Increase in venous thromboembolism in SARS-CoV-2 infected lung tissue: proteome analysis of lung parenchyma, isolated endothelium, and thrombi.

AIMS: COVID-19 pneumonia is characterized by an increased rate of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. To better understand the pathophysiology behind thrombosis in COVID-19, we performed proteomics analysis on SARS-CoV-2 infected lung tissue. METHODS: Liquid chromatography mass spectrometry was performed on SARS-CoV-2 infected postmortem lung tissue samples. Five protein profiling analyses were performed: whole slide lung parenchyma analysis, followed by analysis of isolated thrombi and endothelium, both stratified by disease (COVID-19 versus influenza) and thrombus morphology (embolism versus in situ). Influenza autopsy cases with pulmonary thrombi were used as controls. RESULTS: Compared to influenza controls, both analyses of COVID-19 whole-tissue and isolated endothelium showed upregulation of proteins and pathways related to liver metabolism including urea cycle activation, with arginase being among the top upregulated proteins in COVID-19 lung tissue. Analysis of isolated COVID-19 thrombi showed significant downregulation of pathways related to platelet activation compared to influenza thrombi. Analysis of isolated thrombi based on histomorphology shows that in situ thrombi have significant upregulation of coronavirus pathogenesis proteins. CONCLUSIONS: The decrease in platelet activation pathways in severe COVID-19 thrombi suggests a relative increase in venous thromboembolism, as thrombi from venous origin tend to contain fewer platelets than arterial thrombi. Based on histomorphology, in situ thrombi show upregulation of various proteins related to SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis compared to thromboemboli, which may indicate increased in situ pulmonary thrombosis in COVID-19. Therefore, this study supports the increase of venous thromboembolism without undercutting the involvement of in situ thrombosis in severe COVID-19.

Topical imiquimod treatment of residual or recurrent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia lesions (TOPIC-2): A randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy of imiquimod in women with residual or recurrent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (rrCIN), compared with large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ). DESIGN: Randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. SETTING: One academic and one regional hospital in the Netherlands. POPULATION: Thirty-five women with rrCIN were included in the study between May 2016 and May 2021. METHODS: Women were randomised to receive treatment with 5% imiquimod cream (12.5 mg) intravaginally (three times a week for a duration of 16 weeks) or a LLETZ procedure (standard treatment). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was reduction to normal cytology at 6 months after starting treatment. Secondary outcomes were clearance of high-risk human papilloma virus (hr-HPV) in both groups and reduction to ≤CIN1 in the imiquimod group. Side effects were monitored. RESULTS: Treatment success was 33% (6/18) in the imiquimod group versus 100% (16/16) in the LLETZ group (P < 0.001), whereas HPV clearance was 22% (4/18) in the imiquimod group versus 88% (14/16) in the LLETZ group (P < 0.001). After the randomisation of 35 women, the futility of treatment with imiquimod was proven and the trial was prematurely finished. In the follow-up period, three patients remained without additional treatment, whereas all other patients underwent LLETZ, conisation or hysterectomy. In the LLETZ group none of the patients received additional treatment during 2 years of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first randomised controlled trial to show that topical imiquimod has a significantly lower success rate in terms of reduction to normal cytology and hr-HPV clearance, compared with LLETZ, in women with rrCIN. Additionally, imiquimod has numerous side effects and after using imiquimod most women with rrCIN still required additional surgical treatment.

Faecal occult blood loss accurately predicts future detection of colorectal cancer. A prognostic model.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the prognostic potential of repeated faecal haemoglobin (F-Hb) concentration measurements in faecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based screening for colorectal cancer (CRC). DESIGN: Prognostic model. SETTING: Dutch biennial FIT-based screening programme during 2014-2018. PARTICIPANTS: 265 881 participants completing three rounds of FIT, with negative test results (F-Hb <47 µg Hb/g faeces) in rounds 1 and 2. INTERVENTIONS: Colonoscopy follow-up in participants with a positive FIT (F-Hb ≥47 µg Hb/g faeces). MAIN OUTCOMES: We evaluated prognostic models for detecting advanced neoplasia (AN) and CRC in round 3, with as predictors, participant age, sex, F-Hb in rounds 1 and 2, and categories/combinations/non-linear transformations of F-Hb. Primary evaluation criteria included: risk prediction accuracy (calibration), discrimination of participants with versus without AN or CRC (optimism-adjusted C-statistics, range 0.5-1.0), the degree of risk stratification and C-statistics in external validation. RESULTS: Among study participants, 8806 (3.3%) had a positive FIT result, 3254 (1.2%) had AN detected and 557 (0.2%) had cancer. F-Hb concentrations in rounds 1 and 2 were the strongest outcome predictors, with adjusted ORs of up to 9.4 (95% CI 7.5 to 11.7) for the highest F-Hb category. Risk predictions matched the observed risk for most participants (calibration intercept -0.008 to -0.099; slope 0.982-0.998), and discriminated participants with versus without AN or CRC with C-statistics of 0.78 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.79) and 0.73 (95% CI 0.71 to 0.75), respectively. The predicted risk ranged from 0.4% to 36.7% for AN and from 0.0% to 5.5% for CRC across participants. In external validation, the model retained similar discrimination accuracy for AN (C-statistic 0.77, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.87) and CRC (C-statistic 0.78, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.91). CONCLUSION: Participants at lower versus higher risk of future AN or CRC can be accurately identified based on their age, sex and particularly, prior F-Hb concentrations. Risk stratification should be considered based on this information.

Factors associated with interval colorectal cancer after negative FIT: Results of two screening rounds in the Dutch FIT-based CRC screening program.

The interval colorectal cancer (CRC) rate after negative fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is an important quality indicator of CRC screening programs. We analyzed the outcomes of two rounds of the FIT-based CRC screening program in the Netherlands, using data from individuals who participated in FIT-screening from 2014 to 2017. Data of individuals with one prior negative FIT (first round) or two prior negative FITs (first and second round) were included. Outcomes included the incidence of interval CRC in FIT-negative participants (<47 µg Hb/g feces [µg/g]), FIT-sensitivity, and the probability of detecting an interval CRC by fecal hemoglobin concentration (f-Hb). FIT-sensitivity was estimated using the detection method and the proportional incidence method (based on expected CRC incidence). Logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate whether f-Hb affects probability of detecting interval CRC, adjusted for sex- and age-differences. Incidence of interval CRC was 10.4 per 10 000 participants after the first and 9.6 after the second screening round. FIT-sensitivity based on the detection method was 84.4% (95%CI 83.8-85.0) in the first and 73.5% (95% CI 71.8-75.2) in the second screening round. The proportional incidence method resulted in a FIT-sensitivity of 76.4% (95%CI 73.3-79.6) in the first and 79.1% (95%CI 73.7-85.3) in the second screening round. After one negative FIT, participants with f-Hb just below the cut-off (>40-46.9 µg/g) had a higher probability of detecting an interval CRC (OR 16.9; 95%CI: 14.0-20.4) than had participants with unmeasurable f-Hb (0-2.6 µg/g). After two screening rounds, the odds ratio for interval CRC was 12.0 (95%CI: 7.8-17.6) for participants with f-Hb just below the cut-off compared with participants with unmeasurable f-Hb. After both screening rounds, the Dutch CRC screening program had a low incidence of interval CRC and an associated high FIT-sensitivity. Our findings suggest there is a potential for further optimizing CRC screening programs with the use of risk-stratified CRC screening based on prior f-Hb.

Advanced serrated polyps as a target of screening: detection rate and positive predictive value within a fecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening population.

BACKGROUND : Advanced serrated polyps (ASPs) have a comparable risk to advanced adenomas for progression to colorectal cancer (CRC). The yield of most CRC screening programs, however, is based on advanced adenomas and CRC only. We assessed the ASP detection rate, and positive predictive value (PPV) including ASPs in a fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based screening program. METHODS : We analyzed the findings of follow-up colonoscopies of FIT-positive screenees in the Dutch CRC screening program from 2014 until 2020. Data were retrieved from the national screening and pathology database. An ASP was defined as any serrated polyp of ≥ 10 mm, sessile serrated lesion with dysplasia, or traditional serrated adenoma. The ASP detection rate was defined as the proportion of colonoscopies with ≥ 1 ASP. PPV was originally defined as the proportion of individuals with a CRC or advanced adenoma. The updated PPV definition included CRCs, advanced adenomas, and/or ASPs. RESULTS : 322 882 colonoscopies were included in the analyses. The overall detection rate of ASPs was 5.9 %. ASPs were detected more often in women than men (6.3 % vs. 5.6 %; P < 0.001). ASP detection rates in individuals aged 55-59, 60-64, 65-69, and 70 + were 5.2 %, 6.1 %, 6.1 %, and 5.9 %, respectively (P < 0.001). The PPV for CRCs and advanced adenomas was 41.1 % and increased to 43.8 % when including ASPs. The PPV increase was larger in women than in men (3.2 vs. 2.4 percentage points). CONCLUSIONS : 5.9 % of FIT-positive screenees had ASPs, but half of these were detected in combination with a CRC or advanced adenoma. Therefore, including ASPs results in a small increase in the yield of FIT-based screening.

Interval post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer following a negative colonoscopy in a fecal immunochemical test-based screening program.

BACKGROUND: In the Dutch colorectal (CRC) screening program, fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-positive individuals are referred for colonoscopy. If no relevant findings are detected at colonoscopy, individuals are reinvited for FIT screening after 10 years. We aimed to assess CRC risk after a negative colonoscopy in FIT-positive individuals. METHODS: In this cross-sectional cohort study, data were extracted from the Dutch national screening information system. Participants with a positive FIT followed by a negative colonoscopy between 2014 and 2018 were included. A negative colonoscopy was defined as a colonoscopy during which no more than one nonvillous, nonproximal adenoma < 10 mm or serrated polyp < 10 mm was found. The main outcome was interval post-colonoscopy CRC (iPCCRC) risk. iPCCRC risk was reviewed against the risk of interval CRC after a negative FIT (FIT IC) with a 2-year screening interval. RESULTS: 35 052 FIT-positive participants had a negative colonoscopy and 24 iPCCRCs were diagnosed, resulting in an iPCCRC risk of 6.85 (95 %CI 4.60-10.19) per 10 000 individuals after a median follow-up of 1.4 years. After 2.5 years of follow-up, age-adjusted iPCCRC risk was approximately equal to FIT IC risk at 2 years. CONCLUSION: Risk of iPCCRC within a FIT-based CRC screening program was low during the first years after colonos-copy but, after 2.5 years, was the same as the risk in FIT-negative individuals at 2 years, when they are reinvited for screening. Colonoscopy quality may therefore require further improvement and FIT screening interval may need to be reduced after negative colonoscopy.

Personalized colorectal cancer screening: study protocol of a mixed-methods study on the effectiveness of tailored intervals based on prior f-Hb concentration in a fit-based colorectal cancer screening program (PERFECT-FIT).

BACKGROUND: In 2014, the national population-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program was implemented in the Netherlands. Biennial fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for hemoglobin (Hb) is used at a cut-off of 47 µg Hb per gram feces. The CRC screening program successfully started, with high participation rates and yield of screening. Now that the program has reached a steady state, there is potential to further optimize the program. Previous studies showed that prior fecal Hb (f-Hb) concentrations just below the FIT cut-off are associated with a higher risk for detection of advanced neoplasia (AN) at subsequent screening rounds. We aim to achieve a better balance between the harms and benefits of CRC screening by offering participants tailored invitation intervals based on prior f-Hb concentrations after negative FIT. METHODS: This mixed-methods study will be performed within the Dutch national CRC screening program and will consist of: (1) a randomized controlled trial (RCT), (2) focus group studies, and (3) decision modelling. The primary outcome is the yield of AN per screened individual in personalized screening vs. uniform screening. Secondary outcomes are perspectives on, acceptability of and adherence to personalized screening, as well as long-term outcomes of personalized vs. uniform screening. The RCT will include 20,000 participants of the Dutch CRC screening program; 10,000 in the intervention and 10,000 in the control arm. The intervention arm will receive a personalized screening interval based on the prior f-Hb concentration (1, 2 or 3 years). The control arm will receive a screening interval according to current practice (2 years). The focus group studies are designed to understand individuals' perspectives on and acceptability of personalized CRC screening. Results of the RCT will be incorporated into the MISCAN-Colon model to determine long-term benefits, harms, and costs of personalized vs. uniform CRC screening. DISCUSSION: The aim of this study is to evaluate the yield, feasibility, acceptability and (cost-) effectiveness of personalized CRC screening through tailored invitation intervals based on prior f-Hb concentrations. This knowledge may be of guidance for health policy makers and may provide evidence for implementing personalized CRC screening in The Netherlands and/or other countries using FIT as screening modality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05423886, June 21, 2022, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05423886.

Performance of DNA methylation analysis of ASCL1, LHX8, ST6GALNAC5, GHSR, ZIC1 and SST for the triage of HPV-positive women: Results from a Dutch primary HPV-based screening cohort.

Methylation of host-cell deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) has been proposed as a promising biomarker for triage of high-risk (hr) human papillomavirus (HPV) positive women at screening. Our study aims to validate recently identified host-cell DNA methylation markers for triage in an hrHPV-positive cohort derived from primary HPV-based cervical screening in The Netherlands. Methylation markers ASCL1, LHX8, ST6GALNAC5, GHSR, ZIC1 and SST were evaluated relative to the ACTB reference gene by multiplex quantitative methylation-specific PCR (qMSP) in clinician-collected cervical samples (n = 715) from hrHPV-positive women (age 29-60 years), who were enrolled in the Dutch IMPROVE screening trial (NTR5078). Primary clinical end-point was cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN3) or cancer (CIN3+). The single-marker and bi-marker methylation classifiers developed for CIN3 detection in a previous series of hrHPV-positive clinician-collected cervical samples were applied. The diagnostic accuracy was visualised using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and assessed through area under the ROC curve (AUC). The performance of the methylation markers to detect CIN3+ was determined using the predefined threshold calibrated at 70% clinical specificity. Individual methylation makers showed good performance for CIN3+ detection, with highest AUC for ASCL1 (0.844) and LHX8 (0.830). Combined as a bi-marker panel with predefined threshold, ASCL1/LHX8 yielded a CIN3+ sensitivity of 76.9% (70/91; 95% CI 68.3-85.6%) at a specificity of 74.5% (465/624; 95% CI 71.1-77.9%). In conclusion, our study shows that the individual host-cell DNA methylation classifiers and the bi-marker panel ASCL1/LHX8 have clinical utility for the detection of CIN3+ in hrHPV-positive women invited for routine screening.

Adjunctive use of p16 immunohistochemistry for optimizing management of CIN lesions in a high-risk human papillomavirus-positive population.

INTRODUCTION: Immunostaining with p16INK4a (p16), a tumor-suppressor surrogate protein biomarker for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) oncogenic activity, may complement standard hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) histology review, and provide more objective criteria to support the cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) diagnosis. With this study we assessed the impact of p16 immunohistochemistry on CIN grading in an hrHPV-based screening setting. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this post-hoc analysis, 326 histology follow-up samples from a group of hrHPV-positive women were stained with p16 immunohistochemistry. All H&E samples were centrally revised. The pathologists reported their level of confidence in classifying the CIN lesion. RESULTS: Combining H&E and p16 staining resulted in a change of diagnosis in 27.3% (n = 89) of cases compared with the revised H&E samples, with a decrease of 34.5% (n = 18) in CIN1 and 22.7% (n = 15) in CIN2 classifications, and an increase of 18.3% (n = 19) in no CIN and 20.7% (n = 19) in CIN3 diagnoses. The level of confidence in CIN grading by the pathologist increased with adjunctive use of p16 immunohistochemistry to standard H&E. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that adjunctive use of p16 immunohistochemistry to H&E morphology reduces the number of CIN1 and CIN2 classifications with a proportional increase in no CIN and CIN3 diagnoses, compared with standard H&E-based CIN diagnosis alone. The pathologists felt more confident in classifying the material with H&E and p16 immunohistochemistry than by using H&E alone, particularly during assessment of small biopsies. Adjunctive use of p16 immunohistochemistry to standard H&E assessment of CIN would be valuable for the diagnostic accuracy, thereby optimizing CIN management and possibly decreasing overtreatment.

Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and the risk of spontaneous preterm birth: A Dutch population-based cohort study with 45,259 pregnancy outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Excisional procedures of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) may increase the risk of preterm birth. It is unknown whether this increased risk is due to the excision procedure itself, to the underlying CIN, or to secondary risk factors that are associated with both preterm birth and CIN. The aim of this study is to assess the risk of spontaneous preterm birth in women with treated and untreated CIN and examine possible associations by making a distinction between the excised volume of cervical tissue and having cervical disease. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This Dutch population-based observational cohort study identified women aged 29 to 41 years with CIN between 2005 and 2015 from the Dutch pathology registry (PALGA) and frequency matched them with a control group without any cervical abnormality based on age at and year of pathology outcome (i.e., CIN or normal cytology) and urbanization (<100,000 inhabitants or ≥100,000 inhabitants). All their 45,259 subsequent singleton pregnancies with a gestational age ≥16 weeks between 2010 and 2017 were identified from the Dutch perinatal database (Perined). Nineteen potential confounders for preterm birth were identified. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for preterm birth comparing the 3 different groups of women: (1) women without CIN diagnosis; (2) women with untreated CIN; and (3) women with treated CIN prior to each childbirth. In total, 29,907, 5,940, and 9,412 pregnancies were included in the control, untreated CIN, and treated CIN group, respectively. The control group showed a 4.8% (1,002/20,969) proportion of spontaneous preterm birth, which increased to 6.9% (271/3,940) in the untreated CIN group, 9.5% (600/6,315) in the treated CIN group, and 15.6% (50/321) in the group with multiple treatments. Women with untreated CIN had a 1.38 times greater odds of preterm birth compared to women without CIN (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.60; P < 0.001). For women with treated CIN, these odds 2.07 times increased compared to the control group (95% CI 1.85 to 2.33; P < 0.001). Treated women had a 1.51 times increased odds of preterm birth compared to women with untreated CIN (95% CI 1.29 to 1.76; P < 0.001). Independent from cervical disease, a volume excised from the cervix of 0.5 to 0.9 cc increased the odds of preterm birth 2.20 times (37/379 versus 1,002/20,969; 95% CI 1.52 to 3.20; P < 0.001). These odds further increased 3.13 times and 5.93 times for women with an excised volume of 4 to 8.9 cc (90/724 versus 1,002/20,969; 95% CI 2.44 to 4.01; P < 0.001) and ≥9 cc (30/139 versus 1,002/20,969; 95% CI 3.86 to 9.13; P < 0.001), respectively. Limitations of the study include the retrospective nature, lack of sufficient information to calculate odds of preterm birth <24 weeks, and that the excised volume could only be calculated for a select group of women. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed a strong correlation between preterm birth and a volume of ≥0.5 cc excised cervical tissue, regardless of the severity of CIN. Caution should be taken when performing excisional treatment in women of reproductive age as well as prudence in case of multiple biopsies. Fertile women with a history of performing multiple biopsies or excisional treatment for CIN may benefit from close surveillance during pregnancy.

Colonoscopy-Related Mortality in a Fecal Immunochemical Test-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Program.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Many countries have introduced colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs with fecal immunochemical tests (FITs), and follow-up colonoscopies for individuals with a positive FIT result. In order to make an informed decision to participate, individuals must be informed about the benefits and harms of FIT-based screening and subsequent colonoscopy. Colonoscopy-related fatal complications in FIT-based screening are understudied. We aimed to estimate the colonoscopy-related mortality in a national FIT-based CRC screening program. METHODS: Colonoscopy-related mortality within 30 days after colonoscopy was assessed by analysis of data from national endoscopy complication databases in the Netherlands, determining the excess 30-day rate of death in FIT-positive individuals undergoing colonoscopy vs FIT-negative individuals (based on data from the national screening database), and determining the rate of likely colonoscopy-related deaths based on registered causes of death by the Statistics Netherlands. RESULTS: Between October 2013 and December 2017, 172,797 participants underwent colonoscopy after a positive result from a FIT in the Dutch national CRC screening program; 13,848 participants received a diagnosis of CRC. The reported fatal complication rate was 0.23 per 10,000 FIT-positive participants (or 1 per 43,199; 95% CI, 0.090 - 0.60) undergoing colonoscopy, whereas this was 0.91 per 10,000 FIT-positive participants (or 1 per 10,961; 95% CI, 0.44 - 1.38) according to the excess death rate. Likely colonoscopy-related causes of death were reported in 0.86 per 10,000 FIT-positive participants (or 1 per 11,236; 95% CI, 0.48 - 1.63) who underwent colonoscopy, of which 50% considered cardiovascular events. CONCLUSIONS: Colonoscopy-related mortality within the Dutch FIT-based CRC screening program was estimated to range from 0.23 to 0.91 per 10,000 FIT-positive participants undergoing colonoscopy. These findings indicate underreporting of fatal complications in registries and a noteworthy incidence of fatal cardiovascular adverse events that requires further investigation. Nevertheless, the harm of FIT-based CRC screening is vastly outweighed by the benefits.

The Dutch National TissueArchive Portal enables efficient, consistent, and transparent procurement of diagnostic tissue samples for scientific use.

Biobanks play a crucial role in enabling biomedical research by facilitating scientific use of valuable human biomaterials. The PALGA foundation-a nationwide network and registry of histo- and cytopathology in the Netherlands-was established to promote the provision of data within and between pathology departments, and to make the resulting knowledge available for healthcare. Apart from the pathology data, we aimed to utilize PALGA's nationwide network to find and access the rich wealth of Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded (FFPE) tissue samples for scientific use.  We implemented the Dutch National TissueArchive Portal (DNTP) to utilize PALGA's nationwide network for requesting FFPE tissue samples. The DNTP consists of (1) a centrally organized internet portal to improve the assessing, processing, harmonization, and monitoring of the procurement process, while (2) dedicated HUB-employees provide practical support at peripheral pathology departments. Since incorporation of the DNTP, both the number of filed requests for FFPE tissue samples and the amount of HUB-mediated support increased 55 and 29% respectively. In line, the sample procurement duration time decreased significantly (- 47%). These findings indicate that implementation of the DNTP improved the frequency, efficiency, and transparency of FFPE tissue sample procurement for research in the Netherlands. To conclude, the need for biological resources is growing persistently to enable precision medicine. Here, we access PALGA's national, pathology network by implementation of the DNTP to allow for efficient, consistent, and transparent exchange of FFPE tissue samples for research across the Netherlands.

The second round of the Dutch colorectal cancer screening program: Impact of an increased fecal immunochemical test cut-off level on yield of screening.

The Dutch colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program started in 2014, inviting the target population biennially to perform a fecal immunochemical test (FIT). We obtained prospectively collected data from the national screening information-system to present the results of the second round (2016) and evaluate the impact of increasing the FIT cut-off halfway through the first round from 15 to 47 µg Hb/g feces on outcomes in the second round. Second round screening was done with a 47 µg Hb/g feces FIT cut-off. Participants were classified based on first round participation status as either FIT (15,47) or FIT (47,47) participants, and previous nonparticipants. In total, 348,891 (75.9%) out of 459,740 invitees participated in the second round. Participation rates were 93.4% among previous participants and 21.0% among previous non-participants. FIT(47,47) participants had a significantly higher detection rate of AN (15.3 vs. 10.4 per 1,000 participants) compared to FIT(15,47) participants in the second round, while their cumulative detection rate of AN over two rounds was significantly lower (45.6 vs. 52.6 per 1,000 participants). Our results showed that participation in the Dutch CRC screening program was consistently high and that second round detection rates depended on the first round FIT cut-off. The cumulative detection over two rounds was higher among FIT(15,47) participants. These findings suggest that a substantial part of, but not all the missed findings in the first round due to the increased FIT cut-off were detected in the subsequent round.

Incidence of Interval Colorectal Cancer After Negative Results From First-Round Fecal Immunochemical Screening Tests, by Cutoff Value and Participant Sex and Age.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We evaluated the incidence of interval cancers between the first and second rounds of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with the FOB-Gold fecal immunochemical test (FIT), and the effects of different cutoff values and patient sex and age. METHODS: We collected data from participants in a population-based CRC screening program in the Netherlands who had a negative result from a first-round of FIT screening. We calculated the cumulative incidence of interval cancer after a negative result from a FIT and the sensitivity of the FIT for detection of CRC at a low (15 µg Hb/g feces) and high (47 µg Hb/g feces) cutoff value. RESULTS: Among the 485,112 participants with a negative result from a FIT, 544 interval cancers were detected; 126 were in the 111,800 participants with negative results from a FIT with the low cutoff value and 418 were in the 373,312 FIT participants with negative results from a FIT with the high cutoff value. The mean age of participants tested with the low cutoff value was 72.0 years and the mean age of participants tested the high cutoff value was 66.7 years. The age-adjusted 2-year cumulative incidence of interval cancer after a negative result from a FIT were 9.5 per 10,000 persons at the low cutoff value vs 13.8 per 10,000 persons at the high cutoff value (P < .005). The age-adjusted sensitivity of the FIT for CRC were 90.5% for the low cutoff value vs 82.9% for the high cutoff (P < .0001). The FIT identified men with CRC with 87.4% sensitivity and women with CRC with 82.6% sensitivity (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of data from a FIT population-based screening program in the Netherlands, we found that incidence of interval CRC after a negative result from a FIT to be low. Although the sensitivity of detection of CRC decreased with a higher FIT cutoff value, it remained above 80%.

Performance of human papillomavirus testing on self-collected versus clinician-collected samples for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse: a randomised, paired screen-positive, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing on self-collected samples is a potential alternative to HPV testing on clinician-collected samples, but non-inferiority of its clinical accuracy remains to be assessed in the regular screening population. The IMPROVE study was done to evaluate the clinical accuracy of primary HPV testing on self-collected samples within an organised screening setting. METHODS: In this randomised, non-inferiority trial, women aged 29-61 years were invited to participate in the study as part of their regular screening invitation in the Netherlands. Women who provided informed consent were randomly allocated (1:1, with a block size of ten stratified by age) to one of two groups: a self-sampling group, in which women were requested to collect their own cervicovaginal sample using an Evalyn Brush (Rovers Medical Devices BV, Oss, Netherlands); or a clinician-based sampling group, in which samples were collected by a general practitioner with a Cervex-Brush (Rovers Medical Devices BV). All samples were tested for HPV using the clinically validated GP5+/6+ PCR enzyme immunoassay (Labo Biomedical Products BV, Rijswijk, Netherlands). HPV-positive women in both groups were retested with the other collection method and triaged by cytology and repeat cytology in accordance with current Dutch screening guidelines. Primary endpoints were detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and grade 3 or worse (CIN3+). Non-inferiority of HPV testing on self-collected versus clinician-collected samples was evaluated against a margin of 90% for the relative sensitivity and 98% for the relative specificity. This study is registered at the Dutch Trial register (NTR5078) and has been completed. FINDINGS: Of the 187 473 women invited to participate, 8212 were randomly allocated to the self-sampling group and 8198 to the clinician-based sampling group. After exclusion of women who met the exclusion criteria or who did not return their sample, 7643 women were included in the self-sampling group and 6282 in the clinician-based sampling group. 569 (7·4%) self-collected samples and 451 (7·2%) clinician-collected samples tested positive for HPV (relative risk 1·04 [95% CI 0·92-1·17]). Median follow-up duration for HPV-positive women was 20 months (IQR 17-22). The CIN2+ sensitivity and specificity of HPV testing did not differ between self-sampling and clinician-based sampling (relative sensitivity 0·96 [0·90-1·03]; relative specificity 1·00 [0·99-1·01]). For the CIN3+ endpoint, relative sensitivity was 0·99 (0·91-1·08) and relative specificity was 1·00 (0·99-1·01). INTERPRETATION: HPV testing done with a clinically validated PCR-based assay had similar accuracy on self-collected and clinician-collected samples in terms of the detection of CIN2+ or CIN3+ lesions. These findings suggest that HPV self-sampling could be used as a primary screening method in routine screening. FUNDING: Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Sport (Netherlands), and the European Commission.

Reliable identification of women with CIN3+ using hrHPV genotyping and methylation markers in a cytology-screened referral population.

Cervical screening aims to identify women with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion/cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2-3 (HSIL/CIN2-3) or invasive cervical cancer (ICC). Identification of women with severe premalignant lesions or ICC (CIN3+) could ensure their rapid treatment and prevent overtreatment. We investigated high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) detection with genotyping and methylation of FAM19A4/miR124-2 for detection of CIN3+ in 538 women attending colposcopy for abnormal cytology. All women had an additional cytology with hrHPV testing (GP5+/6+-PCR-EIA+), genotyping (HPV16/18, HPV16/18/31/45), and methylation analysis (FAM19A4/miR124-2) and at least one biopsy. CIN3+ detection was studied overall and in women <30 (n = 171) and ≥30 years (n = 367). Positivity for both rather than just one methylation markers increased in CIN3, and all ICC was positive for both. Overall sensitivity and specificity for CIN3+ were, respectively, 90.3% (95%CI 81.3-95.2) and 31.8% (95%CI 27.7-36.1) for hrHPV, 77.8% (95%CI 66.9-85.8) and 69.3% (95%CI 65.0-73.3) for methylation biomarkers and 93.1% (95%CI 84.8-97.0) and 49.4% (95%CI 44.8-53.9) for combined HPV16/18 and/or methylation positivity. For CIN3, hrHPV was found in 90.9% (95%CI 81.6-95.8), methylation positivity in 75.8% (95%CI 64.2-84.5) and HPV16/18 and/or methylation positivity in 92.4% (95%CI 83.5-96.7). In women aged ≥30, the sensitivity of combined HPV16/18 and methylation was increased (98.2%, 95%CI 90.6-99.7) with a specificity of 46.3% (95%CI 40.8-51.9). Combination of HPV16/18 and methylation analysis was very sensitive and offered improved specificity for CIN3+, opening the possibility of rapid treatment for these women and follow-up for women with potentially regressive, less advanced, HSIL/CIN2 lesions.

Introduction of primary screening using high-risk HPV DNA detection in the Dutch cervical cancer screening programme: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In January 2017, the Dutch cervical cancer screening programme transitioned from cytomorphological to primary high-risk HPV (hrHPV) DNA screening, including the introduction of self-sampling, for women aged between 30 and 60 years. The Netherlands was the first country to switch to hrHPV screening at the national level. We investigated the health impact of this transition by comparing performance indicators from the new hrHPV-based programme with the previous cytology-based programme. METHODS: We obtained data from the Dutch nationwide network and registry of histo- and cytopathology (PALGA) for 454,573 women eligible for screening in 2017 who participated in the hrHPV-based programme between 1 January 2017 and 30 June 2018 (maximum follow-up of almost 21 months) and for 483,146 women eligible for screening in 2015 who participated in the cytology-based programme between 1 January 2015 and 31 March 2016 (maximum follow-up of 40 months). We compared indicators of participation (participation rate), referral (screen positivity; referral rate) and detection (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) detection; number of referrals per detected CIN lesion). RESULTS: Participation in the hrHPV-based programme was significantly lower than that in the cytology-based programme (61% vs 64%). Screen positivity and direct referral rates were significantly higher in the hrHPV-based programme (positivity rate: 5% vs 9%; referral rate: 1% vs 3%). CIN2+ detection increased from 11 to 14 per 1000 women screened. Overall, approximately 2.2 times more clinical irrelevant findings (i.e. ≤CIN1) were found in the hrHPV-based programme, compared with approximately 1·3 times more clinically relevant findings (i.e. CIN2+); this difference was mostly due to a national policy change recommending colposcopy, rather than observation, of hrHPV-positive, ASC-US/LSIL results in the hrHPV-based programme. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first time that comprehensive results of nationwide implementation of hrHPV-based screening have been reported using high-quality data with a long follow-up. We have shown that both benefits and potential harms are higher in one screening round of a well-implemented hrHPV-based screening programme than in an established cytology-based programme. Lower participation in the new hrHPV programme may be due to factors such as invitation policy changes and the phased roll-out of the new programme. Our findings add further to evidence from trials and modelling studies on the effectiveness of hrHPV-based screening.

Quality Monitoring of a FIT-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Program.

BACKGROUND: Quality assessment is crucial for consistent program performance of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs using fecal immunochemical test for hemoglobin (FIT). However, literature on the consistency of FIT performance in laboratory medicine was lacking. This study examined the consistency of FIT in testing positive or detecting advanced neoplasia (AN) for different specimen collection devices, lot reagents, and laboratories. METHODS: All participants with a FIT sample with a cutoff concentration of 47 µg Hb/g feces in the Dutch CRC screening program in 2014 and 2015 were included in the analyses. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to estimate the odds ratios of collection devices, reagents, and laboratories on testing positive or detecting AN and positive predictive value (PPV). RESULTS: In total, 87519 (6.4%) of the 1371169 participants tested positive. Positivity rates and detection rates of AN differed between collection devices and reagents (all P < 0.01). In contrast, PPVs were not found to vary between collection devices, reagents, or laboratories (all P > 0.05). Positivity rates showed a small difference for laboratories (P = 0.004) but not for detection rates of AN. Size of the population affected by the deviating positivity rates was small (0.1% of the total tested population). CONCLUSIONS: Variations were observed in positivity and detection rates between collection devices and reagents, but there was no detected variation in PPV. Although the overall population effect of these variations on the screened population is expected to be modest, there is room for improvement.

Experience with HPV self-sampling and clinician-based sampling in women attending routine cervical screening in the Netherlands.

Several countries offer HPV self-sampling for screening non-attendees. It is assumed that screening attendees also prefer self-sampling to clinician-based sampling, however, little research has been conducted with respect to this. Women participating in the IMPROVE-study were randomised (1:1) to self- or clinician-collected HPV testing, and HPV-positive women were retested using the other collection method. Three different questionnaires were sent out among a subset of participating women: Q1) HPV-positive women from both study groups were asked about their experiences with self-sampling and clinician-based sampling (n = 497); Q2) HPV-negative women from the self-sampling group were asked about their experiences with self-sampling (n = 2366); and Q3) HPV-negative women in the clinician-collection group were asked about their experiences with clinician-based sampling (n = 2092). Response rates ranged from 71.6 to 79.4%. Women reported significantly lower levels of shame, nervousness, discomfort and pain during self-sampling compared to clinician-based sampling. However, trust in correct sampling was significantly higher during clinician-based sampling. The majority of women in group Q1 preferred self-sampling (76.5%) to clinician-based sampling (11.9%) in future screening, while 11.6% of women reported to have no preference for either method. To conclude, women from a regular screening population have a positive attitude towards self-sampling but express some concerns with respect to accuracy. The majority prefers self-sampling to clinician-based sampling in future screening. Based on these results, a screening approach where women can choose for either self-sampling or clinician-based sampling seems highly justifiable.

Management and treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in the Netherlands after referral for colposcopy.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to describe trends in the diagnosis and treatment of women referred from the national screening program with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) in the Netherlands, and to compare these trends with national guidelines and identify potential areas for improvement for the new primary high-risk HPV screening program. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study using data from the Dutch pathology archive. Women aged 29-63 years who took part in the Dutch cervical screening program between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2014 were selected. Three referral groups were identified: direct referrals and those referred after either one (first indirect referrals) or two (second indirect referrals) repeat cytology tests, totaling 85 239 referrals for colposcopy. The most invasive management technique and the most severe diagnosis of each screening episode was identified. Rates of management techniques were calculated separately by referral type, highest CIN diagnosis and age group. RESULTS: In all, 85.1% of CIN 3 lesions were treated with excision (either large excision or hysterectomy) and 26.4% of CIN 1 lesions were treated with large excision. Rates of overtreatment (CIN 1 or less) in see-and-treat management were higher for indirect referrals than for direct referrals and increased with age. Large excision rates increased with CIN diagnosis severity. CONCLUSIONS: Despite guideline recommendations not to treat, CIN 1 lesions were treated in just over 25% of cases and approximately 15% of CIN 3 lesions were possibly undertreated. Given the expected increase in CIN detection in the new primary high-risk HPV screening program, reduction in CIN 1 treatment and CIN 2 treatment in younger women is needed to avoid an increase in potential harm.