The data from the ATHENA study and others bring this expectation and the appropriateness of the guidelines for women aged into question.

Similar documents
HPV Genotyping: A New Dimension in Cervical Cancer Screening Tests

The devil is in the details

HPV Primary Screening Update. Prof. Vu Ba Quyet Director of NO&G hospital

Evolving Cervical Cancer Screening Options in Clinical Practice

Data spark new directions in cervical cancer

Evidence-based treatment of a positive HPV DNA test. Th. Agorastos Prof. of Obstetrics & Gynaecology Aristotle University Thessaloniki/GR

Update on HPV Testing. Robert Schlaberg, M.D., Dr. med., M.P.H. Assistant Professor, University of Utah Medical Director, ARUP Laboratories

HPV Primary Screening in the United States

Clinical 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

HUMAN PAPILLOMAVIRUS TESTING

Molecular Triage: Partial and Extended Genotyping and More!

Cervical cancer prevention: Advances in primary screening and triage system

SESSION J4. What's Next? Managing Abnormal PAPs in 2014

Goals. In the News. Primary HPV Screening 3/9/2015. Your PAP and HPV Update Primary HPV Testing- Screening Intervals- HPV Vaccine Updates-

News. Laboratory NEW GUIDELINES DEMONSTRATE GREATER ROLE FOR HPV TESTING IN CERVICAL CANCER SCREENING TIMOTHY UPHOFF, PHD, DABMG, MLS (ASCP) CM

The clearest path to the most meaningful results. The cobas HPV Test delivers clinical value with workflow efficiencies every step of the way

Detect Cervical Cancer ReachMD Page 1 of 7

HPV Molecular Diagnostics and Cervical Cytology. Philip E. Castle, PhD, MPH American Society for Clinical Pathology (ASCP) March 15, 2012

Risk : How does it define cervical cancer screening?

1/12/2016. I do not engage in any lucrative deals that require disclosure.

Natural History of HPV Infections 15/06/2015. Squamous cell carcinoma Adenocarcinoma

I have no financial interests in any product I will discuss today.

P16 et Ki67 Biomarkers: new tool for risk management and low grade intraepithelial lesions (LGSIL): be ready for the future.

Quarterly laboratory and pathology update from Legacy Laboratory Services in collaboration with Cascade Pathology

Screening for Cervical Cancer: Demystifying the Guidelines DR. NEERJA SHARMA

Appropriate Use of Cytology and HPV Testing in the New Cervical Cancer Screening Guidelines

These comments are an attempt to summarise the discussions at the manuscript meeting. They are not an exact transcript.

Cervical Cancer Screening for the Primary Care Physician for Average Risk Individuals Clinical Practice Guidelines. June 2013

Comparing Liquid-Based Cytology Methods in the Detection of Cervical Cancer: Perspectives from Dr. Ming Guo

ASCCP 2013 Guidelines for Managing Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Tests

32 OBG Management May 2015 Vol. 27 No. 5 obgmanagement.com

Emerging Challenges in Primary Care. Cervical Cancer Screening: Appropriate Use of Pap & HPV Testing

Cervical Cancer 4/27/2016

I have no financial interests in any product I will discuss today.

Comparison of an optoelectronic scan of the cervix, cervical cytology and HPV genotyping for CIN screening

An Update on Cervical Cancer Screening Recommendations and on the DOH BCC Program

Pap Smears Pelvic Examinations Well Woman Examinations. When should you have them performed???

HPV-Negative Results in Women Developing Cervical Cancer: Implications for Cervical Screening Options

Focus. International #52. HPV infection in High-risk HPV and cervical cancer. HPV: Clinical aspects. Natural history of HPV infection

No Disclosures. Updated Guidelines for Cervical Cancer Screening and Prevention Management of Abnormal Results. Objectives 5/9/2016

9/18/2008. Cervical Cancer Prevention for Adolescent Populations Garcia. Faculty disclosure. Objectives. HPV Positivity by Age (UK)

Comparing Liquid-Based Cytology Methods in the Detection of Cervical Cancer: Perspectives from Dr. Edward Wilkinson

I have no financial interests in any product I will discuss today.

Dysplasia: layer of the cervical CIN. Intraepithelial Neoplasia. p16 immunostaining. 1, Cervical. Higher-risk, requires CIN.

Over-diagnoses in Cytopathology: Is histology the gold standard?

Cervical Cancer Screening. David Quinlan December 2013

Pushing the Boundaries of the Lab Diagnosis in Asia

October 9, Dear Ms. Chowdhury:

Cervical Cancer Screening

9/19/17. Emerging Challenges in Primary Care: Cervical Cancer Screening: Appropriate Use of Pap & HPV Testing. Faculty.

Cervical Cancer Prevention in the 21 st Century Changing Paradigms

Biomarkers and HPV testing: The future of cervical screening

He Said, She Said: HPV and the FDA. Audrey P Garrett, MD, MPH June 6, 2014

The HPV Data Is In What Do the Newest Updates in Screening Mean For Your Patients?

Update on Cervical Cancer Screening. Rahmouna Farez M.D. Assistant Professor, Medical College of Wisconsin 5/2/2014

Update on Cervical Cancer Screening

No HPV High Risk Screening with Genotyping. CPT Code: If Result is NOT DETECTED (x3) If Results is DETECTED (Genotype reported)

Disclosures. Goal of Cervical Cancer Screening. Update on Cervical Cancer Screening: Appropriate Use of Pap and HPV Testing

Quantitative Optical Spectroscopy of the Uterine Cervix: A cost effective way to detect and manage cervical disease

Eradicating Mortality from Cervical Cancer

Screening for Cervical Cancer. Grand Rounds 1/16/13 Meggan Linck

Focus. A case. I have no conflicts of interest. HPV Vaccination: Science and Practice. Collaborative effort with Karen Smith-McCune, MD, PhD 2/19/2010

Why HPV Screening Which Problems What Methods

RESEARCH ARTICLE. Abstract. Introduction

Genotype Testing on Current Cervical Cancer Algorithms

Cervical cancer screening in vaccinated population

Samuel B. Wolf, D.O., F.A.C.O.G. Emerald Coast Obstetrics and Gynecology Panama City Florida

Disclosures & images

The new Cervical Screening Test for Australian women: Louise Farrell

Objectives. I have no financial interests in any product I will discuss today. Cervical Cancer Screening Guidelines: Updates and Controversies

Human Papillomaviruses: Biology and Laboratory Testing

L impact attendu de la vaccination contre le virus du papillome humain sur les pratiques de dépistage du cancer du col uterin

Perfecting the Prevention of Cervical cancer. I have no financial interests in any product I will discuss today. Preview

Objectives. Background. Background. Background. Background 9/26/16. Update on Cervical and HPV Screening Guidelines: To pap or not to pap?

Abnormal Spectroscopy Scans May Presage Persistent or Progressive Cervical Dysplasia

Utilization of the Biomarkers to Improve Cervical Cancer Screening

Making Sense of Cervical Cancer Screening

Cervical Screening for Dysplasia and Cancer in Patients with HIV

Safe, Confident, QIAsure


Epigenetic markers on the horizon: how to triage hrhpv positive women

Implementation of a Research-Robust Colposcopy Management Program within the Electronic Medical Record System

OPPORTUNISTIC HPV VACCINATION: AN EXPANDED VISION

What is HPV and why is it so important?

Lessons From Cases of Screened Women Who Developed Cervical Carcinoma

I have no financial interests in any product I will discuss today.

Case Based Problems. Recommended Guidelines. Workshop: Case Management of Abnormal Pap Smears and Colposcopies. Disclosure

Biomed Environ Sci, 2015; 28(1): 80-84

Cytology/Biopsy/Leep Gynecologic Correlation: Practical Considerations and Approaches.

CINtec PLUS and the Pap smear: a co-testing alternative

Treatment of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia. Case. How would you manage this woman?

The Future of Cervical Screening. Jenny Ross

Original Policy Date

Since the 1960s, colposcopy of the cervix with

Performance of the Aptima High-Risk Human Papillomavirus mrna Assay in a Referral Population in Comparison with Hybrid Capture 2 and Cytology

Comparison of HPV test versus conventional and automation-assisted Pap screening as potential screening tools for preventing cervical cancer

ASCCP Guideline Changes and Management of the Abnormal Pap Test Accurately Targeting Intervention

The new European (and Italian) guidelines for cervical screening will recommend PAP from 25 to 34 HPV (+ triage) from 35 to 64

Disclosures Teresa M Darragh, MD

WELL WOMAN CLINIC-SCREENING PROGRAM FOR CERVICAL CARCINOMAS G. J. Vani Padmaja 1

Transcription:

New data support HPV testing beginning at age 25 By Hope Cottrill, M.D. Recent findings from the ATHENA (Addressing the Need for Advanced HPV Diagnostics) study of cervical cancer screening revealed surprising statistics regarding women in the 25-29 age group: Of all the high-grade cervical disease (CIN3 or greater) found in the study, 28% was found in women 25-29. 1 More CIN3 or greater was found in women 25-29 than in all women 40 and older over 3 years. 1 As a clinician, I see these findings as reason for concern and for rethinking how we screen for cervical cancer, particularly in women 25-29 years of age. The background The causative role of HPV (Human Papillomavirus) in cervical cancer has been clearly established, with studies linking the virus to approximately 99% of cases. 2 While approximately 80 % of women in the U.S. will have HPV at some point in their lives, 3 the majority will clear it without progression to cervical disease. The progression from cervical disease to cancer tends to happen slowly, and there has been an assumption in the U.S. clinical community that younger women in particular tend to clear the disease before it advances to precancerous lesions and then to invasive cancer. The expectation has been that most high-grade cervical disease will be in women 30 and older. This belief is reflected in the current screening guidelines for cervical cancer. Most U.S. guidelines recommend co-testing with a high-risk HPV test and Pap cytology for women 30-65, but do not make the same recommendation for women 25-29. The guidelines for women in this 25-29 age group recommend cytology alone every three years as primary screening. The data from the ATHENA study and others bring this expectation and the appropriateness of the guidelines for women aged 25-29 into question. The three-year ATHENA trial enrolled more than 47,000 women and was the largest U.S. registrational study ever conducted for cervical cancer screening. It confirmed that HPV DNA testing has a much greater 1/6

negative predictive value (NPV) than Pap cytology and that genotyping for HPV 16 and HPV 18, the highest-risk types, in particular plays an important role in patient risk assessment. As noted above, the study also provided insight into the age-related incidence of cervical disease, showing more high-grade cervical disease (CIN3 or greater) in women 25-29 than in all women 40 and older. 4 With the study methodology carefully designed to ensure that the age representation in the population accurately reflected U.S. demographics, this finding is cause for concern about the effectiveness of our current screening methods and guidelines regarding women 25-29. eening.pptx, OSCAR 60164 The ATHENA study is not the only source that supports this finding. 5,6 Corroborating data from the National Cancer Institute s SEER Tumor Registry show a sharp rise in the incidence of invasive cervical cancer between the ages of 25 and 34 years. 7 2/6

The rationale for HPV primary screening starting at 25 The findings in these studies and others about the incidence of cervical disease in the 25-29 age group and the higher sensitivity (especially better NPV) of HPV DNA testing compared to Pap were two key factors that led to the historic FDA approval in April 2014 of a DNA-based HPV test (with HPV 16/18 genotyping) for first-line primary screening for cervical cancer in women 25 and older. Another factor influencing the FDA decision to approve 25 as the lower end of the age range for using the HPV test for primary screening was the poor sensitivity and negative predictive value of Pap cytology, especially in the 25-29 age group. In the ATHENA study, 57.3% of women 25-29 years of age with CIN3 or greater, a stage unlikely to regress, had a negative cytology (NILM). 1 Although cytology offers high specificity, its lack of sensitivity diminishes its ability to perform well for primary screening compared to HPV testing. Pap tests miss 50% of precancer at each round of screening, 8 6, 8, 9, requiring frequent repeats. HPV testing offers far superior sensitivity: typically greater than 90%. Disease screening protocols usually enlist the most sensitive test for first-line screening and a more specific test for triage of abnormal results. The question for clinicians becomes, if cytology is not producing reliable results, how do we screen to accurately detect those who are at risk for developing high-grade cervical disease (CIN3 and greater), particularly in the 25-29 age group? In contrast to the low NPV of cytology, the ATHENA data revealed that a woman with a negative HPV test result alone has less than half the risk of developing CIN3 within 3 years than a woman with a negative cytology result alone. Addressing the concern about overcalling disease The FDA approval for HPV-based primary screening beginning at age 25 has raised questions about the risk of referring HPV-positive women to further testing or treatment when in fact they may not need it because 3/6

they are younger and are likely to clear the virus on their own. This is where HPV genotyping and the streamlined primary screening algorithm approved by the FDA are pivotal. Compared to the Pap test, which can be inconclusive or interpreted differently by different pathologists, HPV testing gives clear results: positive, negative or invalid. Yet not all HPV types are equal in terms of the risk associated with the development of cervical cancer. Even among the 14 genotypes commonly identified as high-risk, two have a much higher risk of advancing to cervical disease and cancer: HPV 16 and HPV 18. These two alone are responsible for nearly 70% of cervical cancer cases. So identifying HPV genotypes in a screening test and particularly identifying HPV 16 and HPV 18 individually enables clinicians to stratify risk, identifying someone who may be at risk for cervical dysplasia and cervical cancer before she has the disease, and better managing those who are at risk and reassuring those who are not. A balanced algorithm The primary screening algorithm for the HPV test approved by the FDA establishes a different triage pathway for patients depending on their specific HPV test results. If HPV negative, they return to customary follow-up (e.g., another HPV test in three years); if positive for one of 12 high-risk HPV types (provided as a pooled result), they are reflexed to cytology; if positive for HPV 16 and/or 18, they are referred to colposcopy. This algorithm reconciles cervical cancer screening with other established screening and management protocols by placing the most sensitive test (HPV) first, followed by the most specific test (Pap). By limiting direct referral to colposcopy to only those patients who are positive for the highest-risk genotypes, the algorithm helps prevent unnecessary referrals and over-treatment of patients. 4/6

Changing practices and outcomes Change in clinical practice tends to come slowly, but it does come, especially as cervical cancer screening guidelines are updated to address new data. As a clinician, I believe that HPV testing with genotyping, with reflex to cytology, should become the preferred screening method starting at age 25, which will allow us to make a difference in the current level of high-risk cancer, particularly in the 25-29 age group. As physicians begin to adopt more effective screening protocols for cervical cancer and introduce HPV testing at age 25, we have the opportunity to more clearly identify the risk of cervical disease, stratify and modify our patient management accordingly, and contribute significantly to reducing the overall incidence of cervical cancer, changing the lives of women as we do. Hope Cottrill is a gynecologic oncologist at Baptist Physicians in Lexington, Kentucky, and a diplomate of the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology. References 1 cobas HPV Test [package insert]. Indianapolis, IN: Roche Diagnostics Corp; 2014. 5/6

2 Longworth S and Laimins L. Pathogenesis of human papillomaviruses in differentiating epithelia. Microbio Mol Biol Rev. Jun 2004; 68(2): 362-372. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc419925/. Accessed November 5, 2014. 3 Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention. http://ww.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/phv.html. Accessed November 5, 2014. 4 Wright et al. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Jan; 206(1): 46.e1-46.e11. 5 Martin-Hirsch et al. BJOG. 2007 Apr;114(4):408-15. 6 Katki et al. Lancet Oncol. 2011 Jul;12(7):663-72. 7 Cancer of the Cervi Uteri (Invasive). SEER incidence and US death rates, age-adjusted and age-specific rates, by race. Table 5.7. SEER Web site. http://www.seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2010/results_single/sect_05_table.07.pdf. Accessed April 10, 2014. 8 Cuzick J, et al. Int J Cancer 2006; 119:1095-1101. 9 Whitlock EP, et al. Liquid-based cytology and HPV screening for cervical cancer: A systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Ann Intern Med. 2011; 155:687-97. Sidebar FDA approves first HPV test for primary screening for cervical cancer In April 2014, the FDA approved the Roche cobas HPV Test for first-line primary screening for cervical cancer in women 25 and older. The test provides individual genotyping results for HPV 16 and 18 while simultaneously reporting the 12 other high-risk HPV types as a pooled result. The cobas HPV Test is now approved for primary screening, co-testing (with Pap) for women 30 and older, and reflex testing after Pap for ASC-US results in women 21 and older. 1 6/6