V5Z 4R4, British Columbia, Canada
                [2 ]Clinical Prevention Services, BC Centre for Disease Control , 655 West 12th Avenue, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
                [3 ]Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia , Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
                [4 ]Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, BC Cancer Agency , Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
                [5 ]Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of British Columbia , Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
                [6 ]Cervical Cancer Screening Program, BC Cancer Agency , Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
                [7 ]BC Cancer Agency , Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
                [8 ]Division of Cancer Epidemiology, McGill University , Montreal, Quebec, Canada
                [9 ]Population Oncology, BC Cancer Agency , Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
                Author notes
                Article
                bjc2012489
                10.1038/bjc.2012.489
                3516684
                23169286
                bc8988fc-1a58-4e32-ad8e-2ae0220718fc
                Copyright © 2012 Cancer Research UK

                This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

                History
                : 13 June 2012
                : 03 October 2012
                : 06 October 2012
                Categories
                Clinical Study

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                hpv,cervical cancer,screening,randomised trial,north america
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                hpv, cervical cancer, screening, randomised trial, north america

                Comments

                Comment on this article