Determinants of Viral Oncogene E6-E7 mRNA Overexpression in a Population-Based Large Sample of Women Infected by High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Types.

Cervical cancer screening by human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing with cytology triage is more effective than cytology testing. Compared to cytology, the HPV DNA test's higher sensitivity, which allows better protection with longer intervals, makes it necessary to triage the women with a positive result to compensate its lower specificity. We are conducting a large randomized clinical trial (New Technologies for Cervical Cancer 2 [NTCC2]) within organized population-based screening programs in Italy using HPV DNA as the primary screening test to evaluate, by the Aptima HPV assay (Hologic), the use of HPV E6-E7 mRNA in a triage test in comparison to cytology. By the end of June 2016, data were available for 35,877 of 38,535 enrolled women, 2,651 (7.4%) of whom were HPV DNA positive. Among the samples obtained, 2,453 samples were tested also by Aptima, and 1,649 (67.2%) gave a positive result. The proportion of mRNA positivity was slightly higher among samples tested for HPV DNA by the Cobas 4800 HPV assay (Roche) than by the Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) assay (Qiagen). In our setting, the observed E6-E7 mRNA positivity rate, if used as a triage test, would bring a rate of immediate referral to colposcopy of about 4 to 5%. This value is higher than that observed with cytology triage for both immediate and delayed referrals to colposcopy. By showing only a very high sensitivity and thus allowing a longer interval for HPV DNA-positive/HPV mRNA-negative women, a triage by this test might be more efficient than by cytology.

Interobserver reproducibility of cytologic p16INK4a /Ki-67 dual immunostaining in human papillomavirus-positive women.

BACKGROUND: The accumulation of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (p16ink4a ) protein in a cell is associated with neoplastic progression in precancerous cervical lesions. Dual staining for p16ink4a and Ki-67 has been proposed as a triage test in cervical cancer screening for women who test positive for human papillomavirus DNA. In this study, interobserver reproducibility of the interpretation of this test was assessed. METHODS: Forty-two immunostained, liquid-based cytology slides were divided into 2 sets and were interpreted by 17 to 21 readers from 9 different laboratories, yielding a total of 816 reports. Immunostaining results were classified as positive, negative, inconclusive, or inadequate. After evaluation of the first set of slides and before circulation of the second set, the results were discussed in a plenary meeting. The 10 slides with the most discordant results were evaluated again by selected expert cytopathologists. RESULTS: The overall κ value was 0.612 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.523-0.701), it was higher for the positive and negative categories (κ = 0.692 and κ = 0.641, respectively), and it was almost null for the inconclusive category (κ = 0.058). Considering only readers from laboratories with documented experience, the κ value was higher (κ = 0.747; 95% CI, 0.643-0.839) compared with nonexperienced centers (κ = 0.498; 95% CI, 0.388-0.616). The results were similar in both sets of slides (κ = 0.505 [95% CI, 0.358-0.642] and κ = 0.521 [95% CI, 0.240-0.698] for the first and second sets, respectively). Reinterpretation of the slides with the most discordant results did not provide any improvement (first evaluation, κ = 0.616 [95% CI, 0.384-0.866]; second evaluation, κ = 0.403 [95% CI, 0.182-0.643]). CONCLUSIONS: Dual staining for p16 ink4a and Ki-67 demonstrated good reproducibility, confirming its robustness, which is a necessary prerequisite for its adoption as a triage test in cervical cancer screening programs that use human papillomavirus DNA as a primary test. Cancer Cytopathol 2017;125:212-220. © 2016 American Cancer Society.