Human Papillomavirus Genotypes and the Cumulative 2-Year Risk of Cervical Precancer
|
|
- Brook Craig
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 MAJOR ARTICLE Human Papillomavirus Genotypes and the Cumulative 2-Year Risk of Cervical Precancer Cosette M. Wheeler, 1,2 William C. Hunt, 1 Mark Schiffman, 3 and Philip E. Castle, 3 for the Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance/Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions Triage Study (ALTS) Group a 1 Department of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology and 2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, School of Medicine, Albuquerque; 3 Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics and National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland Background. Prospective data on the risks of cervical precancer associated with specifi human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes are limited. Methods. In 5060 women participating in the Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance/Low Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions Triage Study (ALTS), we determined the cumulative 2-year risks of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or more severe ( CIN2) and of grade 3 or more severe ( CIN3) for 38 individual HPV genotypes, as detected by polymerase chain reaction. Results. The most common HPV genotypes detected at baseline, in descending order of prevalence, were 16, 52, 51, 31, 18, 53, 39, 56, 62, 59, and 58. When detected as a single-type HPV infection, HPV-16 had a 2-year cumulative risk of 50.6% (95% confidenc interval [CI], 44.1% 57.2%) for CIN2 and 39.1% (95% CI, 32.9% 45.7%) for CIN3. For other singly detected carcinogenic HPV types, the risk of CIN2 ranged from 4.7% (for HPV-59) to 29.5% (for HPV-31), and the risk of CIN3 ranged from 0.0% (for HPV-59) to 14.8% (for HPV- 31). Multiple infections with HPV genotypes of different risk classes resulted in a risk that was similar to, and not significantl different from, the risk observed for the HPV genotype of the highest risk class. Conclusions. Genotype-specifi HPV testing may be useful for identifying women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significanc and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions who are at higher and lower risk of prevalent and incipient cervical precancer. Cervical cancer and precancer are caused by persistent infection with human papillomavirus (HPV) [1 4]. More than 40 genotypes (hereafter referred to as types ) of HPV can infect the cervix. Of these, 15 types belonging to 4 related species in the genus a-papillomavirus [5] can cause cancer, but the strength of carcinogenicity of individual types varies greatly [6 9]. For example, HPV-16 (of species a-9) is clearly a Received 29 March 2006; accepted 11 May 2006; electronically published 27 September Potential conflicts of interest: C.M.W., W.C.H., M.S., and P.E.C. report no conflicts of interest. Financial support: National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services (contracts CN-55153, CN-55154, CN , CN-55156, CN-55157, CN-55158, CN-55159, and CN-55105). a ALTS group members are listed after the text, along with information on potential conflicts of interest for these members. Reprints or correspondence: Dr. Cosette M. Wheeler, Dept. of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, UNM HOPE Clinic, 1816 Sigma Chi Rd. NE, Albuquerque, NM (cwheeler@salud.unm.edu). The Journal of Infectious Diseases 2006; 194: by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved /2006/ $15.00 much stronger viral carcinogen than any other type [10 12]. HPV-16 persists longer than most other HPV types [4] and, therefore, has higher prevalence. When it persists for 11 or 2 years, HPV-16 is more likely to cause cervical precancer and cancer than the other potentially carcinogenic types [4]. Globally, HPV-16 causes approximately one-half of cervical cancer cases [6 9]. It has been difficul to assess the carcinogenicity of HPV types other than HPV-16. The other types are less common among the general population and among women with cervical cancer or precancer outcomes, thus limiting the precision of risk estimates. Determining risk estimates for precancer and cancer when multiple HPV infections are detected is particularly difficul when HPV-16 is one of the coinfecting types and, therefore, dominates the risk. Addressing these concerns requires a very large study population of infected women with complete typing for the full range of HPV types and a large number of rigorously define disease outcomes. No currently established study population is big enough to evaluate HPV Genotypes and Cervical Precancer JID 2006:194 (1 November) 1291
2 precisely the risk posed by the least common and weakest of the carcinogenic HPV types. However, in one of the biggest efforts to date, we present data here from the Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significanc (ASCUS)/Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions (LSIL) Triage Study (ALTS) [13], in which we have characterized the 2-year cumulative risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or more severe ( CIN2) and of grade 3 or more severe ( CIN3) for 14 individual carcinogenic HPV types and 24 noncarcinogenic or uncharacterized HPV types. SUBJECTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS Study design and population. ALTS was a randomized trial comparing the following 3 management strategies for 5060 women with ASCUS ( n p 3488) or LSIL ( n p 1572) [13]: (1) immediate colposcopy (referral to colposcopy regardless of enrollment test results); (2) HPV triage (referral to colposcopy if the enrollment HPV testing result was either positive by Hybrid Capture 2 [Digene Corporation, Gaithersburg, MD] or missing or if the enrollment cytological diagnosis was high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion [HSIL]); or (3) conservative management (referral to colposcopy at enrollment if the cytological diagnosis was HSIL). At enrollment, all women received a pelvic examination with collection of 2 cervical specimens; the firs specimen was collected in PreservCyt for ThinPrep cytological analysis (Cytyc Corporation, Boxborough, MA), and the second specimen was collected in specimen transport medium (STM; Digene). Women in all 3 arms of the study were reevaluated by cytological analysis every 6 months for 2 years of follow-up and were sent for a colposcopy if the cytological diagnosis was HSIL. An exit examination with colposcopy was scheduled for all women, regardless of study arm or prior procedures, at the completion of the follow-up. We refer readers elsewhere for details on randomization, examination procedures, patient management, and laboratory and pathological methods [13 17]. The National Cancer Institute and local institutional review boards approved the study, and all participants provided written, informed consent. HPV DNA testing. HPV typing was performed using an L1-based polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay that employs a primer set designated PGMY09/11 and was performed on the STM specimen [18]. Amplimers were subjected to reverse-line blot hybridization for detection of 27 individual HPV types (6, 11, 16, 18, 26, 31, 33, 35, 39, 40, 42, 45, 51 59, 66, 68, 73 [PAP238a], 82 [W13b], 83 [PAP291], and 84 [PAP155]) [19]. We also tested for an additional 11 HPV types (61, 62, 64, 67, 69 72, 81, 82v [IS39], and 89 [CP6108]) in approximately onehalf of the specimens (58%) at enrollment and in all specimens collected at the follow-up visits [20]. Pathological analysis and treatment. Clinical management was based on clinical center pathologists cytologic and histologic diagnoses. In addition, all referral smears, ThinPreps, and histology slides were sent to the Pathology Quality Control Group (PQCG), based at the Johns Hopkins Hospital, for review and secondary diagnoses. The outcomes of interest for these analyses were CIN2 (which was based on the clinical center diagnosis, because it triggered treatment by loop electrical excision procedure) and CIN3 (which was based on the PQCG diagnosis) as the preferred scientifi surrogate for cancer risk. Statistical methods. Of the 5060 women enrolled in ALTS, 4915 (97.1%) had successful HPV testing of 27 HPV types at entry into the study. Ten women received 2 HPV PCR tests at study entry, and the results from both tests were combined for these analyses, such that types detected by either assay were included. A subset of 2833 women had successful testing for an additional 11 HPV types. For purposes of these analyses, we considered HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, 66, and 68 as primary carcinogenic types and HPV types 6, 11, 26, 40, 42, 53, 54, 55, 57, 61, 62, 64, 67, 69 73, 81, 82, 82v, 83, 84, and 89 (CP6108) as noncarcinogenic types. Women were assigned to an HPV risk group according to a priori established cervical cancer risk: positive for HPV-16, else positive for any carcinogenic HPV type and negative for HPV-16 (hereafter, carcinogenic types without HPV-16 ), else positive for any noncarcinogenic HPV type and negative for all carcinogenic types, else PCR negative. Cumulative 2-year risks for CIN2 and CIN3 were computed by considering any diagnosis made at entry, during the 2 years of follow-up, or at exit from the study. Of the 4915 women, only the 3944 (80.2%) who completed the 24-month follow-up visit were included in these analyses. We computed HPV type specifi risks of CIN2 and CIN3 for women who tested positive at entry for the specifi type only. We also computed risks for classes of HPV on the basis of their carcinogenic potential as described above. In further analyses, we divided the study period into 2 intervals: (1) enrollment visit up to the 12-month visit (hereafter, year 1 period ) and (2) 12-month visit through the 24-month visit or exit from the study (hereafter, year 2 period ). The HPV risk status for each interval was based on the presence of the HPV type in the highest HPV risk group during that interval. We then computed the risks of CIN2 and CIN3 during the year 2 period among women who had not received a diagnosis of or treatment for CIN2 during the year 1 period. We restricted these analyses to the women in the immediate colposcopy and HPV triage study arms, because of the insensitive diagnosis of CIN2 during the year 1 period in the conservative management arm [21]. Women without HPV testing for both time periods and without an exit colposcopy were excluded. The total number of women included in these analyses was Confidenc intervals (CIs) were computed using exact pro JID 2006:194 (1 November) Wheeler et al.
3 cedures, and comparisons of estimates of risk were tested for significanc using the Pearson x 2 statistic or the Cochran-Armitage test of trend, with an exact P value. SAS (version 9.1; SAS Institute) was used for all analyses. RESULTS The type-specifi HPV prevalence at study entry for this population of women with ASCUS and LSIL is shown in table 1. Overall, 68.4% of the women ( n p 3362) tested positive for at least 1 type of HPV. Of those women who were HPV positive, 43.7% were positive for only a single type, 28.0% were positive for 2 types, 15.4% were positive for 3 types, and 12.9% were positive for 4 12 types. For any given type, 20% occurred as a single-type HPV infection. The most common HPV types were, in descending order of prevalence, 16 (16.8%), 52 (9.4%), 51 (8.1%), 31 (7.1%), and 18 (6.6%). Table 1 also presents the cumulative 2-year risk for a clinical center diagnosis of CIN2 and a PQCG diagnosis of CIN3 by type of HPV detected at study entry for women with singletype HPV infections. The risk of CIN2 or CIN3 associated with HPV-16 was greater than that observed for any other HPV type. Among women who were infected only with HPV-16, the cumulative 2-year risk of CIN2 was 50.6% (95% CI, 44.1% 57.2%), and the risk of CIN3 was 39.1% (95% CI, 32.9% 45.7%). Other known carcinogenic types had risks of CIN2 and CIN3 that were lower than those for HPV-16 but were generally higher than those for noncarcinogenic or uncharacterized types. Among women with single-type infections of a carcinogenic type other than 16 (18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, 66, and 68), the 2-year cumulative risk of CIN2 ranged from 4.7% (for HPV-59) to 29.5% (for HPV-31). Overall, the risk of CIN2 among women with a single carcinogenic type other than 16 was 18.8%. Women who were initially negative for HPV by PCR had a risk of 2.4% for CIN3. Of these 38 PCR-negative women with CIN3, 19 tested positive by use of a second cervical specimen and HPV test for carcinogenic HPV (Hybrid Capture 2; Digene Corporation). The risk of CIN3 for the remaining 19 PCR-negative, Hybrid Capture 2 negative women was 1.4%. The 2-year cumulative risk of CIN2 and CIN3 was greater for the HPV risk groups more strongly associated with cancer (table 2). For example, the 2-year risk of CIN2 for single-type HPV infections was 8.2% for noncarcinogenic types, 18.8% for carcinogenic types without HPV-16, and (as shown also in table 1) 50.6% for HPV-16. The 2-year risk of CIN3 for single-type HPV infections was 3.9% for noncarcinogenic types, 7.9% for carcinogenic types without HPV-16, and 39.1% for HPV-16. All differences in risk were statistically significan ( P!.01). Women whose infections were categorized as multiple carcinogenic types without HPV-16 had a nonsignificantl greater risk of CIN3 than did women whose infections were categorized as single carcinogenic types without HPV-16 (10.9% vs. 7.9%). However, the converse was true for infections with noncarcinogenic HPV types (1.4% vs. 3.9%). Except for HPV-16, infections with multiple HPV types of different risk groups resulted in risks of CIN2 and CIN3 that were close to the risk observed for the higher of the risk types. For example, women infected with a single noncarcinogenic type and a single carcinogenic type without HPV-16 had a 2-year cumulative risk of CIN2 of 17.3% and a 2-year cumulative risk of CIN3 of 8.3%, which were similar to the risks of CIN2 (18.8%) and CIN3 (7.9%) for women infected with a single carcinogenic type without HPV-16. By contrast, there was an apparent trend toward lower risk in women infected with HPV-16 in combination with single or multiple noncarcinogenic types. The 2-year risk of CIN2 decreased from 50.6% to 40.0% to 36.1% among women infected with HPV-16 only, with 1 additional noncarcinogenic type, or 11 additional noncarcinogenic type, respectively. A test of trend yielded P p.04. A similar pattern of decreasing risk (from 39.1% to 28.9% to 27.8%) was also observed using an end point of CIN3, with a test of trend yielding P p.07. We observed that as the overall risk of CIN2 decreased, the ratio of CIN2 to CIN3 increased. HPV-16 infections conferred the greatest risk of CIN2 and the lowest ratio of CIN2 to CIN3 (i.e., most HPV-16 positive women with CIN2 had CIN3). For single-type HPV-16 infections, the ratio was By contrast, women infected with noncarcinogenic HPV types had ratios of 1 or greater. Women infected with multiple noncarcinogenic types had the highest ratio (6.0). In logistic regression modeling (data not shown), age (!30 or 30 years) and referral cytological diagnosis (LSIL or ASCUS) were not confounding variables of the risks of either CIN2 or CIN3 associated with HPV. Having LSIL (vs. ASCUS) was significantl associated with having CIN2 or CIN3 (odds ratios [ORs], 1.38 and 1.40, respectively). Women 30 years of age had a significantl lower risk of CIN2 but not of CIN3 (ORs, 0.74 and 0.81, respectively), compared with women!30 years of age. In table 3, we present the risk of CIN2 diagnosed during the last 12 months of the study associated with the HPV risk status at 2 time intervals: 0 to!12 months (the year 1 period) and 12 to 24 months (the year 2 period). Women who were reclassifie in the year 2 period into a risk group that was lower or higher than the year 1 period had a decreased or an increased risk of CIN2, respectively, compared with those who were not reclassified For example, women who were HPV negative during both time periods had a risk of 0.6% (95% CI, 0.1% 1.9%), whereas women who were negative during the year 1 period but HPV-16 positive during the year 2 period had a risk of 14.3% (95% CI, 3.0% 36.3%). Among women who were HPV Genotypes and Cervical Precancer JID 2006:194 (1 November) 1293
4 Table 1. Prevalence of human papillomavirus (HPV) at study entry and 2-year risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or more severe ( CIN2; clinical center diagnosis) and of grade 3 or more severe ( CIN3; Pathology Quality Control Group diagnosis), among polymerase chain reaction (PCR) negative women and women with single-type HPV infection. HPV genotype detected Tested, no. Single or multiple HPV infection a No. (%) Risk % (95% CI) Single HPV infection only b CIN2 CIN3 PCR negative (31.6) 4.3 ( ) 2.4 ( ) (3.2) 31 (19.6) 9.7 ( ) 3.2 ( ) (0.9) 3 (7.1) 0.0 ( ) 0.0 ( ) (16.8) 235 (28.4) 50.6 ( ) 39.1 ( ) (6.6) 82 (25.2) 18.3 ( ) 6.1 ( ) (1.0) 5 (10.4) 40.0 ( ) 20.0 ( ) (7.1) 88 (25.4) 29.5 ( ) 14.8 ( ) (3.3) 43 (26.9) 23.3 ( ) 14.0 ( ) (4.8) 64 (26.9) 23.4 ( ) 7.8 ( ) (5.9) 47 (16.2) 17.0 ( ) 8.5 ( ) (1.9) 13 (14.1) 0.0 ( ) 0.0 ( ) (3.6) 37 (20.7) 13.5 ( ) 8.1 ( ) (4.5) 41 (18.6) 24.4 ( ) 9.8 ( ) (8.1) 89 (22.3) 16.9 ( ) 5.6 ( ) (9.4) 124 (26.8) 18.5 ( ) 7.3 ( ) (6.1) 59 (19.8) 8.5 ( ) 3.4 ( ) (4.3) 30 (14.2) 3.3 ( ) 3.3 ( ) (2.4) 17 (14.2) 0.0 ( ) 0.0 ( ) (5.9) 54 (18.7) 5.6 ( ) 1.9 ( ) (0.0) 2 (100.0) 0.0 ( ) 0.0 ( ) (5.5) 67 (24.8) 26.9 ( ) 13.4 ( ) (5.6) 43 (15.6) 4.7 ( ) 0.0 ( ) (4.9) 28 (20.0) 10.7 ( ) 3.6 ( ) (5.7) 23 (14.2) 0.0 ( ) 0.0 ( ) (0.3) 0 (0) (4.9) 52 (21.4) 13.5 ( ) 3.8 ( ) (2.2) 15 (23.8) 20.0 ( ) 13.3 ( ) (3.3) 26 (16.1) 7.7 ( ) 7.7 ( ) (0.4) 1 (9.1) 0.0 ( ) 0.0 ( ) (3.6) 25 (24.3) 4.0 ( ) 0.0 ( ) (0.5) 3 (23.1) 0.0 ( ) 0.0 ( ) (1.1) 4 (12.9) 0.0 ( ) 0.0 ( ) (2.5) 23 (18.7) 0.0 ( ) 0.0 ( ) (2.3) 5 (7.7) 20.0 ( ) 40.0 ( ) (2.3) 18 (16.1) 27.8 ( ) 11.1 ( ) (3.6) 24 (13.6) 0.0 ( ) 0.0 ( ) (3.4) 27 (16.3) 7.4 ( ) 3.7 ( ) 82v (0.4) 2 (18.2) 50.0 ( ) 0.0 ( ) (5.3) 20 (13.3) 10.0 ( ) 0.0 ( ) NOTE. CI, confidence interval. a Percentages are those of women infected with the individual genotype shown. b Percentages are those of women infected only with the individual genotype among all women infected with that type. 1294
5 Table 2. Two-year risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or more severe ( CIN2; clinical center diagnosis) and of grade 3 or more severe ( CIN3; Pathology Quality Control Group diagnosis), by human papillomavirus (HPV) infection category at study entry. CIN2 CIN3 HPV at study entry No. Risk % (95% CI) P Risk % (95% CI) P Pearson x 2 test reference group CIN2/ CIN3 a PCR negative ( ) 2.4 ( ) 0.63 Any noncarcinogenic ( )! ( ).3 PCR negative 1.5 Single noncarcinogenic ( ) ( ).1 PCR negative 0.94 Multiple noncarcinogenic ( ) ( ).2 Single noncarcinogenic 6.0 Any carcinogenic without HPV ( )! ( )!.0001 Any noncarcinogenic 1.3 Single carcinogenic without HPV ( )! ( ).007 Single noncarcinogenic 1.5 Multiple carcinogenic without HPV ( ) ( ).1 Single carcinogenic without HPV Single noncarcinogenic + single carcinogenic without HPV ( ) ( ).9 Single carcinogenic without HPV Multiple noncarcinogenic and/or carcinogenic without HPV ( ) ( ).2 Single carcinogenic without HPV Any HPV ( )! ( )!.0001 Any carcinogenic without HPV HPV-16 only ( )! ( )!.0001 Single carcinogenic without HPV HPV-16 + single noncarcinogenic ( ) ( ).09 HPV-16 only 0.46 HPV-16 + multiple noncarcinogenic ( ) ( ).2 HPV-16 only 0.10 HPV-16 + single carcinogenic without HPV ( ) ( ).9 HPV-16 only 0.31 HPV-16 + multiple carcinogenic without HPV ( ) ( ).06 HPV-16 only 0.61 HPV-16 + single noncarcinogenic + single carcinogenic without HPV ( ) ( ).3 HPV-16 only 0.52 HPV-16 + multiple noncarcinogenic and/or carcinogenic without HPV ( ) ( ).7 HPV-16 only 0.42 NOTE. The noncarcinogenic category includes all noncarcinogenic HPV genotypes (6, 11, 26, 40, 42, 53, 54, 55, 57, 61, 62, 64, 67, 69 73, 81, 82, 82v, 83, 84, and 89 [CP6108]), and the carcinogenic without HPV-16 category includes all carcinogenic HPV genotypes excluding HPV-16 (18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, 66, and 68). CI, confidence interval; PCR, polymerase chain reaction. a Ratio of CIN2 cases to CIN3 cases, both as diagnosed by the Pathology Quality Control Group. 1295
6 Table 3. Risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or more severe ( CIN2; clinical center diagnosis) and of grade 3 or more severe ( CIN3; Pathology Quality Control Group diagnosis) in women with!cin2 during the year 1 period, by human papillomavirus (HPV) risk status during the year 1 period and HPV risk status during the year 2 period. CIN2 CIN3 HPV status, year 1 period HPV status, year 2 period Women, no. Received diagnosis, no. Risk % (95% CI) Received diagnosis, no. Risk % (95% CI) PCR negative PCR negative ( ) ( ) Noncarcinogenic ( ) ( ) Carcinogenic without HPV ( ) ( ) HPV ( ) ( ) Noncarcinogenic PCR negative ( ) ( ) Noncarcinogenic different type(s) ( ) ( ) Noncarcinogenic same type(s) ( ) ( ) Carcinogenic without HPV ( ) ( ) HPV ( ) ( ) Carcinogenic without HPV-16 PCR negative ( ) ( ) Noncarcinogenic ( ) ( ) Carcinogenic without HPV ( ) ( ) different type(s) Carcinogenic without HPV ( ) ( ) same type(s) HPV ( ) ( ) HPV-16 PCR negative ( ) ( ) Noncarcinogenic ( ) ( ) Carcinogenic without HPV ( ) ( ) HPV ( ) ( ) NOTE. Women were assigned an HPV risk status according to the highest-risk HPV genotype detected during each time period. The noncarcinogenic category includes all noncarcinogenic HPV genotypes (6, 11, 26, 40, 42, 53, 54, 55, 57, 61, 62, 64, 67, 69 73, 81, 82, 82v, 83, 84, and 89 [CP6108]), and the carcinogenic without HPV-16 category includes all carcinogenic HPV genotypes excluding HPV-16 (18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, 66, and 68). CI, confidence interval; PCR, polymerase chain reaction. HPV-16 positive during the year 1 period and remained HPV- 16 positive during the year 2 period, the risk of CIN2 was 27.4% (95% CI, 19.5% 36.6%), whereas those who were HPV negative during the year 2 period had a risk of only 4.7% (95% CI, 0.6% 15.8%). Table 3 also shows the corresponding risk estimates for CIN3. Although the numbers were small for many categories and the resulting risk estimates are imprecise, the pattern of risk was similar to that observed for CIN2. The average duration between the diagnosis of CIN and the last PCR HPV test was 92 days for CIN2 and 73 days for CIN3. DISCUSSION We have previously reported that, in this population of mostly young women with either equivocal or mild cervical cytological abnormalities, detection of HPV-16 at entry into the study was associated with a very high risk of CIN3 over a 2-year period [11]. Here, we report the 2-year cumulative risk of CIN2 and CIN3 for individual HPV types and various groupings of HPV types. We found that the recognized carcinogenic HPV types other than 16 (18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, 66, and 68) had a collective risk of CIN3 that was approximately one-fift of that for HPV-16 (7.9% vs. 39.1%). The remaining HPV types had a collective risk of CIN3 that was approximately one-tenth that of HPV-16 (3.9%). Although the risks for the individual HPV types varied greatly, the limited precision of the estimates did not allow us to further distinguish the HPV types within these broad groupings. Women in ALTS were referred for equivocal or mild cytologic abnormalities. Of note, the risk of subsequent CIN3 would be lower in the general population, particularly among those with normal cytological f ndings. The low but nonzero subsequent risk of CIN3 among those who tested negative for HPV at enrollment shows that HPV testing is not 100% sensitive. Nonetheless, recent screening guidelines have included repeat cytological and HPV testing every 3 years. It is expected that multiple negative HPV tests would defin an extremely low-risk group. A recent report found a 10-year elevated risk of cervical precancer and cancer for HPV-18 that was similar in magnitude 1296 JID 2006:194 (1 November) Wheeler et al.
7 to that observed for HPV-16 [12]. The lower risk among HPV- 18 positive women in the present study might be explained by the short duration of follow-up. Among the non HPV-16 carcinogenic types, we observed the greatest risk of CIN3 (14.8%) for HPV-31. In this study, perhaps by chance, relatively low risks of CIN3 for HPV-56 and -59 were observed, with risks similar to those observed for the noncarcinogenic types. Noncarcinogenic types were associated with increased risk of CIN2, compared with the risk in women who were PCR negative. However, the risk of CIN3 for noncarcinogenic types did not differ significantl from the risk of CIN3 in women who were PCR negative. Thus, noncarcinogenic HPV types seem to cause CIN2 but not CIN3, which is consistent with the rare detection of noncarcinogenic HPV types in cohort studies of longer duration and in studies of invasive cervical cancer [4, 6 8, 10]. The occasional findin of CIN3 in women who were HPV negative might be due to false-negative results for carcinogenic HPV types or to histologic overcall. We also observed relatively high risks for HPV-26, -82, -67, and -42; these risks were of comparable magnitude to those observed for the carcinogenic types other than HPV-16. HPV- 26 and -82 have been suggested as potential carcinogenic types [7], and, thus, our finding of relatively high risks for these types might have been expected. HPV-67, which has not been identifie in other studies as carcinogenic, resides, interestingly, in the same phylogenetic species (a-9) as the carcinogenic HPV types 16, 31, 33, 35, 52, and 58. It is unclear whether HPV-67 is truly carcinogenic and was missed by the large case series [7] or whether it causes CIN3 but not cancer. The findin of an association between the risk of cervical precancer and HPV- 42 is surprising but warrants caution, given the wide CIs for these estimated risks and possible false-negative results for coinfection with carcinogenic types. HPV-42 was not found in cancers in large surveys [7]. In the present investigation, we also attempted to estimate the risks of combinations of HPV types. However, the low frequency of multiple infections of specifi HPV types made this impossible for all but a few combinations. Rather than look at combinations of specifi HPV types, we chose to look at combinations of types within broad risk classes. A few patterns emerged from these analyses. First, the risk classes had distinct and significantl different risk levels. Among women with a single infection, those infected with HPV-16 had the highest risk of CIN3 (39.1%), followed by those infected with a carcinogenic type without HPV-16 (7.9%) and by those infected with a noncarcinogenic HPV type (3.9%). Previous reports found that multiple infections with non HPV-16 carcinogenic types significantl increased the risk of CIN3, compared with infection with single-type non HPV- 16 carcinogenic infections [22, 23]. In the present study, we observed a similar yet nonsignifican increase in risk, compared with the risk observed for single infections of that risk class. For example, women infected with a single carcinogenic type without HPV-16 had a risk of 7.9% for CIN3, compared with a risk of 10.9% for women infected with 2 or more carcinogenic types without HPV-16. The likely explanation for this increase in risk is that the non HPV-16 carcinogenic types are not homogenous with respect to risk. If the risk of CIN3 in women with multiple infections is set by the HPV type with the greatest risk, then women with multiple infections will, on average, have a greater risk of CIN3 than will women with single infections. A third pattern observed was that multiple infections with HPV types of different risk classes resulted in a risk that was similar to, and not significantl different from, the risk observed for the highest risk class. Women infected with a single noncarcinogenic type and a single carcinogenic type without HPV- 16 had an 8.3% risk for CIN3, which was essentially the same risk observed in women infected with a single carcinogenic type without HPV-16. Similarly, women infected with HPV-16 and either a single noncarcinogenic type or an additional single carcinogenic type had risks that were close to that observed for HPV-16 alone (29%, 39%, and 39%, respectively). There was one interesting pattern that deviated from the above generalizations. A decreasing trend in risk was observed in the risk estimates among women infected with HPV-16 and either no, one, or multiple noncarcinogenic types. This may result from consistent antagonism between types. Previous work has suggested that antagonism between the noncarcinogenic HPV types 6 or 11 and HPV-16 results in a reduced risk for both CIN and invasive cervical cancer [24, 25]. We are currently exploring type-type interactions by use of Markov chain modeling. Another possibility is that this trend may reflec residual age confounding, given that younger HPV-16 positive women were significantl more likely to have additional carcinogenic HPV types detected than were older women ( P p.0003), who on average would be expected to have had their infections longer and, therefore, to be more likely to have developed precancer or cancer. Another objective of these analyses was to investigate how a change in HPV risk status over the course of follow-up could change the risk of CIN2 and CIN3. By dividing the study period into 2 intervals (0 to!12 months [the year 1 period] and 12 to 24 months [the year 2 period]) and characterizing a woman s HPV risk status for each interval, we were able to show that a change in HPV risk status between the 2 relatively short periods was associated with a concordant change in the risk of CIN2 and CIN3. For women who had a change in HPV risk level, the results of these analyses show that the HPV risk status during the second half of the study was much more closely related to the diagnosis of CIN2 than was the HPV risk status 1 year earlier. Persistence of HPV infection did, however, have an effect on HPV Genotypes and Cervical Precancer JID 2006:194 (1 November) 1297
8 risk, as the highest risk (27.4%) was observed for women who were HPV-16 positive for both years of the study. A lower, but still increased, risk was observed when a non HPV-16 carcinogenic type persisted. Finally, it should be stressed that the ALTS population consisted of women who were referred to 1 of 4 clinical centers in the United States with a cytologic diagnosis of ASCUS or LSIL from a community laboratory. The type-specifi prevalence of HPV and the incidence of CIN2 and CIN3 that we observed during the 2-year follow-up may not be generalizable to other populations with different characteristics. If the present results are confi med, we will need to determine the clinical uses of HPV type specifi testing. Given the limitations in sensitivity of colposcopy [21], in some circumstances, persistent infection with a carcinogenic HPV type might serve as an adjunct to colposcopy and defin treatment in the absence of obvious cervical precancer. Such a change would require the development of reliable, quality-controlled HPV typing kits for general use and careful avoidance of overuse. ALTS GROUP MEMBERS National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD. D. Solomon, project officer M. Schiffman, co project officer S. Wacholder, statistician; P. Castle. University of Alabama at Birmingham. E. E. Partridge, principal investigator; L. Kilgore, co principal investigator; S. Hester, study manager. University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City. J. L. Walker, principal investigator; G. A. Johnson, co principal investigator; A. Yadack, study manager. Magee Womens Hospital of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Health System, Pittsburgh, PA. R. S. Guido, principal investigator; K. McIntyre-Seltman, co principal investigator; R. P. Edwards, investigator; J. Gruss, study manager. University of Washington, Seattle. N. B. Kiviat, co principal investigator; L. Koutsky, co principal investigator; C. Mao, investigator. Colposcopy Quality Control Group. D. Ferris, principal investigator (Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, GA); J. T. Cox, coinvestigator (University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara); L. Burke, coinvestigator (Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Hospital, Boston, MA). HPV Quality Control Group. C. M. Wheeler, principal investigator (University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque); C. Peyton-Goodall, laboratory manager (University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque); M. M. Manos, coinvestigator (Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, CA). Pathology Quality Control Group. R. J. Kurman, principal investigator (Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD); D. L. Rosenthal, coinvestigator (Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD); M. E. Sherman, coinvestigator (National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD); M. H. Stoler, coinvestigator (University of Virginia Health Science Center, Charlottesville). Westat, Coordinating Unit, Rockville, MD. J. Rosenthal, project director; M. Dunn, data management team leader; J. Quarantillo, senior systems analyst; D. Robinson, clinical center coordinator. Quality of Life Group. Diane Harper (Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, NH); A. T. Lorincz, senior scientifi office (Digene Corporation, Gaithersburg, MD); B. Kramer, senior programmer/analyst (Information Management Services, Silver Spring, MD). Potential conflict of interest relating to these ALTS Group members are as follows: A. T. Lorincz is the senior vice president of research and development and chief scientifi office of Digene Corporation, the maker of the Hybrid Capture 2 test, and owns stock in the company; J. T. Cox is on the speakers bureau and is a consultant for Digene Corporation; M. E. Sherman has previously received research funding from Digene Corporation; and M. H. Stoler has consulted for Digene Corporation, Roche Molecular Systems, and Cytyc Corporation. Acknowledgments We thank Digene Corporation, Cytyc Corporation, National Testing Laboratories, Denvu, TriPath Imaging, and Roche Molecular Systems, for donating or providing at reduced cost some of the equipment and supplies used in this study. References 1. Hildesheim A, Schiffman M, Gravitt P, et al. Persistence of type-specifi human papillomavirus infection among cytologically normal women. J Infect Dis 1994; 169: Ho GYF, Bierman R, Beardsley L, Chang CJ, Burk RD. Natural history of cervicovaginal papillomavirus infection in young women. N Engl J Med 1998; 338: Schlect NF, Kulaga S, Robitaille J, et al. Persistent human papillomavirus infection as a predictor of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. JAMA 2001; 286: Schiffman M, Herrero R, Desalle R, et al. The carcinogenicity of human papillomavirus types reflect viral evolution. Virology 2005; 337: de Villiers EM, Fauquet C, Broker TR, Bernard HU, zur Hausen H. Classificatio of papillomaviruses. Virology 2004; 324: Bosch FX, Manos MM, Munoz N, Sherman M, Jansen AM, Peto J. Prevalence of human papillomavirus in cervical cancer: a worldwide perspective. International Biological Study on Cervical Cancer (IBSCC) Study Group. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995; 87: Munoz N, Bosch FX, de Sanjose S, et al. Epidemiologic classificatio of human papillomavirus types associated with cervical cancer. N Engl J Med 2003; 348: Clifford GM, Smith JS, Plummer M, Munoz N, Franceschi S. Human papillomavirus types in invasive cervical cancer worldwide: a metaanalysis. Br J Cancer 2003; 88: IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Vol. 90. Human papillomaviruses. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer, Khan MJ, Castle PE, Lorincz AT, et al. The elevated 10-year risk of cervical precancer and cancer in women with human papillomavirus 1298 JID 2006:194 (1 November) Wheeler et al.
9 (HPV) type 16 or 18 and the possible utility of type-specifi HPV testing in clinical practice. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005; 97: Castle PE, Solomon D, Schiffman M, Wheeler CM. Human papillomavirus type 16 infections and 2-year absolute risk of cervical precancer in women with equivocal or mild cytologic abnormalities. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005; 97: Peto J, Gilham C, Deacon J, et al. Cervical HPV infection and neoplasia in a large population-based prospective study: the Manchester cohort. Br J Cancer 2004; 91: Schiffman M, Adrianza ME. ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study: design, methods and characteristics of trial participants. Acta Cytol 2000; 44: The Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance/Low Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions Triage Study (ALTS) Group. Human papillomavirus testing for triage of women with cytologic evidence of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions: baseline data from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92: Solomon D, Schiffman M, Tarone R. Comparison of three management strategies for patients with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance baseline results from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001; 93: The Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance/Low Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions Triage Study (ALTS) Group. Results of a randomized trial on the management of cytology interpretations of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 188: The Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance/Low Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions Triage Study (ALTS) Group. A randomized trial on the management of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion cytology interpretations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 188: Gravitt PE, Peyton CL, Alessi TQ, et al. Improved amplificatio of genital human papillomaviruses. J Clin Microbiol 2000; 38: Gravitt PE, Peyton CL, Apple RJ, Wheeler CM. Genotyping of 27 human papillomavirus types by using L1 consensus PCR products by a single-hybridization, reverse line blot detection method. J Clin Microbiol 1998; 36: Peyton CL, Gravitt PE, Hunt WC, et al. Determinants of genital human papillomavirus detection in a US population. J Infect Dis 2001; 183: Guido R, Schiffman M, Solomon D, Burke L. Postcolposcopy management strategies for women referred with low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or human papillomavirus DNA-positive atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance a 2-year prospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 188: Herrero R, Castle PE, Schiffman M, et al. Epidemiologic profil of type-specifi human papillomavirus infection and cervical neoplasia in Guanacaste, Costa Rica. J Infect Dis 2005; 191: Trottier H, Mahmud S, Costa MC, et al. Human papillomavirus infections with multiple types and risk of cervical neoplasia. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006; 15: Luostarinen T, af Geijersstam V, Björge T, et al. No excess risk of cervical carcinoma among women seropositive for both HPV 16 and HPV 6/ 11. Int J Cancer 1999; 80: Silins I, Zhaohui W, A vall-lundqvist E, et al. Serological evidence for protection by human papillomavirus (HPV) type 6 infection against HPV type 16 cervical carcinogenesis. J Gen Virol 1999; 80: HPV Genotypes and Cervical Precancer JID 2006:194 (1 November) 1299
Philip E. Castle, Diane Solomon, Mark Schiffman, Cosette M. Wheeler for the ALTS Group
ARTICLEARTICLESHuman Papillomavirus Type 16 Infections and 2-Year Absolute Risk of Cervical Precancer in Women With Equivocal or Mild Cytologic Abnormalities Philip E. Castle, Diane Solomon, Mark Schiffman,
More informationAbstract. Human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing is cost-effective 1-3 (S. Kulasingam, PhD, et al, unpublished Atypical
Anatomic Pathology / HPV DNA DETECTION IN ALTS A Comparison of a Prototype PCR Assay and Hybrid Capture 2 for Detection of Carcinogenic Human Papillomavirus DNA in Women With Equivocal or Mildly Abnormal
More informationCan HPV-16 Genotyping Provide a Benchmark for Cervical Biopsy Specimen Interpretation?
Anatomic Pathology / Monitoring HPV-16 Fractions in CIN Can HPV-16 Genotyping Provide a Benchmark for Cervical Biopsy Specimen Interpretation? Mary T. Galgano, MD, 1 Philip E. Castle, PhD, MPH, 2 Mark
More informationThe Korean Journal of Cytopathology 15 (1) : 17-27, 2004
5 The Korean Journal of Cytopathology 5 () : 7-7, / 5 / / (human papillomavirus, HPV), 6%, 5% HPV. HPV HPV. HPV HPV,,5 HPV HPV. HPV, 6 HPV. HPV HPV International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) HPV
More informationFor the Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance/Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion Triage Study Group
Effects of Age and Human Papilloma Viral Load on Colposcopy Triage: Data From the Randomized Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance/ Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion Triage Study
More informationComparison of Human Papillomavirus Distribution in Cytologic Subgroups of Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion
288 Comparison of Human Papillomavirus Distribution in Cytologic Subgroups of Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion Rosemary E. Zuna, MD 1 Sophia S. Wang, PhD 2 Mark Schiffman, MD, MPH 2 Diane Solomon,
More informationAbsolute Risk of a Subsequent Abnormal Pap among Oncogenic Human Papillomavirus DNA-Positive, Cytologically Negative Women
Absolute Risk of a Subsequent Abnormal Pap among Oncogenic Human Papillomavirus DNA-Positive, Cytologically Negative Women 2145 Philip E. Castle, Ph.D., M.P.H. 1 Sholom Wacholder, Ph.D. 1 Mark E. Sherman,
More informationPrevalence and Determinants of High-risk Human Papillomavirus Infection in Women with High Socioeconomic Status in Seoul, Republic of Korea
RESEARCH COMMUNICATION Prevalence and Determinants of High-risk Human Papillomavirus Infection in Women with High Socioeconomic Status in Seoul, Republic of Korea Kidong Kim 1, Jin Ju Kim 2,3, Sun Mie
More informationDevelopment and Duration of Human Papillomavirus Lesions, after Initial Infection
MAJOR ARTICLE Development and Duration of Human Papillomavirus Lesions, after Initial Infection Rachel L. Winer, 1 Nancy B. Kiviat, 2 James P. Hughes, 3 Diane E. Adam, 1 Shu-Kuang Lee, 3 Jane M. Kuypers,
More informationNo HPV High Risk Screening with Genotyping. CPT Code: If Result is NOT DETECTED (x3) If Results is DETECTED (Genotype reported)
CPAL Central Pennsylvania Alliance Laboratory Technical Bulletin No. 117 August 6, 2013 HPV High Risk Screening with Genotyping Contact: Dr. Jeffrey Wisotzkey, 717-851-1422 Director, Molecular Pathology
More informationHierarchical Clustering of Human Papilloma Virus Genotype Patterns in the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study
Published OnlineFirst on October 19, 2010 as 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-1188 Prevention and Epidemiology Hierarchical Clustering of Human Papilloma Virus Genotype Patterns in the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study
More informationClinical Relevance of HPV Genotyping. A New Dimension In Human Papillomavirus Testing. w w w. a u t o g e n o m i c s. c o m
Clinical Relevance of HPV Genotyping A New Dimension In Human Papillomavirus Testing Human Papillomavirus: Incidence HPV prevalence was 26.8% for women in US aged 14 59 yrs 1 20 million Americans are currently
More informationPhilip E. Castle, Patti E. Gravitt, Diane Solomon, Cosette M. Wheeler and Mark Schiffman
REFERENCES CONTENT ALERTS Comparison of Linear Array and Line Blot Assay for Detection of Human Papillomavirus and Diagnosis of Cervical Precancer and Cancer in the Atypical Squamous Cell of Undetermined
More informationRESEARCH. Short term persistence of human papillomavirus and risk of cervical precancer and cancer: population based cohort study
Short term of human papillomavirus and risk of cervical precancer and cancer: population based cohort study Philip E Castle, investigator, 1 Ana Cecilia Rodríguez, medical epidemiologist, 3 Robert D Burk,
More informationHuman papillomavirus testing as a cytology gold standard: comparing Surinam with the Netherlands
& 2005 USCAP, Inc All rights reserved 0893-3952/05 $30.00 www.modernpathology.org Human papillomavirus testing as a cytology gold standard: comparing Surinam with the Netherlands Mitchell S Wachtel 1,
More informationCurrently, colposcopy is recommended for
Number of Cervical Biopsies and Sensitivity of Colposcopy Julia C. Gage, MPH, Vivien W. Hanson, MD, Kim Abbey, BSN, FNP, Susan Dippery, RN, WHCNP, Susi Gardner, BSN, MSN, ARNP, Janet Kubota, BSN, WHCNP,
More informationPersistence of Genital Human Papillomavirus Infection in a Long-Term Follow-Up Study of Female University Students
MAJOR ARTICLE Persistence of Genital Human Papillomavirus Infection in a Long-Term Follow-Up Study of Female University Students Laura K. Sycuro, 1,4 Long Fu Xi, 1 James P. Hughes, 2 Qinghua Feng, 3 Rachel
More informationVasile Goldiş Western University of Arad, Faculty of Medicine, Obstetrics- Gynecology Department, Romania b
Mædica - a Journal of Clinical Medicine ORIGINAL PAPERS Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia in the Dr. Salvator Vuia Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital - Arad During the 2000-2009 Period Voicu
More informationA Prospective Study of High-Grade Cervical Neoplasia Risk Among Human Papillomavirus-Infected Women
A Prospective Study of High-Grade Cervical Neoplasia Risk Among Human Papillomavirus-Infected Women Philip E. Castle, Sholom Wacholder, Attila T. Lorincz, David R. Scott, Mark E. Sherman, Andrew G. Glass,
More informationAtypical squamous cells. The case for HPV testing
OBG MANAGEMENT FOCUS ON CERVICAL DISEASE BY J. THOMAS COX, MD ASC-US is most often due to transient changes or HPV. HPV-positive ASC-US is 12.5 to 23 times more likely to be associated with CIN 2,3 on
More informationOriginal Policy Date
MP 2.04.03 Cervicography Medical Policy Section Medicine Issue 12:2013 Original Policy Date 12:2013 Last Review Status/Date Reviewed with literature search/12:2013 Return to Medical Policy Index Disclaimer
More informationThe devil is in the details
The cobas KNOW THE RISK For cervical cancer prevention The devil is in the details Leading with the cobas as your primary screening method uncovers disease missed by cytology, and can protect women from
More informationMaterials and Methods
8 A Prospective Study of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Type 16 DNA Detection by Polymerase Chain Reaction and Its Association with Acquisition and Persistence of Other HPV Types Kai-Li Liaw, 1 Allan Hildesheim,
More informationAbnormal Cervicovaginal Cytology With Negative Human Papillomavirus Testing
280 Abnormal Cervicovaginal Cytology With Negative Human Papillomavirus Testing Giovanni Negri, MD Bettina Rigo, BS Fabio Vittadello, ScD Christine Mian, ScD Eduard Egarter-Vigl, MD Department of Pathology,
More informationAtypical Glandular Cells of Undetermined Significance Outcome Predictions Based on Human Papillomavirus Testing
Anatomic Pathology / ATYPICAL GLANDULAR CELLS AND HUMAN PAPILLOMAVIRUS Atypical Glandular Cells of Undetermined Significance Outcome Predictions Based on Human Papillomavirus Testing Jeffrey F. Krane,
More informationEpidemiologic Profile of Type-Specific Human Papillomavirus Infection and Cervical Neoplasia in Guanacaste, Costa Rica
MAJOR ARTICLE Epidemiologic Profile of Type-Specific Human Papillomavirus Infection and Cervical Neoplasia in Guanacaste, Costa Rica Rolando Herrero, 1,a Philip E. Castle, 2,a Mark Schiffman, 2 M. Concepción
More informationA Cytologic/Histologic Review of 367 Cases. Original Article. Cancer Cytopathology August 25,
Correlation Between Hybrid Capture II High-Risk Human Papillomavirus DNA Test Chemiluminescence Intensity From Cervical Samples With Follow-Up Histologic Results A Cytologic/Histologic Review of 367 Cases
More informationBiomed Environ Sci, 2015; 28(1): 80-84
80 Biomed Environ Sci, 2015; 28(1): 80-84 Letter to the Editor Assessing the Effectiveness of a Cervical Cancer Screening Program in a Hospital-based Study* YANG Yi1, LANG Jing He1, WANG You Fang1, CHENG
More informationConcurrent and Sequential Acquisition of Different Genital Human Papillomavirus Types
1097 Concurrent and Sequential Acquisition of Different Genital Human Papillomavirus Types Katherine K. Thomas, 1 James P. Hughes, 1 Jane M. Kuypers, 2 Nancy B. Kiviat, 2 Shu-Kuang Lee, 1 Diane E. Adam,
More informationHuman Papillomaviruses and Cancer: Questions and Answers. Key Points. 1. What are human papillomaviruses, and how are they transmitted?
CANCER FACTS N a t i o n a l C a n c e r I n s t i t u t e N a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t e s o f H e a l t h D e p a r t m e n t o f H e a l t h a n d H u m a n S e r v i c e s Human Papillomaviruses
More informationValidation of an automated detection platform. for use with the Roche Linear Array HPV Genotyping Test ACCEPTED SEPEHR N.
JCM Accepts, published online ahead of print on September 00 J. Clin. Microbiol. doi:./jcm.0-0 Copyright 00, American Society for Microbiology and/or the Listed Authors/Institutions. All Rights Reserved.
More informationChapter 14: Role of Triage Testing in Cervical Cancer Screening
Chapter 14: Role of Triage Testing in Cervical Cancer Screening Diane Solomon The classic model of cervical cancer prevention primary screening with cytology, followed by diagnostic colposcopically directed
More informationHPV Genotyping: A New Dimension in Cervical Cancer Screening Tests
HPV Genotyping: A New Dimension in Cervical Cancer Screening Tests Lee P. Shulman MD The Anna Ross Lapham Professor in Obstetrics and Gynecology and Chief, Division of Clinical Genetics Feinberg School
More informationOriginal Articles. Do Infection Patterns of Human Papillomavirus Affect the Cytologic Detection of High-Grade Cervical Lesions on Papanicolaou Tests?
Original Articles Do Infection Patterns of Human Papillomavirus Affect the Cytologic Detection of High-Grade Cervical Lesions on Papanicolaou Tests? Siavash Azadmanesh Samimi, MD; Roxanne R. Mody, MD;
More informationMethods for HPV Detection: Polymerase Chain Reaction Assays
Monsonego J (ed): Emerging Issues on HPV Infections: From Science to Practice. Basel, Karger, 2006, pp 63 72 Methods for HPV Detection: Polymerase Chain Reaction Assays Suzanne M. Garland a,b, Sepehr Tabrizi
More informationBeyond Pap Morphological Triage: p16/ki67 Dual Staining
Moving away from Beyond Pap Morphological Triage: p16/ki67 Dual Staining Nicolas Wentzensen MD, PhD, MS Deputy Chief, Clinical Genetics Branch; Head, Clinical Epidemiology Unit National Cancer Institute
More informationAbstract. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2006, 16,
Int J Gynecol Cancer 2006, 16, 1801 1808 The distribution and differential risks of human papillomavirus genotypes in cervical preinvasive lesions: a Taiwan Cooperative Oncologic Group Study C.-A. CHEN*,
More informationPerformance of the Aptima High-Risk Human Papillomavirus mrna Assay in a Referral Population in Comparison with Hybrid Capture 2 and Cytology
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, Mar. 2011, p. 1071 1076 Vol. 49, No. 3 0095-1137/11/$12.00 doi:10.1128/jcm.01674-10 Copyright 2011, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved. Performance
More informationComparison of HPV test versus conventional and automation-assisted Pap screening as potential screening tools for preventing cervical cancer
BJOG: an International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology August 2004, Vol. 111, pp. 842 848 DOI: 1 0. 1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00210.x Comparison of HPV test versus conventional and automation-assisted
More informationClinical Policy Title: Fluorescence in situ hybridization for cervical cancer screening
Clinical Policy Title: Fluorescence in situ hybridization for cervical cancer screening Clinical Policy Number: 01.01.02 Effective Date: April 1, 2015 Initial Review Date: January 21, 2015 Most Recent
More informationNegative Colposcopic Biopsy After Positive Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) DNA Testing False-Positive HPV Results or False-Negative Histologic Findings?
Anatomic Pathology / FALSE-NEGATIVE HISTOLOGIC FINDINGS Negative Colposcopic Biopsy After Positive Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) DNA Testing False-Positive HPV Results or False-Negative Histologic Findings?
More informationThe society for lower genital tract disorders since 1964.
The society for lower genital tract disorders since 1964. Updated Consensus Guidelines for Managing Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Tests and Cancer Precursors American Society for and Cervical Pathology
More information(Pap) results, ie, abnormal squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS). According to
The Role of Human Papillomavirus Type 16/18 Genotyping in Predicting High-Grade Cervical/Vaginal Intraepithelial Neoplasm in Women With Mildly Abnormal Papanicolaou Results Ming Guo, MD 1 ; Yun Gong, MD
More informationEdinburgh Research Explorer
Edinburgh Research Explorer Persistent high risk HPV infection associated with development of cervical neoplasia in a prospective population study Citation for published version: Cuschieri, K, Cubie, H,
More informationDetection of Human Papillomavirus DNA in Cytologically Normal Women and Subsequent Cervical Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions
Detection of Human Papillomavirus DNA in Cytologically Normal Women and Subsequent Cervical Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions Kai-Li Liaw, Andrew G. Glass, M. Michele Manos, Catherine E. Greer, David R.
More informationDetecting High-Grade Cervical Disease on ASC-H Cytology. Role of BD ProEx C and Digene Hybrid Capture II HPV DNA Testing
Anatomic Pathology / BD ProEx C Use in ASC-H Cy t o l o g y Detecting High-Grade Cervical Disease on ASC-H Cytology Role of BD ProEx C and Digene Hybrid Capture II HPV DNA Testing Momin T. Siddiqui, MD,
More informationHuman Papillomavirus Testing Using Hybrid Capture II With SurePath Collection
468 Human Papillomavirus Testing Using Hybrid Capture II With SurePath Collection Initial Evaluation and Longitudinal Data Provide Clinical Validation for This Method Vincent Ko, MD Rosemary H. Tambouret,
More information!"#$%&'(#)*$+&,$-&.#,$/#0()1-$ ),1')$2(%&,2#,%$%(0'#$34567$
!"#$%&'(#)*$+&,$-&.#,$/#0()1-$ ),1')$2(%&,2#,%$%(0'#$34567$ Updated Consensus Guidelines for Managing Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Tests and Cancer Precursors American Society for and Cervical Pathology
More informationThe Absolute Risk of Cervical Abnormalities in High-risk Human Papillomavirus Positive, Cytologically Normal Women Over a 10-Year Period
Published Online First on October 23, 2006 as 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-1057 Research Article The Absolute Risk of Cervical Abnormalities in High-risk Human Papillomavirus Positive, Cytologically Normal
More informationNatural History of HPV Infections 15/06/2015. Squamous cell carcinoma Adenocarcinoma
14,670 5796 United States/ Canada 17,165 8124 Central America 48,328 21,402 South America 59,929 29,814 Europe 78,896 61,670 Africa 157,759 86,708 Southcentral Asia 61,132 31,314 Eastern Asia 42,538 22,594
More informationRisk : How does it define cervical cancer screening?
Risk : How does it define cervical cancer screening? Alan G. Waxman, MD, MPH Dept. of Obstetrics and Gynecology University of New Mexico The University of New Mexico Disclosures I have no commercial interests
More informationHPV Testing & Cervical Cancer Screening:
HPV Testing & Cervical Cancer Screening: Are they linked? By William Chapman, MD, FRCPC Screening for precursor lesions of cervical cancer by the Papanicolaou (Pap) smear has been one of the greatest success
More informationHPV test results and histological follow-up results of patients with LSIL Cervical Cytology from the Largest CAP-certified laboratory in China
2436 Ivyspring International Publisher Research Paper Journal of Cancer 2017; 8(13): 2436-2441. doi: 10.7150/jca.19421 HPV test results and histological follow-up results of patients with LSIL Cervical
More informationPAP SMEAR WITH ATYPICAL SQUAMOUS CELLS OF UNDETERMINED SIGNIFICANCE
Arch Iranian Med 2005; 8 (3): 192 196 Original Article PAP SMEAR WITH ATYPICAL SQUAMOUS CELLS OF UNDETERMINED SIGNIFICANCE Fatemeh Ghaemmaghami MD *, Fereshteh Ensani MD**, Nadereh Behtash MD* Ebrahim
More informationA systematic review of the role of human papilloma virus (HPV) testing within a cervical screening programme: summary and conclusions
British Journal of Cancer (2000) 83(5), 561 565 doi: 10.1054/ bjoc.2000.1375, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on A systematic review of the role of human papilloma virus (HPV) testing within
More informationCONCERN ABOUT THE LOW SENsitivity
ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION Evaluation of Human Papillomavirus Testing in Primary Screening for Cervical Abnormalities Comparison of Sensitivity, Specificity, and Frequency of Referral Shalini L. Kulasingam,
More informationSingle and multiple human papillomavirus infections in cervical abnormalities in Portuguese women
ORIGINAL ARTICLE VIROLOGY Single and multiple human papillomavirus infections in cervical abnormalities in Portuguese women A. Pista*, A. Oliveira*, N. Verdasca and F. Ribeiro National Laboratory of STI
More information9/18/2008. Cervical Cancer Prevention for Adolescent Populations Garcia. Faculty disclosure. Objectives. HPV Positivity by Age (UK)
Faculty disclosure Cervical Cancer Prevention for Francisco, MD, MPH Associate Professor Obstetrics & Gynecology Mexican American Studies Public Health Francisco, MD, MPH has no financial affiliations
More informationNew cervical cancer screening strategy: Combined Pap and HPV testing
REVIEW CME CREDIT XIAN WEN JIN, MD, PhD Department of General Internal Medicine, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation KRISTINE ZANOTTI, MD Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation
More informationCytology/Biopsy/Leep Gynecologic Correlation: Practical Considerations and Approaches.
Cytology/Biopsy/Leep Gynecologic Correlation: Practical Considerations and Approaches. Fadi W. Abdul-Karim MD MEd. Professor of Pathology. Vice chair for education. Robert Tomsich Pathology and Lab Med
More informationPopulation Effectiveness of HPV Vaccination on Cervical Cancer Prevention in the U.S. Project #3 Cosette M. Wheeler, Ph.D.
Population Effectiveness of HPV Vaccination on Cervical Cancer Prevention in the U.S. Project #3 Cosette M. Wheeler, Ph.D. - Leader Woman-based informatics program that captures all events and outcomes
More informationHPV Testing ASC-US. Jodie Zeke, a nurse practitioner, received initial CE2. 5. By Kim K. Choma, MSN, APN,C
CE2. 5 HOURS Continuing Education By Kim K. Choma, MSN, APN,C & ASC-US HPV Testing When the Pap result is atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance, testing for the human papillomavirus may
More informationEffect of human papillomavirus genotype on severity and prognosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia
Original Article Obstet Gynecol Sci 2014;57(1):37-43 http://dx.doi.org/10.5468/ogs.2014.57.1.37 pissn 2287-8572 eissn 2287-8580 Effect of human papillomavirus genotype on severity and prognosis of cervical
More informationDisclosures & images
Cervical Cancer Screening: New Approaches Levi S. Downs, Jr., MD Disclosures & images During the previous 12 months, I have been a consultant for and received honoraria from Merck. Images are attributed
More informationUtilization of the Biomarkers to Improve Cervical Cancer Screening
Utilization of the Biomarkers to Improve Cervical Cancer Screening Elena BERNAD Victor Babes University of Medicine and Pharmacy Timisoara, Romania Cervical cancer is at the second most common cancer in
More informationFREQUENCY AND RISK FACTORS OF CERVICAL Human papilloma virus INFECTION
Arch. Biol. Sci., Belgrade, 66 (4), 1653-1658, 2014 DOI:10.2298/ABS1404653M FREQUENCY AND RISK FACTORS OF CERVICAL Human papilloma virus INFECTION IN WOMEN IN MONTENEGRO GORDANA MIJOVIĆ 1, TATJANA JOVANOVIĆ
More informationSupplementary Appendix
Supplementary Appendix This appendix has been provided by the authors to give readers additional information about their work. Supplement to: Garland SM, Hernandez-Avila M, Wheeler CM, et al. Quadrivalent
More informationLessons From Cases of Screened Women Who Developed Cervical Carcinoma
Lessons From Cases of Screened Women Who Developed Cervical Carcinoma R. Marshall Austin MD,PhD Magee-Womens Hospital of University of Pittsburgh Medical Center raustin@magee.edu Why Focus Study On Cases
More informationSESSION J4. What's Next? Managing Abnormal PAPs in 2014
37th Annual Advanced Practice in Primary and Acute Care Conference: October 9-11, 2014 2:45 SESSION J4 What's Next? Managing Abnormal PAPs in 2014 Session Description: Linda Eckert, MD Review current guidelines
More informationHPV TESTING AND UNDERSTANDING VALIDITY: A tough row to hoe. Mark H. Stoler, MD ASC Companion Meeting USCAP 2008
OBJECTIVES: HPV TESTING AND UNDERSTANDING VALIDITY: A tough row to hoe Mark H. Stoler, MD ASC Companion Meeting USCAP 2008 1. Describe the concept of marker validation in the context of HPV tests. 2. Present
More informationHPV-DNA Test Kit in Cervical Scrapes or
Infectious Diseases in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2:126-129 (I 994) (C) 1994 Wiley-Liss, Inc. Detection of Human Papillomavirus DNA by AffiProbe HPV-DNA Test Kit in Cervical Scrapes or Biopsies-Histopathologic
More informationHuman Papillomavirus Prevalence and Type Distribution Among 968 Women in South Korea
JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION Vol. 21, No. 2, June 2016 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.15430/jcp.2016.21.2.104&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2016-6-30 http://dx.doi.org/10.15430/jcp.2016.21.2.104
More informationEarly Natural History of Incident, Type-Specific Human Papillomavirus Infections in Newly Sexually Active Young Women
Research Article Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention Early Natural History of Incident, Type-Specific Human Papillomavirus Infections in Newly Sexually Active Young Women Rachel L. Winer 1, James
More informationA Population-Based Study of Vaginal Human Papillomavirus Infection in Hysterectomized Women
MAJOR ARTICLE A Population-Based Study of Vaginal Human Papillomavirus Infection in Hysterectomized Women Philip E. Castle, 1 Mark Schiffman, 1 M. Concepcion Bratti, 6 Allan Hildesheim, 1 Rolando Herrero,
More informationMaking Sense of Cervical Cancer Screening
Making Sense of Cervical Cancer Screening New Guidelines published November 2012 Tammie Koehler DO, FACOG The incidence of cervical cancer in the US has decreased more than 50% in the past 30 years because
More informationHuman papillomavirus infections among Japanese
Human papillomavirus infections among Japanese Blackwell Publishing Asia women: age-related prevalence and type-specific risk for cervical cancer Mamiko Onuki, 1 Koji Matsumoto, 1,4 Toyomi Satoh, 1 Akinori
More informationShould Anal Pap Smears Be a Standard of Care in HIV Management?
Should Anal Pap Smears Be a Standard of Care in HIV Management? Gordon Dickinson, M.D., FACP Professor of Medicine and Chief Infectious Diseases, Miller School of Medicine Short Answer: NO But 15-20 HPV
More informationOpinion: Cervical cancer a vaccine preventable disease
Opinion: Cervical cancer a vaccine preventable disease Leon Snyman Principal specialist at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Gynaecological Oncology unit, University of Pretoria and Kalafong
More informationHPV-Negative Results in Women Developing Cervical Cancer: Implications for Cervical Screening Options
HPV-Negative Results in Women Developing Cervical Cancer: Implications for Cervical Screening Options R. Marshall Austin MD,PhD Magee-Womens Hospital of University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) (raustin@magee.edu)
More informationASCCP 2013 Guidelines for Managing Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Tests
ASCCP 2013 Guidelines for Managing Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Tests www.treatmentok.com Barbara S. Apgar, MD, MS Professor of Family Medicine University of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan Disclosures
More informationObjectives. I have no financial interests in any product I will discuss today. Cervical Cancer Screening Guidelines: Updates and Controversies
Cervical Cancer Screening Guidelines: Updates and Controversies I have no financial interests in any product I will discuss today. Jody Steinauer, MD, MAS University of California, San Francisco Objectives
More informationType-Specific Incidence and Persistence of HPV Infection among Young Women: A Prospective Study in North India
DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2012.13.3.1019 Type-Specific Incidence and Persistence of HPV Infection among Young Women in North India RESEARCH COMMUNICATION Type-Specific Incidence and Persistence
More informationWoo Dae Kang, Ho Sun Choi, Seok Mo Kim
Is vaccination with quadrivalent HPV vaccine after Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure effective in preventing recurrence in patients with High-grade Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia (CIN2-3)? Chonnam
More informationThe Korean Journal of Cytopathology 13(1): 14-20, 2002
13 1 The Korean Journal of Cytopathology 13(1): 14-20, 2002 : ASCUS 1941 Papanicolaou. The Bethesda System(TBS) 1) 1988, atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance(ascus), low-grade squamous
More informationHuman papillomavirus genotypes detected in clinician-collected and self-collected specimens from women living in the Mississippi Delta
Castle et al. BMC Infectious Diseases 2013, 13:5 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Human papillomavirus genotypes detected in clinician-collected and self-collected specimens from women living in the Mississippi
More informationFaculty Pap Smear Guidelines: Family Planning Update 2008 Part Two
Faculty Pap Smear Guidelines: Family Planning Update 2008 Part Two Seshu P. Sarma, MD, FAAP Emory University Regional Training Center Atlanta, Georgia Produced by the Alabama Department of Public Health
More informationHUMAN PAPILLOMAVIRUS INFECTION IN WOMEN INFECTED WITH THE HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS
HUMAN PAPILLOMAVIRUS INFECTION IN WOMEN INFECTED WITH THE HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS XIAO-WEI SUN, M.D., LOUISE KUHN, PH.D., TEDD V. ELLERBROCK, M.D., MARY ANN CHIASSON, DR.P.H., TIMOTHY J. BUSH, B.A.,
More informationRESEARCH ARTICLE. Abstract. Introduction
DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2015.16.16.6857 Cost-Effectiveness of Strategies for Detection CIN2+ in Women with ASC-US Pap Smears in Thailand RESEARCH ARTICLE Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Different
More informationPathology of the Cervix
Pathology of the Cervix Thomas C. Wright Pathology of the Cervix Topics to Consider Burden of cervical cancer 1 Invasive Cervical Cancer Cervical cancer in world Second cause of cancer death in women Leading
More informationColposcopy at a crossroads
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (2006) 195, 349 53 www.ajog.org CLINICAL OPINION Colposcopy at a crossroads Jose Jeronimo, MD, Mark Schiffman, MD, MPH Hormonal and Reproductive Epidemiology
More informationAppropriate Use of Cytology and HPV Testing in the New Cervical Cancer Screening Guidelines
Appropriate Use of Cytology and HPV Testing in the New Cervical Cancer Screening Guidelines Tim Kremer, MD Ralph Anderson, MD 1 Objectives Describe the natural history of HPV particularly as it relates
More informationEmerging Laboratory Diagnostic Options for Sexually-transmitted Infections
Emerging Laboratory Diagnostic Options for Sexually-transmitted Infections Erik Munson Wheaton Franciscan Laboratory Marquette University Milwaukee, Wisconsin 1 OBJECTIVES I. Appreciate the changing epidemiology
More informationCervical cancer screening in vaccinated population
Cervical cancer screening in vaccinated population Cytology and molecular testing Prof. Dr. Fuat Demirkıran I.U Cerrahpaşa School of Medicine. Department of OB&GYN Division Of Gynocol Oncol Izmir, November
More informationGSK Medication: Study No.: Title: Rationale: Phase: Study Period Study Design: Centres: Indication: Treatment: Objectives:
The study listed may include approved and non-approved uses, formulations or treatment regimens. The results reported in any single study may not reflect the overall results obtained on studies of a product.
More informationThe promise of HPV vaccines for Cervical (and other genital cancer) prevention
The promise of HPV vaccines for Cervical (and other genital cancer) prevention CONTROVERSIES IN OBSTETRICS GYNECOLOGY & INFERTILITY Barcelona March 27 F. Xavier Bosch Catalan Institute of Oncology CURRENT
More informationHuman papillomavirus load measured by Linear Array correlates with quantitative
JCM Accepts, published online ahead of print on 15 February 2012 J. Clin. Microbiol. doi:10.1128/jcm.06240-11 Copyright 2012, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved. Human papillomavirus
More informationAcceptable predictive accuracy of histopathology results by colposcopy done by Gynecology residents using Reid index
DOI 10.1007/s00404-012-2569-y GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY Acceptable predictive accuracy of histopathology results by colposcopy done by Gynecology residents using Reid index Hadi Shojaei Fariba Yarandi Leila
More informationScreening for Cervical Cancer: Demystifying the Guidelines DR. NEERJA SHARMA
Screening for Cervical Cancer: Demystifying the Guidelines DR. NEERJA SHARMA Cancer Care Ontario Cervical Cancer Screening Goals Increase patient participation in cervical screening Increase primary care
More informationCervical FISH Testing for Triage and Support of Challenging Diagnoses: A Case Study of 2 Patients
Cervical FISH Testing for Triage and Support of Challenging Diagnoses: A Case Study of 2 Patients Richard Hopley, MD, Alexandra Gillespie, MD* Laboratory Medicine 47:1:52-56 CLINICAL HISTORY Patients:
More information