Factors associated with human papillomavirus (HPV) test acceptability in primary screening for cervical cancer: A mixed methods research synthesis.

Primary screening for cervical cancer is transitioning from the longstanding Pap smear towards implementation of an HPV-DNA test, which is more sensitive than Pap cytology in detecting high-risk lesions and offers greater protection against invasive cervical carcinomas. Based on these results, many countries are recommending and implementing HPV testing-based screening programs. Understanding what factors (e.g., knowledge, attitudes) will impact on HPV test acceptability by women is crucial for ensuring adequate public health practices to optimize cervical screening uptake. We used mixed methods research synthesis to provide a categorization of the relevant factors related to HPV primary screening for cervical cancer and describe their influence on women's acceptability of HPV testing. We searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Global Health and Web of Science for journal articles between January 1, 1980 and October 31, 2017 and retained 22 empirical articles. Our results show that while most factors associated with HPV test acceptability are included in the Health Belief Model and/or Theory of Planned Behavior (e.g., attitudes, knowledge), other important factors are not encompassed by these theoretical frameworks (e.g., health behaviors, negative emotional reactions related to HPV testing). The direction of influence of psychosocial factors on HPV test acceptability was synthesized based on 14 quantitative studies as: facilitators (e.g., high perceived HPV test benefits), barriers (e.g., negative attitudes towards increased screening intervals), contradictory evidence (e.g., sexual history) and no impact (e.g., high perceived severity of HPV infection). Further population-based studies are needed to confirm the impact of these factors on HPV-based screening acceptability.

Human Papillomavirus Genotyping Testing Practice in 2014: Results of a College of American Pathologists National Survey.

CONTEXT: - College of American Pathologists (CAP) surveys are used to establish national benchmarks for laboratories. OBJECTIVE: - To investigate human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping testing practice patterns in laboratories in 2014. DESIGN: - Data were analyzed from the CAP HPV Genotyping Practices Supplemental Questionnaire distributed to 749 laboratories participating in the CAP Human Papillomavirus (High Risk) for Cytology Program. RESULTS: - Six hundred four of 749 laboratories (80.6%) responded to the survey. More laboratories offered HPV genotyping testing and performed in-house HPV genotyping testing as compared to previous surveys. The Roche cobas HPV test was the most commonly used genotyping method (37.0%; 160 of 433), followed by Hologic Aptima HPV16 18/45 (26.1%; 113 of 433) and Hologic Cervista HPV16/18 (14.3%; 62 of 433). Most laboratories (287 of 399; 71.9%) offered HPV genotyping for high-risk HPV cases regardless of Papanicolaou (Pap) test results and patient age; this pattern was more common in laboratories using cobas. The remaining laboratories specifically offered testing to women with a negative Pap test result at age 30 years and older (65.2%, 73 of 112) or all ages (37.5%, 42 of 112). The median reporting rates of HPV16 and/or HPV18 positivity were 20.6%, 25.7%, 21.1%, and 57.4% for women with positive high-risk HPV adjunctive negative Pap results, atypical squamous cells of undermined significance, low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, and high-grade squamous lesion, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: - Human papillomavirus genotyping testing has increased. Roche cobas and Hologic Aptima genotype methods were the most common, and laboratories using cobas usually offered genotyping regardless of Pap test result and age. The data provide a baseline and trend of HPV genotyping test practices in 2014.

High-risk human papillomavirus DNA test: could it be useful in low-grade cervical lesion triage? Five-year follow-up.

We conducted a retrospective, observational study in order to evaluate the role of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)-DNA test in patients with first diagnosis of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (L-SILs).Patients were divided into group A, annual Papanicolaou test and hrHPV-DNA tests (167 patients) and group B, immediate colposcopy, followed by annual papanicolaou test and hrHPV-DNA tests (164 patients). We assessed sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), positive predictive value, positive-negative likelihood ratio of hrHPV-DNA test, and 5-year relative risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 in hrHPV-DNA+. Colposcopy is still considered the best choice for women with L-SIL and hrHPV-DNA+ test. High sensitivity and NPV of hrHPV-DNA test permit to use it in the follow-up of L-SIL with a HPV-negative status, without necessity of referring to colposcopy.

HPV testing and vaccination in Europe.

Current cytology-based screening has a moderate sensitivity to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN 3) and cervical cancer even in those states providing rigorous quality control of their cervical screening programs. The impact of vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) types 16 and 18 as well as the incorporation of HPV testing on the detection of CIN 3 and cancer is discussed. HPV testing used as a triage for atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, test of cure after treatment, and HPV-based primary screening may improve current cervical screening programs.HPV testing as a triage test for ASCUS seems to offer an improved sensitivity, with a similar specificity as compared to repeat cytology for diagnosing high-grade CIN and has been recommended throughout most EU states. HPV testing as a triage test for low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions has a low specificity and is not recommended in most member states. HPV test of cure offers an improved sensitivity compared to cytology for women with persistent cervical precancer after treatment. HPV-based cervical cancer screening is more effective than screening with cytology. The effects of HPV-based screening depend on the organization of the program and on adherence to algorithms for screening triage. Otherwise, it is likely that HPV-based screening will increase the referral rate to colposcopy including more women with no detectable cervical lesion. HPV vaccination will require many years to evaluate any beneficial effects on cervical cancer incidence and mortality.