Evaluation of an Isothermal Amplification HPV Assay on Self-Collected Vaginal Samples as Compared to Clinician-Collected Cervical Samples.

This study aimed to evaluate the concordance of HPV results between the SentisTM HPV assay (Sentis) (BGI Group, Shenzhen, China), an isothermal amplification-based HPV assay, on self-collected and clinician-collected samples and the agreement of Sentis on self-collected samples with the BD OnclarityTM HPV assay (Onclarity) (Becton, Dickinson, and Company, Franklin Lakes, New Jersey, USA), a PCR-based HPV assay, on clinician-collected samples. This was a prospective study of 104 women attending the colposcopy clinic for abnormal smears. After informed consent, participants self-collected vaginal samples before having clinician-collected cervical samples. Self-collected samples underwent HPV testing with Sentis (Self-Sentis HPV) and clinician-collected samples were tested with Sentis (Clinician-Sentis HPV) and Onclarity (Clinician-Onclarity), which was used as a reference standard. The concordance was assessed using Cohen's kappa. The prevalence of HPV and the acceptability of self-sampling were also evaluated. The concordance rate between Self-Sentis HPV and Clinician-Sentis HPV was 89.8% with a kappa of 0.769. The concordance rate between Self-Sentis HPV and Clinician-Onclarity was 84.4% with a kappa of 0.643. The prevalence of HPV was 26.0% on Clinician-Onclarity, 29.3% on Clinician-Sentis HPV, and 35.6% on Self-Sentis HPV. Overall, 65% of participants would undergo self-sampling again. This was attributed to mainly not feeling embarrassed (68%) and being convenient (58%). Our study showed a substantial agreement between Self-Sentis HPV with Clinician-Sentis HPV and Clinician-Onclarity. Self-sampling was also shown to be a generally well-accepted method of screening.

Machine Learning Interpretation of Extended Human Papillomavirus Genotyping by Onclarity in an Asian Cervical Cancer Screening Population.

This study aimed (i) to compare the performance of the BD Onclarity human papillomavirus (HPV) assay with the Cobas HPV test in identifying cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2/3 or above (CIN2/3+) in an Asian screening population and (ii) to explore improving the cervical cancer detection specificity of Onclarity by machine learning. We tested 605 stratified random archived samples of cervical liquid-based cytology samples with both assays. All samples had biopsy diagnosis or repeated negative cytology follow-up. Association rule mining (ARM) was employed to discover coinfection likely to give rise to CIN2/3+. Outcome classifiers interpreting the extended genotyping results of Onclarity were built with different underlying models. The sensitivities (Onclarity, 96.32%; Cobas, 95.71%) and specificities (Onclarity, 46.38%; Cobas, 45.25%) of the high-risk HPV (hrHPV) components of the two tests were not significantly different. When HPV16 and HPV18 were used to further interpret hrHPV-positive cases, Onclarity displayed significantly higher specificity (Onclarity, 87.10%; Cobas, 80.77%). Both hrHPV tests achieved the same sensitivities (Onclarity, 90.91%; Cobas, 90.91%) and similar specificities (Onclarity, 48.46%; Cobas, 51.98%) when used for triaging atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Positivity in both HPV16 and HPV33/58 of the Onclarity channels entails the highest probability of developing CIN2/3+. Incorporating other hrHPVs into the outcome classifiers improved the specificity of identifying CIN2/3 to up to 94.32%. The extended genotyping of Onclarity therefore can help to highlight patients having the highest risk of developing CIN2/3+, with the potential to reduce unnecessary colposcopy and negative psychosocial impact on women receiving the reports.

HPV genotyping and E6/E7 transcript assays for cervical lesion detection in an Asian screening population-Cobas and Aptima HPV tests.

BACKGROUND: High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) detection and genotyping by Cobas HPV test has become an important technical platform in cervical cancer screening. It may be used as a co-test with cervical cytology or as a standalone test. Aptima HPV assay (AHPV) is another hrHPV test detecting 13 genotypes through qPCR based amplification of viral E6/E7 transcripts. Partial genotyping with Aptima HPV 16 18/45 genotype assay (AHPV GT) on positive samples is possible. Evidence supporting the performance of AHPV in Asian populations is scarce. OBJECTIVE: To compare the performances of Cobas and AHPV in detection of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions (SIL) and triage of cytologically equivocal smears in a cohort of Hong Kong women. STUDY DESIGN: 442 liquid based cytology (LBC) residues with biopsy confirmed diagnoses were evaluated by both AHPV and Cobas HPV tests. RESULTS: Overall, there was a moderate agreement between AHPV and Cobas (κ = 0.5082, 95% CI: 0.492-0.672). The sensitivities of AHPV and Cobas for detecting biopsy confirmed HSIL or worse lesions (HSIL+) were 96.71% (95% CI: 92.49%-98.92%) and 97.37% (95% CI: 93.40%-99.28%) respectively. AHPV demonstrated significantly higher specificity than Cobas (37.85% vs 23.96%, p < 0.0001). Both tests could identify all ASC-US and AGC cases with HSIL + in follow-up biopsies, but AHPV showed a significantly higher specificity in both settings (ASC-US: 28.81% vs 11.86%, p < 0.0001; AGC: 55.00% vs 20.00%, p = 0.0233). CONCLUSIONS: Both AHPV and Cobas were equally sensitive in detecting high-grade SIL in both scenarios of screening and ASC-US or AGC triage but AHPV showed a higher specificity.

Comparison of fluorescence in-situ hybridisation with dual-colour in-situ hybridisation for assessment of HER2 gene amplification of breast cancer in Hong Kong.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the PathVysion fluorescence in-situ hybridisation assay with the INFORM HER2 Dual in-situ hybridisation assay on 104 invasive breast cancers with a broad spectrum of immunohistochemistry scores. METHODS: This case series involved consecutive patients diagnosed with invasive breast carcinoma with equivocal immunohistochemistry score and referred for further HER2 assessment from the departments of Surgery and/or Clinical Oncology of the two hospitals between January 2013 and February 2014. An additional 10 cases with negative HER2 immunohistochemistry and 11 cases with positive HER2 immunohistochemistry were further included. RESULTS: The results of both fluorescence in-situ hybridisation and dual in-situ hybridisation were available in 99 of 104 cases, respectively. Student'st test showed no statistically significant difference in the mean number of HER2 count, CEP17 copies, or HER2/CEP17 ratio between that obtained by fluorescence in-situ hybridisation and that obtained by dual in-situ hybridisation. Pearson's correlation of results for the two assays was strong for HER2/CEP17 signal ratio (R=0.963, P<0.001) and mean HER2 copies per nucleus (R=0.897, P<0.001). Overall agreement was 96.0% (95 out of 99 cases, ĸ0.882). Three of the four discordant cases were equivocal for either fluorescence in-situ hybridisation or dual in-situ hybridisation. The results of immunohistochemistry 0/1+ and 3+ cases showed 100% concordance between the two assays. The failure rate was 0.96% for fluorescence in-situ hybridisation and 3.85% for dual in-situ hybridisation. Cases that failed for fluorescence in-situ hybridisation were successful for dual in-situ hybridisation and vice versa. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that dual in-situ hybridisation is a reliable and useful option for HER2 testing in breast cancer.

Comparison of the GenoFlow human papillomavirus (HPV) test and the Linear Array assay for HPV screening in an Asian population.

High-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) DNA detection in cervical cytology samples is useful for primary screening of cervical cancer and for triage of patients with equivocal cytological findings. The GenoFlow HPV array test (GF assay; Diagcor Bioscience Inc., Hong Kong) was recently developed to detect 33 HPV genotypes by a "flowthrough" hybridization technology. In this study, we assessed the analytical sensitivity and reproducibility of the GF assay and compared its genotyping results with those of the Linear Array (LA) assay (Roche Molecular Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN), using 400 archived liquid-based cytology samples representing the full range of cytology findings. Genotyping findings of the GF and LA assays were concordant or compatible for 93.44% of tested samples, with a good (κ = 0.797) to very good (κ = 0.812) strength of agreement for assay-common and oncogenic HPV types, respectively. The two assays showed good (κ = 0.635) agreement in detecting infections with multiple HPV genotypes. The lowest detection limits of the GF assay for HPV16 and HPV18 were 25 copies and 20 copies, respectively. Repeat testing of 60 samples by use of two different lots of the GF assay revealed no discordant results, suggesting good reproducibility of the assay. Both assays achieved approximately 80% and 100% sensitivity for identifying cases of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL) with subsequent detection of LSIL+ and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or higher (HSIL+) in 2 years, respectively. Among ASC-US samples, the GF assay achieved the highest specificity (23.08%) for indicating subsequent identification of HSIL compared with the LA (19.23%) and Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) (8.97%) assays. The GF and LA assays showed significant discrepancy in detecting HPV genotypes 11, 26, 39, 52, and 66. More sensitive detection of HPV52 by GF assay offers an advantage in regions where HPV52 is more prevalent. The sensitivity of the GF assay for detecting patients with HSIL+ was noninferior to that of the LA assay.

Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance on cervical smears: follow-up study of an Asian screening population.

BACKGROUND: The current study reports on the significance of cervical smears identified as atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) in the largest Asian screening population to date. METHODS: From January 1998 to December 1999, 190,000 cervical smears were evaluated by the cervical cytology laboratory at the University of Hong Kong (Hong Kong, China). From these smears, 5579 ASCUS were identified. Follow-up cytology and histology findings were analyzed. RESULTS: Follow-up cytology or biopsy results were retrieved for 3601 women (64.5%). Of these, 544 (9.8%) and 96 women (1.7%) were found to have low-grade (LSIL) and high-grade (HSIL) squamous intraepithelial lesions, respectively. Biopsy results were obtained for 198 (36.4%) of the 544 women with LSIL. One hundred seventy-nine (32.9%) and 19 women (3.5%) were confirmed to have cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)-1 and CIN-2-CIN-3, respectively. Biopsy results were retrieved for 53 (55.2%) women with HSIL. Forty patients (41.7%) were confirmed to have CIN-2-CIN-3, whereas CIN-1 was found in the remaining patients. One woman with squamous cell carcinoma was diagnosed by colposcopic biopsy after immediate referral following a diagnosis of ASCUS. There was a significantly larger proportion of LSIL or HSIL (P < 0.0001) or higher-grade findings in women with ASCUS compared with the general screening population. Infective organisms were identified in 412 women (7.4%) with ASCUS. These women had a decreased risk of subsequent development of LSIL (P < 0.0001) or HSIL (P = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: ASCUS smears indicated an increased risk of HSIL or carcinoma. The authors suggested careful patient follow-up in such cases.