Impact of HPV testing in opportunistic cervical screening: Support for primary HPV screening in the United States.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical screening increases diagnosis of precancer and reduces the incidence of cervical cancer more than cytology alone. However, real-world evidence from diverse practice settings is lacking for the United States (U.S.) to support clinician adoption of primary HPV screening. Using a population-based registry, which captures all cervical cytology (with or without HPV testing) and all cervical biopsies, we conducted a real-world evidence study of screening in women aged 30 to 64 years across the entire state of New Mexico. Negative cytology was used to distinguish cotests from reflex HPV tests. A total of 264 198 cervical screening tests (with exclusions based on clinical history) were recorded as the first screening test between 2014 and 2017. Diagnoses of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grades 2 or 3 or greater (CIN2+, CIN3+) from 2014 to 2019 were the main outcomes. Of cytology-negative screens, 165 595 (67.1%) were cotests and 4.8% of these led to biopsy within 2 years vs 3.2% in the cytology-only group. Among cytology-negative, HPV tested women, 347 of 398 (87.2%) CIN2+ cases were diagnosed in HPV-positive women, as were 147 of 164 (89.6%) CIN3+ cases. Only 29/921 (3.2%) CIN3+ and 67/1964 (3.4%) CIN2+ cases were diagnosed in HPV-negative, cytology-positive women with biopsies. Under U.S. opportunistic screening, across a diversity of health care delivery practices, and in a population suffering multiple disparities, we show adding HPV testing to cytology substantially increased the yield of CIN2+ and CIN3+. CIN3+ was rarely diagnosed in HPV-negative women with abnormal cytology, supporting U.S. primary HPV-only screening.

DNA methylation testing with S5 for triage of high-risk HPV positive women.

Methylation of host and viral genes is promising for triage of women with high-risk human papillomavirus infections (hrHPV). Using a population-based sample of hrHPV positive women with cervical biopsies within 12 months after cervical screening, the clinical value of the S5 methylation classifier (S5), HPV genotyping and cytology were compared as potential triage tests, for outcomes of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 3 or greater (CIN3+), CIN2+ and CIN2, and the area under the curve (AUC) calculated. S5 scores increased with histopathology severity (Ptrend < .001). For CIN3+, the AUC was 0.780 suggesting S5 provides good discrimination between

Burden of Mycoplasma genitalium and Bacterial Coinfections in a Population-Based Sample in New Mexico.

ABSTRACT: In this population-based US study, the overall prevalence of Mycoplasma genitalium was 1.95% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.62%-2.34%), declining from 6.12% (95% CI, 4.72%-7.92%) in women aged 21 to 24 years to 0.48% (95% CI, 0.25%-0.94%) in women aged 40 to 64 years. The prevalence of coinfections with Chlamydia trachomatis and Trichomonas vaginalis was low.

Uptake of co-testing with HPV and cytology for cervical screening: A population-based evaluation in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical screening has been shown to increase the yield of precancerous disease and reduce the incidence of cervical cancer more than cytology alone. Here we document the state-wide uptake of co-testing with HPV and cytology in women aged 30-64 years as recommended by national and international bodies. METHODS: Registry-based study of all screening cytology and HPV tests in New Mexico from 2008 to 2019 among women aged 21-64 years, with a focus on cytology negative tests to distinguish co-testing from reflex HPV testing to triage equivocal or mildly abnormal cytology. RESULTS: A total of 1,704,055 cervical screening tests from 681,440 women aged 21-64 years in the state of New Mexico were identified. The proportion of screening tests which were co-tests rose from 5.6% in 2008 to 84.3% in 2019 among women aged 30-64 years with a marked change from the near exclusive use of the Hybrid Capture II HPV test, (a signal amplified test method) to the use of target amplified HPV tests. The largest increases were seen between 2013 and 2015, reflecting the introduction and adoption of new clinical guidelines. Increases in co-testing were also seen in younger women. CONCLUSIONS: Co-testing is now well established in women aged 30-64 years, but smaller increases have also been seen at younger ages, although this is not currently recommended. The impact of co-testing on cervical disease outcomes and number of colposcopies and biopsies in routine population settings remain important, especially in young women.

Clinical follow-up practices after cervical cancer screening by co-testing: A population-based study of adherence to U.S. guideline recommendations.

Failure to follow-up women after abnormal cervical screening could lead to cervical cancers, yet little is known about adherence to recommended follow-up after abnormal co-testing [cytology and high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing]. We documented clinical management following cervical screening by co-testing in a diverse population-based setting. A statewide surveillance program for cervical screening, diagnosis, and treatment was used to investigate all cytology, hrHPV and biopsy reports in the state of New Mexico from January 2015 through August 2019. Guideline-adherent follow-up after co-testing required 1) biopsy within 6 months for low-grade cytology if positive for hrHPV, for high-grade cytology irrespective of hrHPV, and for HPV 16/18 positive results irrespective of cytology and; 2) repeat co-testing within 18 months if cytology was negative and hrHPV test was positive (excluding types 16/18). Screening co-tests (2015-2017) for 164,522 women were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Kaplan Meier curves, and pairwise comparisons between groups. Guideline adherence was highest when both cytology and hrHPV tests were abnormal, ranging from 61.7% to 80.3%. Guideline-adherent follow-up was lower for discordant results. Women with high-grade cytology were less likely to receive a timely biopsy when hrHPV-testing was negative (48.1%) versus positive (83.3%) (p < 0.001). Only 47.9% of women received biopsies following detection of HPV16/18 with normal cytology, and 30.8% received no follow-up within 18-months. Among women with hrHPV-positive normal cytology without evidence of HPV 16/18 infection, 51% received no follow-up within 18 months. Provider education and creation of robust recall systems may help ensure appropriate follow-up of abnormal screening results.

A cross-sectional evaluation of the impact of Class II Division 1 malocclusion in treated and untreated adolescents on oral health-related quality of life.

INTRODUCTION: The relationship between malocclusion, orthodontic treatment, and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQOL) is complicated, with some traits, such as increased overjet, having a potentially greater adverse effect on an adolescent's OHRQOL. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment on OHRQOL in adolescents presenting with Class II Division 1 malocclusion and explore the relationship between OHRQOL using a condition-specific and generic instrument and occlusal outcome. METHODS: Two groups of adolescents were recruited from a United Kingdom university hospital: a pretreatment group of adolescents with Class II Division 1 malocclusion and a treated (posttreatment) group whose Class II Division 1 malocclusion had been corrected. Self-reported OHRQOL was assessed using the malocclusion impact questionnaire (MIQ) and the short form of Child Oral Health Impact Profile questionnaires. Occlusion severity and outcome were assessed using Peer Assessment Rating scores. RESULTS: A total of 241 participants (106 male; 135 female) were recruited. MIQ scores differed significantly between the pretreatment and posttreatment groups, with scores being 11.35 times lower posttreatment than pretreatment, after adjusting for age and sex (95% confidence interval, -17.28 to -5.42; P <0.001). Females had higher total MIQ scores by 2.6 (95% confidence interval, 0.38 to 4.82), which was statistically significant (P = 0.022). There was a moderate correlation between MIQ and Peer Assessment Rating scores, but this relationship strengthened when omitting the global MIQ questions (Spearman's correlation coefficient, 0.59). CONCLUSIONS: Increased overjet was associated with impaired OHRQOL using a condition-specific measure. A deeper understanding of associations between malocclusion, orthodontic treatment, and OHRQOL would benefit from longitudinal evaluation.

Combined use of cytology, p16 immunostaining and genotyping for triage of women positive for high-risk human papillomavirus at primary screening.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is very sensitive for primary cervical screening but has low specificity. Triage tests that improve specificity but maintain high sensitivity are needed. Women enrolled in the experimental arm of Phase 2 of the New Technologies for Cervical Cancer randomized controlled cervical screening trial were tested for high-risk HPV (hrHPV) and referred to colposcopy if positive. hrHPV-positive women also had HPV genotyping (by polymerase chain reaction with GP5+/GP6+ primers and reverse line blotting), immunostaining for p16 overexpression and cytology. We computed sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) for different combinations of tests and determined potential hierarchical ordering of triage tests. A number of 1,091 HPV-positive women had valid tests for cytology, p16 and genotyping. Ninety-two of them had cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN2+) histology and 40 of them had CIN grade 3+ (CIN3+) histology. The PPV for CIN2+ was >10% in hrHPV-positive women with positive high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (61.3%), positive low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL+) (18.3%) and positive atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (14.8%) cytology, p16 positive (16.7%) and, hierarchically, for infections by HPV33, 16, 35, 59, 31 and 52 (in decreasing order). Referral of women positive for either p16 or LSIL+ cytology had 97.8% sensitivity for CIN2+ and women negative for both of these had a 3-year CIN3+ risk of 0.2%. Similar results were seen for women being either p16 or HPV16/33 positive. hrHPV-positive women who were negative for p16 and cytology (LSIL threshold) had a very low CIN3+ rate in the following 3 years. Recalling them after that interval and referring those positive for either test to immediate colposcopy seem to be an efficient triage strategy. The same applies to p16 and HPV16.

Human papilloma virus genotyping for the cross-sectional and longitudinal probability of developing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more.

Human papilloma virus (HPV) testing is more sensitive but less specific than cytology. We evaluated stand-alone genotyping as a possible triage method. During a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing HPV testing to conventional cytology, HPV-positive women were referred to colposcopy and followed up if no high-grade lesion was detected. HPV-positive samples were genotyped by GP5+/GP6+ primed polymerase chain reaction followed by reverse line blot. Genotypes were hierarchically ordered by positive predictive value (PPV) for CIN grade 2 or more (CIN2+), and grouped by cluster analysis into three groups (A, B and C in decreasing order). Receiver operating characteristic curves were computed. Among 2,255 HPV-positive women with genotyping, 239 CIN2+ (including 113 CIN3+) were detected at baseline or during a 3-year follow-up. HPV33 had the highest PPV with CIN2+ and CIN3+ as the endpoint and when considering lesions detected at baseline or also during follow-up. HPV16 and HPV35 were the second and third, respectively. Cross-sectional sensitivity for CIN2+ at baseline was 67.3% (95% CI 59.7-74.2), 91.8% (95% CI 86.6-95.5) and 94.7% (95% CI 90.2-97.6), respectively, when considering as "positive" any of the HPV types in group A (33, 16 and 35), A or B (31, 52, 18, 59 and 58) and A or B or C (39, 51, 56, 45 and 68). The corresponding cross-sectional PPVs for CIN2+ were 15.8% 95% (CI 13.2-18.7), 12.0% (95% CI 10.3-13.9) and 9.6% (95% CI 8.2-11.1), respectively. HPV33, 16 and 35 confer a high probability of CIN2+ but this rapidly decreases when adding other genotypes.

Relationships of p16 Immunohistochemistry and Other Biomarkers With Diagnoses of Cervical Abnormalities: Implications for LAST Terminology.

CONTEXT.­: Lower Anogenital Squamous Terminology (LAST) standardization recommended p16INK4a immunohistochemistry (p16 IHC) for biopsies diagnosed morphologically as cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 (CIN2) to classify them as low-grade or high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSILs). OBJECTIVE.­: To describe the relationships of p16 IHC and other biomarkers associated with cervical cancer risk with biopsy diagnoses. DESIGN.­: A statewide, stratified sample of cervical biopsies diagnosed by community pathologists (CPs), including 1512 CIN2, underwent a consensus, expert pathologist panel (EP) review (without p16 IHC results), p16 IHC interpretation by a third pathology group, and human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping, results of which were grouped hierarchically according to cancer risk. Antecedent cytologic interpretations were also available. RESULTS.­: Biopsies were more likely to test p16 IHC positive with increasing severity of CP diagnoses, overall (Ptrend ≤ .001) and within each HPV risk group (Ptrend ≤ .001 except for low-risk HPV [Ptrend < .010]). All abnormal grades of CP-diagnosed biopsies were more likely to test p16 IHC positive with a higher HPV risk group (Ptrend < .001), and testing p16 IHC positive was associated with higher HPV risk group than testing p16 IHC negative for each grade of CP-diagnosed biopsies (P < .001). p16 IHC-positive, CP-diagnosed CIN2 biopsies were less likely than CP-diagnosed CIN3 biopsies to test HPV16 positive, have an antecedent HSIL+ cytology, or to be diagnosed as CIN3+ by the EP (P < .001 for all). p16 IHC-positive, CP-diagnosed CIN1 biopsies had lower HPV risk groups than p16 IHC-negative, CP-diagnosed CIN2 biopsies (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS.­: p16 IHC-positive, CP-diagnosed CIN2 appears to be lower cancer risk than CP-diagnosed CIN3. LAST classification of "HSIL" diagnosis, which includes p16 IHC-positive CIN2, should annotate the morphologic diagnosis (CIN2 or CIN3) to inform all management decisions, which is especially important for young (<30 years) women diagnosed with CIN2 for whom surveillance rather than treatment is recommended.

A Pooled Analysis to Compare the Clinical Characteristics of Human Papillomavirus-positive and -Negative Cervical Precancers.

Given that high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) is the necessary cause of virtually all cervical cancer, the clinical meaning of HPV-negative cervical precancer is unknown. We, therefore, conducted a literature search in Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed Central, and Google Scholar to identify English-language studies in which (i) HPV-negative and -positive, histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe diagnoses (CIN2+) were detected and (ii) summarized statistics or deidentified individual data were available to summarize proportions of biomarkers indicating risk of cancer. Nineteen studies including 3,089 (91.0%) HPV-positive and 307 (9.0%) HPV-negative CIN2+ were analyzed. HPV-positive CIN2+ (vs. HPV-negative CIN2+) was more likely to test positive for biomarkers linked to cancer risk: a study diagnosis of CIN3+ (vs. CIN2; 18 studies; 0.56 vs. 0.24; P < 0.001) preceding high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion cytology (15 studies; 0.54 vs. 0.10; P < 0.001); and high-grade colposcopic impression (13 studies; 0.30 vs. 0.18; P = 0.03). HPV-negative CIN2+ was more likely to test positive for low-risk HPV genotypes than HPV-positive CIN2+ (P < 0.001). HPV-negative CIN2+ appears to have lower cancer risk than HPV-positive CIN2+. Clinical studies of human high-risk HPV testing for screening to prevent cervical cancer may refer samples of HPV test-negative women for disease ascertainment to correct verification bias in the estimates of clinical performance. However, verification bias adjustment of the clinical performance of HPV testing may overcorrect/underestimate its clinical performance to detect truly precancerous abnormalities.

Role of HPV Genotype, Multiple Infections, and Viral Load on the Risk of High-Grade Cervical Neoplasia.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing provides a much more sensitive method of detection for high-grade lesions than cytology, but specificity is low. Here, we explore the extent to which full HPV genotyping, viral load, and multiplicity of types can be used to improve specificity. METHODS: A population-based sample of 47,120 women undergoing cervical screening was tested for 13 high-risk HPV genotypes. Positive predictive values (PPV) for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or worse (CIN2+; N = 3,449) and CIN3 or worse (CIN3+; N = 1,475) over 3 years of follow-up were estimated for HPV genotype and viral load. Weighted multivariate logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds of CIN2+ or CIN3+ according to genotype, multiplicity of types, and viral load. RESULTS: High-risk HPV was detected in 15.4% of women. A hierarchy of HPV genotypes based on sequentially maximizing PPVs for CIN3+ found HPV16>33>31 to be the most predictive, followed sequentially by HPV18>35>58>45>52>59>51>39>56>68. After adjusting for higher ranked genotypes, the inclusion of multiple HPV infections added little to risk prediction. High viral loads for HPV18, 35, 52, and 58 carried more risk than low viral loads for HPV16, 31, and 33. High viral load for HPV16 was significantly more associated with CIN3+ than low viral load. CONCLUSIONS: HPV genotype and viral load, but not multiplicity of HPV infections, are important predictors of CIN2+ and CIN3+. IMPACT: The ability to identify women at higher risk of CIN2+ and CIN3+ based on both HPV genotype and viral load could be important for individualizing triage plans, particularly as HPV becomes the primary screening test.

Population-Based Incidence of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Across 14 Years of HPV Vaccination.

This cohort study examines the incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia during a period of increasing human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination coverage from 2007 to 2020.