Clinical performance of the novel full-genotyping OncoPredict HPV Quantitative Typing assay using the VALGENT framework.

Clinical validation of human papillomavirus (HPV) assays according to international criteria is prerequisite for their implementation in cervical cancer screening. OncoPredict HPV Quantitative Typing (QT) assay (Hiantis Srl, Milan, Italy) is a novel full-genotyping multiplex real-time PCR quantitative assay targeting E6/E7 genes, allowing individual viral load determination of 12 high-risk (HR) HPV types. Quality controls for sample adequacy, efficiency of nucleic acid extraction and PCR inhibition are included in the assay. Clinical performance of OncoPredict HPV QT test was assessed as part of the "Validation of HPV Genotyping Tests" (VALGENT-2) framework, consisting of 1300 cervical liquid-based cytology (LBC) samples of women aged between 20 and 60 years who had originally attended for routine cervical screening in Scotland. The clinical accuracy of the OncoPredict HPV QT (index test) for the detection of CIN2+ was assessed relative to the GP5+/6+ Enzyme ImmunoAssay (GP5+/6+ EIA) (comparator test), using noninferiority criteria. Intra- and interlaboratory reproducibility of the assay was assessed on a subpopulation, comprising 526 samples. The relative sensitivity and specificity for OncoPredict HPV QT vs GP5+/6+-PCR-EIA were 1.01 (95% CI: 0.99-1.03) and 1.03 (95% CI: 1.0-1.06) respectively. The P-values for noninferiority were ≤0.001. The intra- and inter-laboratory reproducibility demonstrated a high concordance (>98.7%) with kappas for individual types ranging from 0.66 to 1.00. OncoPredict HPV QT fulfills the international validation criteria for the use of HPV tests in cervical cancer screening.

Predictable changes in the accuracy of human papillomavirus tests after vaccination: review with implications for performance monitoring in cervical screening.

Vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) is changing the performance of cytology as a cervical screening test, but its effect on HPV testing is unclear. We review the effect of HPV16/18 vaccination on the epidemiology and the detection of HPV infections and high-grade cervical lesions (CIN2+) to evaluate the likely direction of changes in HPV test accuracy. The reduction in HPV16/18 infections and cross-protection against certain non-16/18 high-risk genotypes, most notably 31, 33, and/or 45, will likely increase the test's specificity but decrease its positive predictive value (PPV) for CIN2+. Post-vaccination viral unmasking of non-16/18 genotypes due to fewer HPV16 co-infections might reduce the specificity and the PPV for CIN2+. Post-vaccination clinical unmasking exposing a higher frequency of CIN2+ related to non-16/18 high-risk genotypes is likely to increase the specificity and the PPV of HPV tests. The effect of HPV16/18 vaccination on HPV test sensitivity is difficult to predict based on these changes alone. Programmes relying on HPV detection for primary screening should monitor the frequency of false-positive and false-negative tests in vaccinated (younger) vs. unvaccinated (older) cohorts, to assess the outcomes and performance of their service.

Criteria for second generation comparator tests in validation of novel HPV DNA tests for use in cervical cancer screening.

While HC2 and GP5+/6+ PCR-EIA were pivotal in test validation of new HPV assays, they represent the first generation of comparator tests based upon technologies that are not in widespread use anymore. In the current guideline, criteria for second-generation comparator tests are presented that include more detailed resolution of HPV genotypes. Second-generation comparator tests should preferentially target only the 12 genotypes classified as carcinogenic (IARC-group I), and show consistent non-inferior sensitivity for CIN2+ and CIN3+ and specificity for ≤CIN1 compared to one of the first-generations comparators, in at least three validation studies using benchmarks of 0.95 for relative sensitivity and 0.98 for relative specificity. Validation should take into account used storage media and other sample handling procedures. Meta-analyses were conducted to identify the assays that fulfill these stringent criteria. Four tests fulfilled the new criteria: (1) RealTime High-Risk HPV Test (Abbott), (2) Cobas-4800 HPV test (Roche Molecular System), (3) Onclarity HPV Assay (BD Diagnostics), and (4) Anyplex II HPV HR Detection (Seegene), each evaluated in three to six studies. Whereas the four assays target 14 carcinogenic genotypes, the first two identify separately HPV16 and 18, the third assay identifies five types separately and the fourth identifies all the types separately.

FAM19A4/miR124-2 Methylation Testing and Human Papillomavirus (HPV) 16/18 Genotyping in HPV-Positive Women Under the Age of 30 Years.

BACKGROUND: High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) or cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2/3 lesions in human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive women <30 years of age have high spontaneous regression rates. To reduce overtreatment, biomarkers are needed to delineate advanced CIN lesions that require treatment. We analyzed the FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation test and HPV16/18 genotyping in HPV-positive women aged <30 years, aiming to identify CIN2/3 lesions in need of treatment. METHODS: A European multicenter retrospective study was designed evaluating the FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation test and HPV16/18 genotyping in cervical scrapes of 1061 HPV-positive women aged 15-29 years (690 ≤CIN1, 166 CIN2, and 205 CIN3+). A subset of 62 CIN2 and 103 CIN3 were immunohistochemically characterized by HPV E4 expression, a marker for a productive HPV infection, and p16ink4a and Ki-67, markers indicative for a transforming infection. CIN2/3 lesions with low HPV E4 expression and high p16ink4a/Ki-67 expression were considered as nonproductive, transforming CIN, compatible with advanced CIN2/3 lesions in need of treatment. RESULTS: FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation positivity increased significantly with CIN grade and age groups (<25, 25-29, and ≥30 years), while HPV16/18 positivity was comparable across age groups. FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation positivity was HPV type independent. Methylation-positive CIN2/3 lesions had higher p16ink4a/Ki-67-immunoscores (P = .003) and expressed less HPV E4 (P = .033) compared with methylation-negative CIN2/3 lesions. These differences in HPV E4 and p16ink4a/Ki-67 expression were not found between HPV16/18-positive and non-16/18 HPV-positive lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with HPV16/18 genotyping, the FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation test detects nonproductive, transforming CIN2/3 lesions with high specificity in women aged <30 years, providing clinicians supportive information about the need for treatment of CIN2/3 in young HPV-positive women.

Widening the offer of human papillomavirus self-sampling to all women eligible for cervical screening: Make haste slowly.

Self-collection of samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing has the potential to increase the uptake of cervical screening among underscreened women and will likely form a crucial part of the WHO's strategy to eliminate cervical cancer by 2030. In high-income countries with long-standing, organised cervical screening programmes, self-collection is increasingly becoming available as a routine offer for women regardless of their screening histories, including under- and well-screened women. For these contexts, a validated microsimulation model determined that adding self-collection to clinician collection is likely to be cost-effective on the condition that it meets specific thresholds relating to (1) uptake and (2) sensitivity for the detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+). We used these thresholds to review the 'early-adopter' programme-level evidence with a mind to determine how well and how consistently they were being met. The available evidence suggested some risk to overall programme performance in the situation where low uptake among underscreened women was accompanied by a high rate of substituting clinician sampling with self-collection among well-screened women. Risk was further compounded in a situation where the slightly reduced sensitivity of self-sampling vs clinician sampling for the detection of CIN2+ was accompanied with lack of adherence to a follow-up triage test that required a clinician sample. To support real-world programmes on their pathways toward implementation and to avoid HPV self-collection being introduced as a screening measure in good faith but with counterproductive consequences, we conclude by identifying a range of mitigations and areas worthy of research prioritisation.

The changing nature of HPV associated with high grade cervical lesions in vaccinated populations, a retrospective study of over 1700 cases in Scotland.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the pattern and dominance of HPV types in high grade cervical disease within increasingly vaccinated populations will help inform the development of appropriate screening and management protocols. METHODS: Over 1700 cases of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) diagnosed between 2011 and 2017 in women younger than 25 were genotyped for HPV. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between HPV 16/18 positivity with biopsy-collection year, birth year, deprivation and vaccination status. Regression analysis was repeated for cross-protective types (31, 33 and 45). Type specific detail of non-vaccine types by vaccination status was presented descriptively. RESULTS: Detection of HPV 16/18 or 16/18/31/33 and 45 was lower in CIN2 associated with full vaccination vs no vaccination (OR 0.3; 95% CI 0.2-0.5 & 0.4; 95% CI 0.3-0.6 respectively) Similar observations were made for CIN3. The relative contribution of non-established high-risk types including those considered low risk was greater among vaccinated women with CIN2+ vs unvaccinated women with CIN2+. CONCLUSIONS: The change in HPV distribution in CIN2+ in vaccinated populations is a further marker of vaccine impact. Additionally, the progression rate of CIN2+ in vaccinated populations may be lower given the shift in type distribution. The definition of high grade disease in vaccinated populations may warrant reassessment.

Testing for Human Papillomaviruses in Urine, Blood, and Oral Specimens: an Update for the Laboratory.

Twelve high-risk alpha human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes cause approximately 690,000 cancer cases annually, with cervical and oropharyngeal cancer being the two most prominent types. HPV testing is performed in laboratory settings for various applications of a clinical, epidemiological, and research nature using a range of clinical specimens collected by clinicians or by individuals (self-collected specimens). Here, we reflect on the importance and justification of using the right test for the right application and provide practical updates for laboratories either participating in or anticipating involvement in HPV testing in three specimen types, namely, urine, blood, and oral specimens, which are considered "alternative" specimens by many. In addition to clinician-collected cervical samples and self-collected cervicovaginal samples, first-void urine is emerging as a credible specimen for HPV-based cervical cancer screening, triage of HPV screen-positive women, monitoring HPV vaccine impact, and HPV testing in groups for which a less invasive sample is preferred. Detection of cell-free DNA (including HPV DNA) in blood has great promise for the early detection of HPV-attributable oropharyngeal cancer (HPV-AOC) and potentially other HPV-driven cancers and as an adjunct prognostic marker in long-term tumor surveillance, including treatment response. The moderate sensitivity of HPV testing in oral rinses or swabs at HPV-AOC diagnosis prevents its use in HPV-AOC secondary prevention but represents a promising prognostic tool in HPV-AOC tertiary prevention, where the HPV persistence in oral rinses throughout treatment may predict early HPV-AOC recurrences and/or the development of secondary HPV-AOC. The increasing sophistication of specific collection devices designed for alternative samples and the enhanced precision of novel molecular technologies are likely to support the evolution of this field and catalyze potential translation into routine practice.

Evaluation of the clinical performance of OncoPredict HPV® SCR assay within the VALGENT-2 framework.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) assays used in cervical cancer screening should be clinically validated according to international criteria. OncoPredict HPV® Screening (SCR) is a partial genotyping multiplex real-time PCR assay targeting E6/E7 genes of 13 high-risk (hr) HPVs. OncoPredict HPV® SCR (index assay) identifies HPV-16 and HPV-18 separately, 11 other hrHPV in aggregate and includes quality controls for sample adequacy, DNA extraction efficiency and PCR inhibition. 1300 VALGENT-2 study samples (from women aged 20-60 attending the Scottish cervical cancer screening program) were tested with the index assay and the GP5+/6+ PCR enzyme immunoassay (standard comparator assay). Non-inferior accuracy detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) of the index versus comparator was verified. Intra- and interlaboratory reproducibility of the index was evaluated by overall concordance and Cohen's kappa, using a sub-population (n = 526). Relative sensitivity and specificity for CIN2+ of the index versus comparator were 1.01 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.99-1.03) and 1.02 (95% CI: 1.0-1.04), respectively. Noninferiority p values were all ≤0.05, except for CIN3+ in patients ≥30 years. Excellent intra- and interlaboratory reproducibility was shown with concordance >98% and kappas >0.95. OncoPredict HPV® SCR fulfills the three international validation criteria for hrHPV DNA tests in cervical cancer screening.

Quality assurance in human papillomavirus testing for primary cervical screening.

The recommendation for cervical screening is that it should be based on human papillomavirus (HPV) molecular testing. For all screening programs, attention to quality assurance is required to fully realize the benefits. Internationally recognized quality assurance recommendations for HPV-based screening are needed that are ideally applicable for a variety of settings, including in low- and middle-income countries. We summarize the main points of quality assurance for HPV screening, with a focus on the selection, implementation, and use of an HPV screening test, quality assurance systems (including internal quality control and external quality assessment), and staff competence. While we recognize that it might not be possible to fulfill all points in all settings, an awareness of the issues is essential.

Clinical performance of methylation as a biomarker for cervical carcinoma in situ and cancer diagnosis: A worldwide study.

The shift towards primary human papillomavirus (HPV)-based screening has necessitated the search for a secondary triage test that provides sufficient sensitivity to detect high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and cancer, but also brings an improved specificity to avoid unnecessary clinical work and colposcopy referrals. We evaluated the performance of the previously described DNA-methylation test (S5) in detecting CIN3 and cancers from diverse geographic settings in high-, medium- and low-income countries, using the cut-off of 0.80 and exploratory cut-offs of 2.62 and 3.70. Assays were performed using exfoliated cervical specimens (n = 808) and formalin-fixed biopsies (n = 166) from women diagnosed with cytology-negative results (n = 220), CIN3 (n = 204) and cancer stages I (n = 245), II (n = 249), III (n = 28) and IV (n = 22). Methylation increased proportionally with disease severity (Cuzick test for trend, P < .0001). S5 accurately separated women with negative-histology from CIN3 or cancer (P < .0001). At the 0.80 cut-off, 543/544 cancers were correctly identified as S5 positive (99.81%). At cut-off 3.70, S5 showed a sensitivity of 95.77% with improved specificity. The S5 odds ratios of women negative for cervical disease vs CIN3+ were significantly higher than for HPV16/18 genotyping at all cut-offs (all P < .0001). At S5 cut-off 0.80, 96.15% of consistently high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)-negative cancers (tested with multiple hrHPV-genotyping assay) were positive by S5. These cancers may have been missed in current primary hrHPV-screening programmes. The S5 test can accurately detect CIN3 and malignancy irrespective of geographic context and setting. The test can be used as a screening and triage tool. Adjustment of the S5 cut-off can be performed considering the relative importance given to sensitivity vs specificity.

Self-sampling as the principal modality for population based cervical screening: Five-year follow-up of the PaVDaG study.

Self-sampling provides a powerful means to engage women in cervical screening. In the original Papillomavirus Dumfries and Galloway study (PaVDaG), we demonstrated cross-sectional similarity of high-risk human papillomavirus (Hr-HPV) testing on self-taken vaginal vs clinician-taken samples for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse (CIN2+). Few data exist on the longitudinal performance of self-sampling; we present longitudinal outcomes of PaVDaG. Routinely screened women provided a self-taken and a clinician-collected sample. Ninety-one percent of 5136 women from the original cohort completed a further screening round. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and complement of the negative predictive value of the Hr-HPV test on self-samples for detection of CIN2+ and CIN3+ up-to 5 years after testing were determined. Additionally, clinical accuracy of Hr-HPV testing on vaginal and clinician-collected samples was assessed. A total of 183 CIN2+ and 102 CIN3+ lesions were diagnosed during follow-up. Risk of CIN2+ and CIN3+ following an Hr-HPV negative self-sample was 0.6% and 0.2%, respectively, for up to 5 years after testing. The relative sensitivity for CIN3+ and specificity for ≤CIN1 of Hr-HPV testing on self-taken specimens was slightly lower vs clinician-collected samples: 0.95 (95% CI: 0.90-0.99; PMcN = .0625) and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.95-1.00; PMcN = <.0000), respectively. The low risk of CIN2+ in women with Hr-HPV-self-sample(s) suggests, that the 3 to 5-year recall interval implemented in several cervical screening settings, based on clinician-taken samples, may be safe for self-samples. Future assessment will show if "universal" 5-year screening is appropriate for programs based on self-sampling.

Age-specific outcomes from the first round of HPV screening in unvaccinated women: Observational study from the English cervical screening pilot.

OBJECTIVE: To report detailed age-specific outcomes from the first round of an English pilot studying the implementation of high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing in primary cervical screening. DESIGN: Observational study with screening in 2013-2016, followed by two early recalls and/or colposcopy until the end of 2019. SETTING: Six NHS laboratory sites. POPULATION: A total of 1 341 584 women undergoing screening with HR-HPV testing or liquid-based cytology (LBC). METHODS: Early recall tests and colposcopies were recommended, depending on the nature of the screening-detected abnormality. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We reported standard screening process indicators, e.g. proportions with an abnormality, including high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+) or cancer, and the positive predictive value (PPV) of colposcopy for CIN2+, by screening test and age group. RESULTS: Among unvaccinated women screened with HR-HPV testing at age 24-29 years, 26.9% had a positive test and 10.4% were directly referred to colposcopy following cytology triage, with a PPV for CIN2+ of 47%. At 50-64 years of age, these proportions were much lower: 5.3%, 1.2% and 27%, respectively. The proportions of women testing positive for HR-HPV without cytological abnormalities, whose early recall HR-HPV tests returned negative results, were similar across the age spans: 54% at 24-29 years and 55% at 50-64 years. Two-thirds of infections at any age were linked to non-16/18 genotypes. Among women with CIN2, CIN3 or cervical cancer, however, the proportion of non-16/18 infections increased with age. As expected, the detection of abnormalities was lower following screening with LBC. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide a reliable reference for future epidemiological studies, including those concerning the effectiveness of HPV vaccination. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Data from the English pilot study provide a comprehensive overview of abnormalities detected through HPV screening.

Effective methylation triage of HPV positive women with abnormal cytology in a middle-income country.

The S5-methylation test, an alternative to cytology and HPV16/18 genotyping to triage high-risk HPV-positive (hrHPV+) women, has not been widely validated in low-middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared S5 to HPV16/18 and cytology to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia Grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and CIN3+ in hrHPV+ women selected from a randomized pragmatic trial of 2661 Colombian women with an earlier-borderline abnormal cytology. We included all hrHPV+ CIN2 and CIN3+ cases (n = 183) age matched to 183

Methylation markers FAM19A4 and miR124-2 as triage strategy for primary human papillomavirus screen positive women: A large European multicenter study.

In human papillomavirus (HPV) cervical cancer screening, cytology is used as triage to counter the low specificity of HPV testing. VALID-SCREEN is a EU-multicenter, retrospective study conducted to evaluate the clinical performance of the FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation-based molecular triage test as a substitute or addition to cytology as reflex testing of HPV screen positive women. FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation test (QIAsure Methylation Test) was evaluated in 2384 HPV-positive cervical screening samples, from women 29-76 years of age, derived from four EU countries. Specimens were collected in ThinPrep or SurePath media, HPV-status, concurrent cytology, and histology diagnosis were provided by the parent institutes. The control population consisted of women with no evidence of disease within 2 years of follow-up. A total of 899 histologies were retrieved; 527 showed no disease, 124 CIN2 (5.2%), 228 CIN3 (9.6%) and 20 cervical cancers (0.8%); 19 of 20 screen-detected cervical cancers were found methylation-positive (sensitivity 95%). Overall specificity of FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation test was 78.3% (n = 2013; 95%CI: 76-80). The negative predictive value of hrHPV positive, methylation-negative outcomes were 99.9% for cervical cancer (N = 1694; 95%CI: 99.6-99.99), 96.9% for ≥CIN3 (95%CI: 96-98), and 93.0% for ≥CIN2 (95%CI: 92-94). Overall sensitivity for CIN3 using FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation test was 77% (n = 228; 95%CI: 71-82). CIN3 sensitivity was uniform between centers independent of sample collection medias, DNA extraction methods and HPV screening tests. Being objectively reported compared to the subjectivity of cytology, equally performing across settings and screening methods, the FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation constitute an alternative/supplement to cytology as triage method to be investigated in real-life pilot implementation.

FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation in invasive cervical cancer: A retrospective cross-sectional worldwide study.

Widespread adoption of primary human papillomavirus (HPV)-based screening has encouraged the search for a triage test which retains high sensitivity for the detection of cervical cancer and precancer, but increases specificity to avoid overtreatment. Methylation analysis of FAM19A4 and miR124-2 genes has shown promise for the triage of high-risk (hr) HPV-positive women. In our study, we assessed the consistency of FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation analysis in the detection of cervical cancer in a series of 519 invasive cervical carcinomas (n = 314 cervical scrapes, n = 205 tissue specimens) from over 25 countries, using a quantitative methylation-specific PCR (qMSP)-based assay (QIAsure Methylation Test®). Positivity rates stratified per histotype, FIGO stage, hrHPV status, hrHPV genotype, sample type and geographical region were calculated. In total, 510 of the 519 cervical carcinomas (98.3%; 95% CI: 96.7-99.2) tested FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation-positive. Test positivity was consistent across the different subgroups based on cervical cancer histotype, FIGO stage, hrHPV status, hrHPV genotype, sample type and geographical region. In conclusion, FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation analysis detects nearly all cervical carcinomas, including rare histotypes and hrHPV-negative carcinomas. These results indicate that a negative FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation assay result is likely to rule out the presence of cervical cancer.

Baseline HPV prevalence in rectal swabs from men attending a sexual health clinic in Scotland: assessing the potential impact of a selective HPV vaccination programme for men who have sex with men.

OBJECTIVES: A human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programme targeted towards men who have sex with men who are disproportionately affected by HPV anogenital infection and related disease was established in Scotland in July 2017. We aimed to establish a baseline HPV prevalence to assess the potential impact of the programme. METHODS: Residual rectal swabs taken in a sexual health clinic (n=1 248) were tested for the presence of HPV and HPV-type prevalence was collated and stratified by age. Prevalence of HPV types included in the quadrivalent and nonavalent vaccines was specifically assessed. RESULTS: 72.8% (95% CI 70.2% to 75.3%) of swabs were positive for HPV with 59.1% (95% CI 56.3% to 61.9%) of samples positive for at least one high-risk type. A least one of HPV 6, 11, 16 and 18 was detected in approximately half of the swabs. HPV prevalence generally increased with age but did not significantly differ between older age groups. The presence of more than one HPV type increased with age and over half of samples had multiple types present. CONCLUSIONS: While HPV prevalence in this population is high, the potential impact of the vaccination programme is substantial given that 50% are not infected with a vaccine type. Defining a preimmunisation baseline in this group will be important for longitudinal monitoring of impact.

Clinical validation of full genotyping CLART® HPV4S assay on SurePath and ThinPrep collected screening samples according to the international guidelines for human papillomavirus test requirements for cervical screening.

BACKGROUND: To ensure the highest quality of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in primary cervical cancer screening, novel HPV assays must be evaluated in accordance with the international guidelines. Furthermore, HPV assay with genotyping capabilities are becoming increasingly important in triage of HPV positive women in primary HPV screening. Here we evaluate a full genotyping HPV assay intended for primary screening. METHODS: The CLART® HPV4S (CLART4S) assay is a newly developed full-genotyping assay detecting 14 oncogenic (16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, 66, 68) and two non-oncogenic HPV genotypes (6, 11). It was evaluated using SurePath and ThinPrep screening samples collected from the Danish and Swedish cervical cancer screening programs, respectively. For calculation of sensitivity, 81 SurePath and 80 ThinPrep samples with confirmed ≥CIN2 were assessed. For clinical specificity analysis, 1184 SurePath and 1169 ThinPrep samples from women with

Increased risk of HPV-associated genital cancers in men and women as a consequence of pre-invasive disease.

To assess the excess risk of HPV-associated cancer (HPVaC) in two at-risk groups-women with a previous diagnosis of high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN3) and both men and women treated for non-cervical pre-invasive anogenital disease. All CIN3 cases diagnosed in 1989-2015 in Scotland were extracted from the Scottish cancer registry (SMR06). All cases of pre-invasive penile, anal, vulval, and vaginal disease diagnosed in 1990-2015 were identified within the NHS pathology databases in the two largest NHS health boards in Scotland. Both were linked to SMR06 to extract subsequent incidence of HPVaC following the diagnosis of CIN3 or pre-invasive disease. Standardised incidence ratios were calculated for the risk of acquiring HPVaC for the two at-risk groups compared to the general Scottish population. Among 69,714 females in Scotland diagnosed with CIN3 (890,360.9 person-years), 179 developed non-cervical HPVaC. CIN3 cases were at 3.2-fold (95% CI: 2.7 to 3.7) increased risk of developing non-cervical HPVaC, compared to the general female population. Among 1,235 patients diagnosed with non-cervical pre-invasive disease (9,667.4 person-years), 47 developed HPVaC. Individuals with non-cervical pre-invasive disease had a substantially increased risk of developing HPVaC - 15.5-fold (95% CI: 11.1 to 21.1) increased risk for females and 28-fold (11.3 to 57.7) increased risk for males. We report a significant additional risk of HPV-associated cancer in those have been diagnosed with pre-invasive HPV-associated lesions including but not confined to the cervix. Uncovering the natural history of pre-invasive disease has potential for determining screening, prevention and treatment.

Factors That Influence Confirmation of Neisseria gonorrhoeae Positivity by Molecular Methods.

Several Neisseria gonorrhoeae nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) with high sensitivity exist. However, the specificity of N. gonorrhoeae NAATs may be suboptimal, particularly for extragenital biospecimens. Consequently, confirmation with a second NAAT is common, although this represents a burden on resources. Furthermore, the rationale for confirmation is contentious. The objective of this work was to assess N. gonorrhoeae confirmation in over 13,000 N. gonorrhoeae screen-positive samples representing various biospecimens and three separate screening assays, the Abbott RealTime CT/NG (Abbott Molecular, Inc., Des Plaines, IL), the Cobas CT/NG test (Roche Molecular Systems Inc., Alameda, CA), and the BD ProbeTec ET CT/GC amplified DNA assay (BD Diagnostics, Sparks, MD). Factors predictive of confirmation were determined via logistic regression involving sex, year, whether the sample was formally validated, and sample site. Level of confirmation varied according to screening assay (96.2%, 86.0%, and 73.9% for the Abbott, Roche, and BD tests, respectively) in sample types formally included according to the manufacturers' instructions (i.e., validated). Sex did not affect confirmation for 2/3 assays, and the likelihood of confirmation of samples not formally included in manufacturer instructions (i.e., nonvalidated) was 89.1%, 82.1%, and 59.2% for the Abbott, Roche, and BD tests, respectively. Rectal swabs, which are nonvalidated samples, confirmed in 91.5%, 90.1%, and 87.4% of samples initially tested with the respective assays. The requirement to confirm N. gonorrhoeae in validated samples is not required for all NAATs, although initial assay-specific evaluation is justified given observed variability. Rectal samples represent robust biospecimens for N. gonorrhoeae NAAT testing and may not require confirmation when screened with the assays described.

Intra- and inter-laboratory agreement of the FAM19A4/mir124-2 methylation test: Results from an international study.

BACKGROUND: HPV-based cervical screening detects women at an increased risk of cervical cancer and precancer. To differentiate among HPV-positive women those with (pre)cancer, triage testing is necessary. The detection of cancer-associated host-cell DNA methylation (FAM19A4 and hsa-mir124-2) in cervical samples has shown valuable as triage test. This multicenter study from 6 collaborating European laboratories and one reference laboratory was set out to determine the intra- and inter-laboratory agreement of FAM19A4/mir124-2 DNA methylation analysis utilizing the QIAsure Methylation Test. METHODS: Agreement analysis for the QIAsure Methylation Test was assessed on high-risk HPV-positive cervical specimens (n = 1680) both at the level of the assay and at the full workflow, including bisulfite conversion. RESULTS: Intra- and inter-laboratory assay agreement were 91.4% (534/584; 95% CI 88.9-93.5; κ = 0.82) and 92.5% (369/399; 95% CI 90.0-94.7; κ = 0.83), respectively. The inter-laboratory workflow (bisulfite conversion and assay combined) agreement was 90.0% (627/697; 95% CI 87.5%-92.0%; κ = 0.76). CONCLUSION: These data show that the QIAsure Methylation Test performs robust and reproducible in different laboratory contexts. These results support the use of the QIAsure Methylation Test for full molecular screening for cervical cancer, including primary HPV testing and triage testing by methylation analysis.