Calendar-period trends in cervical precancer and cancer diagnoses since the introduction of human papillomavirus and cytology co-testing into routine cervical cancer screening at Kaiser Permanente Northern California.

OBJECTIVES: The longer-term impact of introducing human papillomavirus (HPV) testing into routine cervical cancer screening on precancer and cancer rates by histologic type has not been well described. Calendar trends in diagnoses were examined using data from Kaiser Permanente Northern California, which introduced triennial HPV and cytology co-testing in 2003 for women aged ≥30 years. METHODS: We examined trends in cervical precancer (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 [CIN3] and adenocarcinoma in situ [AIS]) and cancer (squamous cell carcinoma [SCC] and adenocarcinoma [ADC]) diagnoses per 1000 screened during 2003-2018. We examined ratios of squamous vs. glandular diagnoses (SCC:ADC and CIN3:AIS). RESULTS: CIN3 and AIS diagnoses increased approximately 2% and 3% annually, respectively (ptrend < 0.001 for both). While SCC diagnoses decreased by 5% per annually (ptrend < 0.001), ADC diagnoses did not change. These patterns were generally observed within each age group (30-39, 40-49, and 50-64 years). ADC diagnoses per 1000 screened did not change even among those who underwent co-testing starting in 2003-2006. SCC:ADC decreased from approximately 2.5:1 in 2003-2006 to 1.3:1 in 2015-2018 while the CIN3:AIS remained relatively constant, ∼10:1. CONCLUSIONS: Since its introduction at KPNC, co-testing increased the detection of CIN3 over time, which likely caused a subsequent reduction of SCC. However, there has been no observed decrease in ADC. One possible explanation for lack of effectiveness against ADC is the underdiagnosis of AIS. Novel strategies to identify and treat women at high risk of ADC need to be developed and clinically validated.

Automated Evaluation of p16/Ki-67 Dual-Stain Cytology as a Biomarker for Detection of Anal Precancer in Men Who Have Sex With Men and Are Living With Human Immunodeficiency Virus.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus-related biomarkers such as p16/Ki-67 "dual-stain" (DS) cytology have shown promising clinical performance for anal cancer screening. Here, we assessed the performance of automated evaluation of DS cytology (automated DS) to detect anal precancer in men who have sex with men (MSM) and are living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of 320 MSM with HIV undergoing anal cancer screening and high-resolution anoscopy (HRA) in 2009-2010. We evaluated the performance of automated DS based on a deep-learning classifier compared to manual evaluation of DS cytology (manual DS) to detect anal intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3 (AIN2+) and grade 3 (AIN3). We evaluated different DS-positive cell thresholds quantified by the automated approach and modeled performance compared with other screening strategies in a hypothetical population of MSM with HIV. RESULTS: Compared with manual DS, automated DS had significantly higher specificity (50.9% vs 42.2%; P < .001) and similar sensitivity (93.2% vs 92.1%) for detection of AIN2+. Human papillomavirus testing with automated DS triage was significantly more specific than automated DS alone (56.5% vs 50.9%; P < .001), with the same sensitivity (93.2%). In a modeled analysis assuming a 20% AIN2+ prevalence, automated DS detected more precancers than manual DS and anal cytology (186, 184, and 162, respectively) and had the lowest HRA referral rate per AIN2+ case detected (3.1, 3.5, and 3.3, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with manual DS, automated DS detects the same number of precancers, with a lower HRA referral rate.

A comparison of high-grade cervical abnormality risks in women living with and without human immunodeficiency virus undergoing routine cervical-cancer screening.

As the US moves increasingly towards using human papillomavirus (HPV) testing with or without concurrent cytology for cervical cancer screening, it is unknown what the corresponding risks are following a screening result for women living with HIV (WLWH), which will dictate the optimal clinical follow-up. Therefore, using medical records data from Kaiser Permanente Northern California, which introduced triennial HPV and cytology co-testing in women aged 30-64 years in 2003, we compared risks of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) or more severe diagnoses (CIN2+) in women not known to have HIV (HIV[-] women) (n = 67,488) frequency matched 111:1 on age and year of the first co-test to the 608 WLWH (n = 608). WLWH were more likely to test HPV positive (20.2% vs. 6.5%, p < 0.001) and have non-normal cytology (14.1% vs. 4.1%, p < 0.001) than HIV[-] women. Five-year CIN2+ risks for all WLWH and HIV[-] women were 3.5% (95%CI = 2.0-5.0%) and 1.6% (95%CI = 1.5-1.8%) (p = 0.01), respectively. Five-year CIN2+ risks for WLWH with positive HPV and non-normal cytology, positive HPV and normal cytology, negative HPV and non-normal cytology, and negative HPV and normal cytology were 24.9% (95%CI = 13.4-36.4%), 3.0% (95%CI = 0.0-7.4%), 3.6 (95%CI = 0.0-9.8%) and 0.3% (95%CI = 0.0-0.8%), respectively. Corresponding 5-year CIN2+ risks for HIV[-] women were 26.6% (95%CI = 24.6-28.7%), 8.5% (95%CI = 7.2-9.9%), 1.9% (95%CI = 1.0-2.8%), and 0.5% (95%CI = 0.4-0.6%), respectively. Thus, in this healthcare setting, the main cause in overall CIN2+ risk differences between WLWH and HIV[-] women was the former was more likely to screen positive and once the screening result is known, it may be reasonable to manage both populations similarly.

Contribution of Etiologic Cofactors to CIN3+ Risk Among Women With Human Papillomavirus-Positive Screening Test Results.

OBJECTIVE: The US screening and management guidelines for cervical cancer are based on the absolute risk of precancer estimated from large clinical cohorts and trials. Given the widespread transition toward screening with human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, it is important to assess which additional factors to include in clinical risk assessment to optimize management of HPV-infected women. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed data from HPV-infected women, ages 30-65 years, in the National Cancer Institute-Kaiser Permanente Northern California Persistence and Progression study. We estimated the influence of HPV risk group, cytology result, and selected cofactors on immediate risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or higher (CIN 3+) among 16,094 HPV-positive women. Cofactors considered included, age, race/ethnicity, income, smoking, and hormonal contraceptive use. RESULTS: Human papillomavirus risk group and cytology test result were strongly correlated with CIN 3+ risk. After considering cytology and HPV risk group, other cofactors (age, race/ethnicity, income, smoking, and hormonal contraceptive use) had minimal impact on CIN 3+ risk and did not change recommended management based on accepted risk thresholds. We had insufficient data to assess the impact of long-duration heavy smoking, parity, history of sexually transmitted infection, or immunosuppression. CONCLUSIONS: In our study at the Kaiser Permanente Northern California, the risk of CIN 3+ was determined mainly by HPV risk group and cytology results, with other cofactors having limited impact in adjusted analyses. This supports the use of HPV and cytology results in risk-based management guidelines.

The relationship of human papillomavirus and cytology co-testing results with endometrial and ovarian cancer diagnoses.

BACKGROUND: To investigate whether routine cervical screening using human papillomavirus (HPV) and cytology co-testing effectively identifies women with endometrial (EC) or ovarian (OvC) cancer. METHODS: In 2003, Kaiser Permanente Northern California implemented triennial co-testing in women aged ≥30 years. Index screening results (n = 2,385,729) were linked to subsequent EC (n = 3434) and OvC (n = 1113) diagnoses from January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2017. EC were categorized as type 1 or 2, and, selectively, EC and OvC diagnoses were stratified on whether symptoms were present at the time of the co-test. Fractions and absolute risks of EC or OvC of each co-testing result were calculated. RESULTS: Most EC (82.18%) and OvC (88.68%) were preceded by a negative HPV and negative cytology co-test. More EC were preceded by atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) or more severe (ASC-US+) cytology and negative HPV test (n = 290) (8.44% of EC) compared to a negative cytology and a positive HPV test (n = 31) (0.89% of EC) (p < 0.001). The absolute risk of any EC diagnosis following ASC-US+ and negative HPV test was 0.48%. Atypical glandular cells (AGC) cytology and a negative HPV result preceded 6.92% of any EC diagnosis, with an absolute risk of 4.02%, but preceded only 1.13% of type 2 EC cases, with an absolute risk of 0.24%, in asymptomatic women. AGC cytology and a negative HPV result preceded 1.44% of OvC, with an absolute risk of 0.28%. CONCLUSIONS: Abnormal cervical screening tests, even AGC cytology, rarely precedes and poorly predict women with EC or OvC.

Absolute risks of cervical precancer among women who fulfill exiting guidelines based on HPV and cytology cotesting.

US guidelines recommend that most women older than 65 years cease cervical screening after two consecutive negative cotests (concurrent HPV and cytology tests) in the previous 10 years, with one in the last 5 years. However, this recommendation was based on expert opinion and modeling rather than empirical data on cancer risk. We therefore estimated the 5-year risks of cervical precancer (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or adenocarcinoma in situ [CIN3]) after one, two and three negative cotests among 346,760 women aged 55-64 years undergoing routine cotesting at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (2003-2015). Women with a history of excisional treatment or CIN2+ were excluded. No woman with one or more negative cotests was diagnosed with cancer during follow-up. Five-year risks of CIN3 after one, two, and three consecutive negative cotests were 0.034% (95% CI: 0.023%-0.046%), 0.041% (95% CI: 0.007%-0.076%) and 0.016% (95% CI: 0.000%-0.052%), respectively (ptrend < 0.001). These risks did not appreciably differ by a positive cotest result prior to the one, two or three negative cotest(s). Since CIN3 risks after one or more negative cotests were significantly below a proposed 0.12% CIN3+ risk threshold for a 5-year screening interval, a longer screening interval in these women is justified. However, the choice of how many negative cotests provide sufficient safety against invasive cancer over a woman's remaining life represents a value judgment based on the harms versus benefits of continued screening. Ideally, this guideline should be informed by longer-term follow-up given that exiting is a long-term decision.

A study of the risks of CIN3+ detection after multiple rounds of HPV testing: Results of the 15-year cervical cancer screening experience at Kaiser Permanente Northern California.

Many countries are transitioning to HPV testing for cervical cancer screening, despite a lack of long-term experience. To anticipate multi-round screening performance, we analyzed 15-year HPV testing results at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC). We evaluated HPV test result patterns among women aged 30-64 undergoing triennial HPV/cytology cotesting at KPNC during 2003-2018. We calculated incidence rates and proportion of CIN3+ diagnoses associated with the most frequent HPV testing patterns overall and stratified by age. From 2003 to 2018, a total of 1,361,581 women had a valid HPV test result, and 7,087 were diagnosed with CIN3+. Incidence rates of CIN3+ after HPV positivity were lowest when HPV detection was new and highest in women with prevalent infections (770 vs. 13,910/100,000 person-years). Repeat test negativity reduced subsequent incidence rates of CIN3+ to extremely low levels (18/100,000 person-years following four consecutive negative results). For mixed patterns of positivity/negativity, the recency and frequency of positive tests were associated with increased rates of CIN3+ diagnosis. Most CIN3+ cases (76%) were diagnosed in women who were positive at baseline (the first known positive HPV result); 16% were attributed to apparent newly detected infections and 3% to possible reappearing infections. These results corroborate previous findings that current HPV positivity, particularly when prevalent rather than new, is associated with the highest rates of CIN3+. In a screening program implementing HPV testing, most CIN3+ is detected at the first HPV positive test.

Association of HPV35 with cervical carcinogenesis among women of African ancestry: Evidence of viral-host interaction with implications for disease intervention.

HPV35 has been found in only ∼2% of invasive cervical cancers (ICC) worldwide but up to 10% in Sub-Saharan Africa, warranting further investigation and consideration of impact on preventive strategies. We studied HPV35 and ethnicity, in relation to the known steps in cervical carcinogenesis, using multiple large epidemiologic studies in the U.S. and internationally. Combining five U.S. studies, we measured HPV35 positivity and, in Northern California, observed HPV35 type-specific population prevalence and estimated 5-year risk of developing precancer when HPV35-positive. HPV35 genetic variation was examined for differences in carcinogenicity in 1053 HPV35+ cervical specimens from a U.S. cohort and an international collection. African-American women had more HPV35 (12.1% vs 5.1%, P < .001) and more HPV35-associated precancers (7.4% vs 2.1%, P < .001) compared to other ethnicities. Precancer risks after HPV35 infection did not vary by ethnicity (global P = .52). The HPV35 A2 sublineage showed an increased association with precancer/cancer in African-Americans (OR = 5.6 vs A1, 95% CI = 1.3-24.8) and A2 was more prevalent among ICC in Africa than other world regions (41.9% vs 10.4%, P < .01). Our analyses support a strong link between HPV35 and cervical carcinogenesis in women of African ancestry. Current HPV vaccines cover the majority of cervical precancer/cancer across all ethnic groups; additional analyses are required to determine whether the addition of HPV35 to the already highly effective nine-valent HPV vaccine would provide better protection for women in Africa or of African ancestry.

Risk Estimates Supporting the 2019 ASCCP Risk-Based Management Consensus Guidelines.

The 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology Risk-Based Management Consensus Guidelines for the management of cervical cancer screening abnormalities recommend 1 of 6 clinical actions (treatment, optional treatment or colposcopy/biopsy, colposcopy/biopsy, 1-year surveillance, 3-year surveillance, 5-year return to regular screening) based on the risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3, adenocarcinoma in situ, or cancer (CIN 3+) for the many different combinations of current and recent past screening results. This article supports the main guidelines presentation by presenting and explaining the risk estimates that supported the guidelines. METHODS: From 2003 to 2017 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC), 1.5 million individuals aged 25 to 65 years were screened with human papillomavirus (HPV) and cytology cotesting scheduled every 3 years. We estimated immediate and 5-year risks of CIN 3+ for combinations of current test results paired with history of screening test and colposcopy/biopsy results. RESULTS: Risk tables are presented for different clinical scenarios. Examples of important results are highlighted; for example, the risk posed by most current abnormalities is greatly reduced if the prior screening round was HPV-negative. The immediate and 5-year risks of CIN 3+ used to decide clinical management are shown. CONCLUSIONS: The new risk-based guidelines present recommendations for the management of abnormal screening test and histology results; the key risk estimates supporting guidelines are presented in this article. Comprehensive risk estimates are freely available online at https://CervixCa.nlm.nih.gov/RiskTables.

A Study of Partial Human Papillomavirus Genotyping in Support of the 2019 ASCCP Risk-Based Management Consensus Guidelines.

INTRODUCTION: The 2019 ASCCP Risk-Based Management Consensus Guidelines include recommendations for partial human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping in management of abnormal cervical cancer screening results. The guidelines are based on matching estimates of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 3+ risk to consensus clinical action thresholds. In support of the guidelines, this analysis addresses the risks predicted by individual identification of HPV 16 and HPV 18. METHODS: Risk estimates were drawn from a subset of women in the Kaiser Permanente Northern California screening program, whose residual cervical specimens were HPV typed as part of the HPV Persistence and Progression study. We calculated risk of CIN 3+ to assess how identification of HPV 16, HPV 18, or 12 other "high-risk" HPV types would influence recommended clinical management of new abnormal screening results, taking into account current cytologic results and recent screening history. Immediate and/or 5-year risks of CIN 3+ were matched to clinical actions identified in the guidelines. RESULTS: Identification of HPV 16 at the first visit including HPV testing elevated immediate risk of diagnosing CIN 3+ sufficiently to mandate colposcopic referral even when cytology was Negative for Intraepithelial Lesions or Malignancy and to support a preference for treatment of cytologic high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion. HPV 18 less clearly elevated CIN 3+ risk. CONCLUSIONS: Identification of HPV 16 clearly mandated consideration in clinical management of new abnormal screening results. HPV 18 positivity must be considered as a special situation because of established disproportionate risk of invasive cancer. More detailed genotyping and use beyond initial management will be considered in guideline updates.

Impact of human papillomavirus vaccination on the clinical meaning of cervical screening results.

Women previously vaccinated against human papillomavirus (HPV) type 16 and 18 are now reaching the age (21 years) at which cervical-cancer screening is recommended in the U.S. The impact of HPV vaccination on risks of cervical precancer following a positive and negative screen among women aged 21-24 years who just started routine cervical screening are not well described. Therefore, three-year absolute and relative (RR) cumulative risks of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe diagnoses (≥CIN2) and grade 3 or more severe diagnoses (≥CIN3) were estimated for women undergoing cervical screening at Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Risks were estimated in women aged 21-24 years (n = 75,008) undergoing cervical screening since late 2006, 6 months after HPV vaccination became available; women were categorized vaccinated at ages <18, 18-20, and 21-24 years and compared to those who were unvaccinated. Three-year risks were estimated for normal, low-grade, and high-grade cytology results. Three-year risks of ≥CIN2 and ≥CIN3 for unvaccinated women following low-grade cytology were 10.89% for and 3.70%, respectively. By comparison, Three-year risks of ≥CIN2 and ≥CIN3 were 5.26% (RR = 0.48, 95%CI = 0.24-0.99) and 0.99% (RR = 0.27, 95%CI = 0.06-1.13), respectively, for women vaccinated under the age of 18 years. Three-year ≥CIN2 and ≥CIN3 risks were lower for those HPV vaccinated at younger age for any screening result (ptrend ≤ 0.01 for all comparisons). These data support initiating cervical screening at an older age or changing the management of a low-grade cytology result in women aged 21-24 years who were vaccinated against HPV younger than age of 18 years.

Effect of Several Negative Rounds of Human Papillomavirus and Cytology Co-testing on Safety Against Cervical Cancer: An Observational Cohort Study.

Background: Current U.S. cervical cancer screening and management guidelines do not consider previous screening history, because data on multiple-round human papillomavirus (HPV) and cytology "co-testing" have been unavailable. Objective: To measure cervical cancer risk in routine practice after successive negative screening co-tests at 3-year intervals. Design: Observational cohort study. Setting: Integrated health care system (Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California). Patients: 990 013 women who had 1 or more co-tests from 2003 to 2014. Measurements: 3- and 5-year cumulative detection of (risk for) cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3, adenocarcinoma in situ, and cervical cancer (≥CIN3) in women with different numbers of negative co-tests, overall and within subgroups defined by previous co-test results or baseline age. Results: Five-year ≥CIN3 risks decreased after each successive negative co-test screening round (0.098%, 0.052%, and 0.035%). Five-year ≥CIN3 risks for an HPV-negative co-test, regardless of the cytology result, nearly matched the performance (reassurance) of a negative co-test for each successive round of screening (0.114%, 0.061%, and 0.041%). By comparison, ≥CIN3 risks for the cytology-negative co-test, regardless of the HPV result, also decreased with each successive round, but 3-year risks were as high as 5-year risks after an HPV-negative co-test (0.199%, 0.065%, and 0.043%). No interval cervical cancer cases were diagnosed after the second negative co-test. Independently, ≥CIN3 risks decreased with age. Length of previous screening interval did not influence future ≥CIN3 risks. Limitation: Interval-censored observational data. Conclusion: After 1 or more negative cervical co-tests (or HPV tests), longer screening intervals (every 5 years or more) might be feasible and safe. Primary Funding Source: National Cancer Institute Intramural Research Program.

Validation of a Human Papillomavirus (HPV) DNA Cervical Screening Test That Provides Expanded HPV Typing.

As cervical cancer screening shifts from cytology to human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, a major question is the clinical value of identifying individual HPV types. We aimed to validate Onclarity (Becton Dickinson Diagnostics, Sparks, MD), a nine-channel HPV test recently approved by the FDA, by assessing (i) the association of Onclarity types/channels with precancer/cancer; (ii) HPV type/channel agreement between the results of Onclarity and cobas (Roche Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, CA), another FDA-approved test; and (iii) Onclarity typing for all types/channels compared to typing results from a research assay (linear array [LA]; Roche). We compared Onclarity to histopathology, cobas, and LA. We tested a stratified random sample (n = 9,701) of discarded routine clinical specimens that had tested positive by Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2; Qiagen, Germantown, MD). A subset had already been tested by cobas and LA (n = 1,965). Cervical histopathology was ascertained from electronic health records. Hierarchical Onclarity channels showed a significant linear association with histological severity. Onclarity and cobas had excellent agreement on partial typing of HPV16, HPV18, and the other 12 types as a pool (sample-weighted kappa value of 0.83); cobas was slightly more sensitive for HPV18 and slightly less sensitive for the pooled high-risk types. Typing by Onclarity showed excellent agreement with types and groups of types identified by LA (kappa values from 0.80 for HPV39/68/35 to 0.97 for HPV16). Onclarity typing results corresponded well to histopathology and to an already validated HPV DNA test and could provide additional clinical typing if such discrimination is determined to be clinically desirable.

Adherence patterns to extended cervical screening intervals in women undergoing human papillomavirus (HPV) and cytology cotesting.

Although guidelines have recommended extended interval cervical screening using concurrent human papillomavirus (HPV) and cytology ("cotesting") for over a decade, little is known about its adoption into routine care. Using longitudinal medical record data (2003-2015) from Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC), which adopted triennial cotesting in 2003, we examined adherence to extended interval screening. We analyzed predictors of screening intervals among 491,588 women undergoing routine screening, categorizing interval length into early (<2.5years), adherent (2.5<3.5years), or late (3.5<6.0years). We also examined repeated early screening in a subgroup of 50,691 women. Predictors examined included: cohort year (defined by baseline cotest, 2003-2009), race/ethnicity, and baseline age. Compared to the 2003 cohort, women in the 2009 cohort were significantly less likely to screen early (aOR=0.22, 95% CI=0.21, 0.23) or late (aOR=0.47, 95% CI=0.45, 0.49). African American (AA) and Hispanic women were less adherent overall than Non-Hispanic White women, with increased early [(AA: aOR=1.21, 95%CI=1.17, 1.25) (Hispanic: aOR=1.08, 95%CI=1.06, 1.11)] and late screening [(AA: aOR=1.23, 95%CI=1.19, 1.27) (Hispanic: aOR=1.06, 95%CI=1.03, 1.08)]. Asian women were slightly more likely to screen early (aOR=1.03, 95%CI=1.01, 1.05), and less likely to screen late (aOR=0.92, 95% CI=0.90, 0.94). Women aged 60-64years were most likely to screen early for two consecutive intervals (aOR=2.09, 95%CI=1.91, 2.29). Our study found that widespread and rapid adoption of extended interval cervical cancer screening is possible, at least in this managed care setting. Further research examining multilevel drivers promoting or restricting extended interval screening across diverse healthcare settings is needed.

Challenges in risk estimation using routinely collected clinical data: The example of estimating cervical cancer risks from electronic health-records.

Electronic health-records (EHR) are increasingly used by epidemiologists studying disease following surveillance testing to provide evidence for screening intervals and referral guidelines. Although cost-effective, undiagnosed prevalent disease and interval censoring (in which asymptomatic disease is only observed at the time of testing) raise substantial analytic issues when estimating risk that cannot be addressed using Kaplan-Meier methods. Based on our experience analysing EHR from cervical cancer screening, we previously proposed the logistic-Weibull model to address these issues. Here we demonstrate how the choice of statistical method can impact risk estimates. We use observed data on 41,067 women in the cervical cancer screening program at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, 2003-2013, as well as simulations to evaluate the ability of different methods (Kaplan-Meier, Turnbull, Weibull and logistic-Weibull) to accurately estimate risk within a screening program. Cumulative risk estimates from the statistical methods varied considerably, with the largest differences occurring for prevalent disease risk when baseline disease ascertainment was random but incomplete. Kaplan-Meier underestimated risk at earlier times and overestimated risk at later times in the presence of interval censoring or undiagnosed prevalent disease. Turnbull performed well, though was inefficient and not smooth. The logistic-Weibull model performed well, except when event times didn't follow a Weibull distribution. We have demonstrated that methods for right-censored data, such as Kaplan-Meier, result in biased estimates of disease risks when applied to interval-censored data, such as screening programs using EHR data. The logistic-Weibull model is attractive, but the model fit must be checked against Turnbull non-parametric risk estimates.

Low Risk of Cervical Cancer/Precancer Among Most Women Under Surveillance Postcolposcopy.

OBJECTIVE: To inform impending postcolposcopy guidelines, this analysis examined the subsequent risk of CIN 3+ among women with a grade lower than CIN 2 (< CIN 2) colposcopy results, taking into account the referring results that brought them to colposcopy and cotest results postcolposcopy. METHODS: We analyzed 107,005 women from 25 to 65 years old, recommended for colposcopy at Kaiser Permanente Northern California. We estimated absolute risks of CIN 3+ among women: (1) recommended for colposcopy (precolposcopy), (2) following colposcopy and with histology results < CIN 2 (postcolposcopy), and (3) with cotest results 12 months after a < CIN 2 colposcopy (return cotest). RESULTS: After colposcopy showing < CIN 2 (n = 69,790; 87% of the women at colposcopy), the 1-year risk of CIN 3+ was 1.2%, compared with 6.3% at the time of colposcopy recommendation. Negative cotest results 1 year after colposcopy identified a large group (37.1%) of women whose risk of CIN 3+ (i.e., <0.2% at 3 years after postcolposcopy cotest) was comparable with women with normal cytology in the screening population. These risks are consistent with current guidelines recommending repeat cotesting 12 months after colposcopy < CIN 2 and a 3-year return for women with a negative postcolposcopy cotest. CONCLUSIONS: Most women are at low risk of subsequent CIN 3+ after a colposcopy showing < CIN 2, especially those who are human papillomavirus-negative postcolposcopy, consistent with current management guidelines for repeat testing intervals. Before the finalizing the upcoming guidelines, we will consider additional rounds of postcolposcopy cotesting.

Assessment of a New Lower-Cost Real-Time PCR Assay for Detection of High-Risk Human Papillomavirus: Useful for Cervical Screening in Limited-Resource Settings?

Inexpensive and easy-to-perform human papillomavirus (HPV) tests are needed for primary cervical cancer screening in lower-resource regions. In a convenience sample of 516 residual exfoliative cervical specimens from the Kaiser Permanente Northern California and U.S. National Cancer Institute Persistence and Progression Study, we assessed the agreement and clinical performance of a simple, inexpensive real-time PCR assay for the detection of 13 carcinogenic HPV types (the H13 assay; Hybribio, Hong Kong) that is marketed in limited-resource settings compared to previous testing by the Hybrid Capture 2 assay (HC2; Qiagen, Germantown, MD) and the Onclarity assay (BD Diagnostics, Sparks, MD). The test set was chosen to include many HPV-positive specimens. The reference standard was a combination of HC2 and Onclarity results for HPV detection and histologic diagnosis of controls (less than cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 [

Why does cervical cancer occur in a state-of-the-art screening program?

BACKGROUND: The goal of cervical screening is to detect and treat precancers before some become cancer. We wanted to understand why, despite state-of-the-art methods, cervical cancers occured in relationship to programmatic performance at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC), where >1,000,000 women aged ≥30years have undergone cervical cancer screening by triennial HPV and cytology cotesting since 2003. METHODS: We reviewed clinical histories preceding cervical cancer diagnoses to assign "causes" of cancer. We calculated surrogate measures of programmatic effectiveness (precancers/(precancers and cancers)) and diagnostic yield (precancers and cancers per 1000 cotests), overall and by age at cotest (30-39, 40-49, and ≥50years). RESULTS: Cancer was rare and found mainly in a localized (treatable) stage. Of 623 cervical cancers with at least one preceding or concurrent cotest, 360 (57.8%) were judged to be prevalent (diagnosed at a localized stage within one year or regional/distant stage within two years of the first cotest). Non-compliance with recommended screening and management preceded 9.0% of all cancers. False-negative cotests/sampling errors (HPV and cytology negative), false-negative histologic diagnoses, and treatment failures preceded 11.2%, 9.0%, and 4.3%, respectively, of all cancers. There was significant heterogeneity in the causes of cancer by histologic category (p<0.001 for all; p=0.002 excluding prevalent cases). Programmatic effectiveness (95.3%) and diagnostic yield were greater for squamous cell versus adenocarcinoma histology (p<0.0001) and both decreased with older ages (ptrend<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: A state-of-the-art intensive screening program results in very few cervical cancers, most of which are detected early by screening. Screening may become less efficient at older ages.

Risks of CIN 2+, CIN 3+, and Cancer by Cytology and Human Papillomavirus Status: The Foundation of Risk-Based Cervical Screening Guidelines.

OBJECTIVES: The next round of the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP)-sponsored cervical cancer screening and management guidelines will recommend clinical actions based on risk, rather than test-based algorithms. This article gives preliminary risk estimates for the screening setting, showing combinations of the 2 most important predictors, human papillomavirus (HPV) status and cytology result. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Among 1,262,713 women aged 25 to 77 years co-tested with HC2 (Qiagen) and cytology at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, we estimated 0-5-year cumulative risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2+, CIN 3+, and cancer for combinations of cytology (negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy [NILM], atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance [ASC-US], low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion [LSIL], atypical squamous cells cannot exclude HSIL [ASC-H], high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion [HSIL], atypical glandular cells [AGC]) and HPV status. RESULTS: Ninety percent of screened women had HPV-negative NILM and an extremely low risk of subsequent cancer. Five-year risks of CIN 3+ were lower after HPV negativity (0.12%) than after NILM (0.25%). Among HPV-negative women, 5-year risks for CIN 3+ were 0.10% for NILM, 0.44% for ASC-US, 1.8% for LSIL, 3.0% for ASC-H, 1.2% for AGC, and 29% for HSIL+ cytology (which was very rare). Among HPV-positive women, 5-year risks were 4.0% for NILM, 6.8% for ASC-US, 6.1% for LSIL, 28% for ASC-H, 30% for AGC, and 50% for HSIL+ cytology. CONCLUSIONS: As a foundation for the next guidelines revision, we confirmed with additional precision the risk estimates previously reported for combinations of HPV and cytology. Future analyses will estimate risks for women being followed in colposcopy clinic and posttreatment and will consider the role of risk modifiers such as age, HPV vaccine status, HPV type, and screening and treatment history.

A cohort study of cervical screening using partial HPV typing and cytology triage.

HPV testing is more sensitive than cytology for cervical screening. However, to incorporate HPV tests into screening, risk-stratification ("triage") of HPV-positive women is needed to avoid excessive colposcopy and overtreatment. We prospectively evaluated combinations of partial HPV typing (Onclarity, BD) and cytology triage, and explored whether management could be simplified, based on grouping combinations yielding similar 3-year or 18-month CIN3+ risks. We typed ∼9,000 archived specimens, taken at enrollment (2007-2011) into the NCI-Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) HPV Persistence and Progression (PaP) cohort. Stratified sampling, with reweighting in the statistical analysis, permitted risk estimation of HPV/cytology combinations for the 700,000+-woman KPNC screening population. Based on 3-year CIN3+ risks, Onclarity results could be combined into five groups (HPV16, else HPV18/45, else HPV31/33/58/52, else HPV51/35/39/68/56/66/68, else HPV negative); cytology results fell into three risk groups ("high-grade," ASC-US/LSIL, NILM). For the resultant 15 HPV group-cytology combinations, 3-year CIN3+ risks ranged 1,000-fold from 60.6% to 0.06%. To guide management, we compared the risks to established "benchmark" risk/management thresholds in this same population (e.g., LSIL predicted 3-year CIN3+ risk of 5.8% in the screening population, providing the benchmark for colposcopic referral). By benchmarking to 3-year risk thresholds (supplemented by 18-month estimates), the widely varying risk strata could be condensed into four action bands (very high risk of CIN3+ mandating consideration of cone biopsy if colposcopy did not find precancer; moderate risk justifying colposcopy; low risk managed by intensified follow-up to permit HPV "clearance"; and very low risk permitting routine screening.) Overall, the results support primary HPV testing, with management of HPV-positive women using partial HPV typing and cytology.