Role of HPV genotyping in risk assessment among cytology diagnosis categories: analysis of 4562 cases with cytology-HPV cotesting and follow-up biopsies.

OBJECTIVE: Human papilloma virus (HPV) detection and genotyping are increasingly used in clinical risk assessment. We aimed to analyze HPV genotyping performance in risk stratification among cytology diagnosis categories. METHODS: Between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2016, 4562 cases with cytology-HPV co-testing and biopsy follow-up were identified. HPV tests were performed on Cobas (n=3959) or Aptima (n=603) platforms. Of the biopsies, 669 demonstrated high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or worse. RESULTS: Pooled high-risk HPV testing had high overall sensitivity (97%) but low specificity (20%) and positive predictive value (20%) for biopsy-confirmed high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or worse. HPV16/18 genotyping had considerably improved specificity (81%) and positive predictve value (35%) in predicting high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or worse, especially in atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion categories. Significantly more biopsy-confirmed high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or worse were detected by Aptima than Cobas testing, as measured by HPV16/18 (48% vs 33%, p<0.001), non-16/18 high-risk HPV (18% vs 13%, p=0.029), or all high-risk HPV genotypes (27% vs 19%, p<0.001). Aptima genotyping showed a significantly higher positive predictive value than Cobas genotyping for biopsy-confirmed high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or worse in the atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance category (47% vs 23%, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: HPV genotyping was sensitive for biopsy-confirmed high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or worse in all cytologic categories, and is particularly valuable in risk evaluation for women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions. The triaging role was greatly diminished in high-risk lesions (atypical glandular cells, atypical squamous cells, cannot exclude high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions) due to low specificity and positive predictive value. Aptima performance in risk management was superior to Cobas, with significantly higher positive predictive value for biopsy-confirmed high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or worse. Our results highlight the importance of careful data interpretation from studies using different HPV testing methods and the need to incorporate HPV E6/E7-mRNA testing into management guidelines.

Aptima Human Papillomavirus E6/E7 mRNA Test Results Strongly Associated With Risk for High-Grade Cervical Lesions in Follow-Up Biopsies.

OBJECTIVE: Human papillomavirus (HPV) tests and genotyping (GT) have been used in clinical risk assessment. The purpose of this study was to analyze the performance of 2 common HPV testing platforms in risk evaluation for high-grade cervical lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2016, a total of 4,562 Pap tests with follow-up biopsies in our laboratory database were analyzed along with HPV tests performed on Cobas (CHPV, n = 3,959) or Aptima (AHPV, n = 603) platforms. RESULTS: The sensitivity for biopsy-confirmed HSIL or worse lesions was 97% for both CHPV and AHPV (p = .75). AHPV showed significantly lower positive rates than CHPV in benign (56% vs 86%) or LSIL (66% vs 90%) biopsies, resulting in significantly higher specificity for HSIL or worse than CHPV (38% vs 12%, p < .001). AHPV demonstrated significantly higher positive predictive value for HSIL or worse (24% vs 16%, p < .001) and overall accuracy (48% vs 24%, p < .001) than CHPV. AHPV GT also had significantly higher specificity for biopsy-confirmed HSIL or worse than CHPV (88% vs 72%, p < .001) with comparable sensitivity (50% vs 51%, p = .75). Women with HPV 16 on AHPV were significantly more likely to have HSIL or worse on biopsies than those with HPV 16 on CHPV (likelihood ratio = 4.3 vs 2.0, p = .004). CONCLUSIONS: Although both AHPV and CHPV were highly sensitive for biopsy-confirmed HSIL or worse lesions, AHPV and GT demonstrated significantly higher specificity and positive predictive value than CHPV. The difference is probably related to E6/E7 overexpression after viral DNA integration in high-grade lesions. The significantly higher specificity and overall accuracy of AHPV and GT for HSIL or worse lesions may be useful in clinical risk management.

Age-specific 3-year cumulative risk of cervical cancer and high-grade dysplasia on biopsy in 9434 women who underwent HPV cytology cotesting.

BACKGROUND: High-risk human papillomavirus (HPV)-Papanicolaou (Pap) cotesting is recommended for cervical cancer screening in women aged ≥30 years. The current study analyzed the effectiveness of cotesting on risk management in different age groups. METHODS: A retrospective review of a 5-year cytology database identified 9434 women with HPV-Pap cotesting and follow-up cervical biopsy. The 3-year cumulative risk of developing high-grade cervical lesions (≥high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion [HSIL]) was analyzed using age stratification. RESULTS: The 3-year cumulative risk of developing ≥HSIL was found to be significantly different in women with baseline cotesting HPV-positive and Pap-positive results (HPV+/Pap+; defined as ≥atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance), HPV+ and Pap-negative results, and HPV-negative and Pap+ results at 19.2%, 7.9%, and 3.1%, respectively (P < .001). The risk of ≥HSIL peaked at ages 30 to 39 years and significantly decreased at ages 50 to 59 years (16.6% vs 6.7%; P < .001). Women aged <30 years shared a high risk similar to that of women aged 30 to 39 years (17.3% vs 16.6%; P = .52), and risk stratification by cotesting was found to be equally effective in the younger age group (HPV+ and Pap+: 19.6%; HPV+ and Pap-negative: 7.2%; and HPV-negative and Pap+: 4.4% [P < .001]). CONCLUSIONS: High-risk HPV-Pap cotesting appears to be extremely sensitive for the prediction of the risk of developing ≥HSIL and is an effective tool for risk stratification. In the current study, the 3-year cumulative risk of developing ≥HSIL varied significantly with age, with the highest risk noted among women aged <40 years and the lowest risk observed in women aged 50 to 59 years. Pap testing significantly impacted risk stratification in the HPV+ positive group, especially in women aged <60 years. Women aged <30 years were found to have a risk profile and cotesting efficacy similar to those of women aged 30 to 39 years. Modification of the current recommendation to offer cotesting to women aged ≥30 years might be considered to include those patients aged <30 years.

HPV status in women with high-grade dysplasia on cervical biopsy and preceding negative HPV tests.

INTRODUCTION: A considerable number of patients with high-grade cervical lesions have undergone preceding human papillomavirus (HPV) tests with negative results. In the present study, we attempted to elucidate the factors potentially contributing to the findings by testing biopsied samples from these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of the 1654 women with HPV testing and follow-up cervicovaginal biopsies from March 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014, 21 of 252 women (8.3%) with biopsy-confirmed high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) or worse had had negative results from preceding high-risk (hr)HPV tests. The corresponding paraffin blocks were tested for HPV using the Cobas 4800 system, a DNA microarray against 40 HPV genotypes, and DNA sequencing. RESULTS: HPV was detected in 20 (95%) of the 21 biopsies with HSIL or worse, including HPV16/18 in 4, non-16/18 hrHPV in 10, and non-hrHPV in 6. HPV59 and HPV45 were 2.2 times more frequently detected than HPV16/18 in these samples. One sample was negative for all 3 tests (5%). CONCLUSIONS: Our study has demonstrated that 8.3% of women with biopsy-confirmed HSIL or worse had preceding test results that were negative for hrHPV. The vast majority of the biopsied samples had detectable HPV, primarily hrHPV genotypes (67%) with HPV59 and HPV45 predominance. This genotypic prevalence pattern was markedly different from those reported in the general population. Non-hrHPV genotypes contributed to 29% of the cases, and HPV-negative cases were rare. In addition to the limited Cobas testing panel and rare possible HPV-negative HSIL or worse, other possible contributing factors to the discrepancy include cytologic sampling, interference material, technical errors, and reduced L1 gene expression in high-grade lesions.

Performance of Roche cobas high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing in the two most common liquid-based Papanicolaou test platforms.

INTRODUCTION: High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing is important in cervical cancer screening and management algorithms. Roche (Pleasanton, Calif.) cobas hrHPV testing is commonly performed on both ThinPrep (TP) and SurePath (SP) samples, but performance of these platforms has not been fully investigated in the literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Roche hrHPV testing was performed on 47,885 (TP = 18,295; SP = 29,590) out of 130,648 consecutive Papanicolaou tests, over 16 months; 1895 of those had interpretable biopsies. RESULTS: The overall hrHPV detection rates were similar in TP (13.5%) and SP (13.1%). The hrHPV positive rate was higher in SP (8.5%) than TP (7.3%, P < 0.0001) in women with negative cytology; the difference in other cytologic diagnosis categories was insignificant. TP samples had significantly fewer negative cytology diagnoses (7.3% versus 8.5%, P < 0.0001), more low-grade abnormalities in cytology and biopsies, and higher colposcopy referral rate (4.8% versus 2.7%, P < 0.0001) than SP. There were no differences between TP and SP in detecting ≥HSIL by hrHPV testing, cytology or biopsy. SP samples had a significantly higher rate of HPV 16/18 but a lower rate of non-16/18 hrHPV genotypes than TP. CONCLUSIONS: Roche cobas hrHPV testing was similar in both TP and SP platforms. The significantly lower hrHPV detection rate in cytological negative TP samples is likely related to higher cytology reporting rates for indeterminate and low-grade diagnoses in TP than SP samples. Significant differences were also observed in hrHPV genotyping results between TP and SP. Clinical risk stratification based on hrHPV testing may need to take testing platforms into consideration.

Do Infection Patterns of Human Papillomavirus Affect the Cytologic Detection of High-Grade Cervical Lesions on Papanicolaou Tests?

CONTEXT: - Persistent infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) is the major cause of cervical cancer. The effect of HPV infection patterns on cytologic detection of cervical lesions is unknown. OBJECTIVE: - To determine the effect of HPV infection patterns on the sensitivity of cytologic detection of high-grade cervical lesions. DESIGN: - Papanicolaou tests from 257 women with biopsy-confirmed, high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions were analyzed with respect to HPV infection patterns. RESULTS: - Among 257 biopsy-confirmed, high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion cases, the preceding cytology showed 20 cases (8%) were benign; 166 cases (65%) were low-grade cervical lesions, including atypical squamous cell of undetermined significance and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions; and 71 cases (28%) were high-grade cervical lesions, including atypical squamous cells cannot rule out high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (atypical squamous cell-high), atypical glandular cells, and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions. In 236 cases tested for HPV, those exhibiting low-grade cervical lesions on cytology were often associated with coinfections of mixed hrHPV genotypes (31 of 40; 78%) or non-16/18 hrHPV (75/103; 73%), compared with single-genotype infections of HPV-16 (33 of 62; 53%) or HPV-18 (2 of 6; 33%) ( P = .001). In contrast, high-grade cervical lesion cytomorphology tended to associate with the single-genotype infection of HPV-16 (20 of 62; 32%) or HPV-18 (3 of 6; 50%), compared with non-16/18 hrHPV (25 of 103; 24%) or multigenotype infection (8 of 40; 20%) ( P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: - Our findings suggest that multigenotypic or non-16/18 hrHPV infections often produce deceptive lower-grade cytomorphology, which could result in underdiagnosis and delay of treatment. The HPV infection patterns may offer unrecognized benefit beyond HPV genotyping and should be considered during clinical risk evaluation of women with lower-grade cytology.

Negative Pap tests in women with high-grade cervical lesions on follow-up biopsies: Contributing factors and role of human papillomavirus genotyping.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have indicated that negative Papanicolaou (Pap) tests can precede high-grade cervical lesions (HGCL) on biopsy. This study aims to determine the contributing factors for cytologic discrepancy and the potential role of human papilloma virus (HPV) testing in risk evaluation of women with negative Pap tests. METHODS: Of 42,797 Pap tests interpreted as negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy (NILM) from March 1, 2013 to December 30, 2014, 426 had available HPV testing and follow-up biopsy. The NILM Pap tests with biopsy-confirmed HGCL were reviewed. RESULTS: Among 426 cytology-negative cases, the biopsies showed benign histology in 243 (57%), low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion in 157 (37%), HGCL in 22 (5%), and endometrial adenocarcinoma in 4 (1%) cases. The sensitivity/specificity/positive predictive values (PPV) of high-risk HPV (hrHPV) and HPV16/18 tests in predicting HGCL was 91%/45%/8% and 55%/76%/11%, respectively. Upon review of NILM Pap tests with biopsy-confirmed HGCL, the contributing factors to negative cytology included absence of abnormal cells (12/21, 57%) or diagnostic high-grade cells (6/21, 29%), unsatisfactory samples (2/21, 10%), and interpretation variances (1/21, 5%). Interpretation variances in three high-risk lesions (1 HSIL, 2 ASC-H) were influenced by marked obscuring inflammation. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that 5% of women underwent co-testing with negative Pap tests had HGCL on follow-up biopsy. Absence of diagnostic cells was the leading cause for cytology discrepancy and interpretation variances were influenced by marked obscuring inflammation. HPV testing and genotyping had limited value in risk stratification due to extremely low PPV. Focused rescreening of hrHPV-positive NILM with obscuring factors may help reduce interpretation variances.

Cervical biopsy rates before and after the introduction of human papillomavirus type reporting in co-tests with negative cytology.

INTRODUCTION: In 2013, our laboratory introduced Roche cobas high-risk human papillomavirus (HRHPV) testing, which includes limited HPV genotype reporting. The shift from Hybrid Capture II (HC2) HPV testing to Roche led to an observed increase in biopsies for patients with negative Papanicolaou tests with positive HRHPV. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of data from our facility to examine biopsies conducted on patients with negative Papanicolaou tests and positive HRHPV. We compared data from 2012 (HC2) to 2015 after implementation of Roche cobas platform. RESULTS: In 2012, 37 biopsies were performed on patients with negative Papanicolaou test and positive HRHPV, out of 82,721 Papanicolaou tests (0.045%). In 2015, the number of biopsies performed on patients with negative Papanicolaou test and positive HRHPV test was 281, out of 115,104 Papanicolaou tests (0.244%; P < 0.001). Of these, 141 had HPV type 16 or 18, and 140 had "other" HRHPV types. We observed an increased detection rate of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) or greater lesions (5.4% in 2012 to 8.9% in 2015), but it was not statistically significant (P = 0.398). Fifteen HSIL or greater lesions were found in women with types 16 or 18 (5.3%) and 10 were found in women with "other" HRHPV types (3.6%). CONCLUSION: The introduction of HRHPV testing with type reporting is associated with a marked increase in the number of women undergoing colposcopy and biopsy for HRHPV despite negative cytology. Half of these have a HRHPV type other than type 16 or 18, despite recommendations to repeat co-testing instead.

Performance of Aptima and Cobas HPV testing platforms in detecting high-grade cervical dysplasia and cancer.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) tests and genotyping have been used in clinical risk assessment. The purpose of this study was to analyze the performance of 2 common HPV testing platforms in detecting high-grade cervical lesions (high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion [HSIL] or worse [≥HSIL]). METHODS: Between January 1 and December 31, 2015, 2041 Papanicolaou (Pap) tests with biopsy confirmation were analyzed along with HPV tests performed on Cobas or Aptima platforms. A biopsy diagnosis of grade 2 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia was confirmed with p16/Ki-67 immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: In total, 1866 and 175 Pap cases were tested on Cobas and Aptima platforms, respectively. Both platforms were highly sensitive (97% for both) for biopsy-confirmed ≥HSIL. Cobas HPV testing had higher positive rates for the diagnosis of benign lesions (84% vs 51%) and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (89% vs 63%) on biopsy compared with Aptima. Aptima testing had significantly higher specificity for ≥HSIL than Cobas (41% vs 13%; P < .0001). Overall, performance of the Aptima platform was superior to that of the Cobas platform in detecting biopsy-confirmed ≥HSIL, resulting from its significantly higher positive predictive value (25% vs 16%; P < .03) and overall accuracy (50% vs 26%; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Although both the Cobas and Aptima platforms offer highly sensitive tests for high-grade cervical lesions, Aptima HPV testing demonstrated significantly higher specificity and positive predictive value than Cobas testing for biopsy-confirmed ≥HSIL. The considerable difference may be related to the significant increase in E6/E7 expression after HPV DNA integration. The significantly higher specificity and overall accuracy of Aptima testing for ≥HSIL, resulting in the identification of high-risk populations that require immediate treatment and close follow-up, may prove useful in clinical risk stratification. Cancer Cytopathol 2017;125:652-7. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Clinical performance of the Food and Drug Administration-Approved high-risk HPV test for the detection of high-grade cervicovaginal lesions.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing for triaging atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance and cotesting with cytology have been implemented in clinical practice. However, clinical data for primary screening with human papillomavirus (HPV) testing alone are currently lacking. METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed the correlation of cytology, histology, and hrHPV testing through the use of a cytology laboratory quality assurance database with 130,648 Papanicolaou (Pap) tests interpreted at Houston BioReference Laboratories and Houston Methodist Hospital between March 1, 2013 and June 30, 2014. Among the 47,499 patients who had undergone cytology-HPV cotesting, 1654 underwent follow-up biopsies. RESULTS: The sensitivities of the hrHPV and Pap tests were 80.8% and 81.2%, respectively, for detecting any type of cervicovaginal dysplasia and 91.3% and 90.9%, respectively, for high-grade cervicovaginal lesions. For biopsy-confirmed high-grade cervicovaginal lesions (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+, adenocarcinoma in situ, or carcinoma; n = 253), the false-negative rates for hrHPV and Pap tests were 8.7% and 9.1%, respectively. The false-negative rate for cytology-hrHPV cotesting was only 1.2%. CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice, the hrHPV test alone is not significantly superior to the Pap test as a primary screening method for cervicovaginal lesions. The false-negative rate of the hrHPV test in detecting biopsy-confirmed high-grade cervicovaginal lesions is comparable to the rate of the Pap test. Women with cytology and hrHPV cotesting, however, have a significantly lower false-negative rate than those undergoing either test alone. Currently, cytology-HPV cotesting remains the best strategy for detecting high-grade cervicovaginal lesions. Cancer Cytopathol 2016;124:317-23. © 2016 American Cancer Society.