Histology Findings after Two Years of Cytology/HPV Co-Testing in Germany.

Introduction: Since 1 January 2020, diagnostic confirmation of abnormalities detected in the context of cytology/HPV co-testing in cervical cancer screening under the statutory health insurance scheme in women aged 35 and over has been performed according to predefined algorithms. A colposcopy is indicated even in the case of borderline/low-grade cytological changes and/or HPV persistence. In this article we compare the histology findings after primary screening examinations in 2020/21 with those from 2018/19, thus also comparing the results of two different screening approaches. Patients and Methods: Our analysis included all of the cytology, HPV, and histology results from all primary screening examinations, as well as the resulting diagnostic confirmation and curative cases, that could be obtained by 30 June 2023. In 2018/19 these comprised 650600 cytology and 1804 histology findings, and in 2020/21 there were 491450 cytology and 7156 histology findings. The absolute numbers of histology findings and the percentage ratios of these to all cytological diagnoses are presented with comparison factors. Results: In 2020/21 there were 5.2 times more histology findings in relation to all previous cytology examinations than in 2018/19, as well as 10.6 times more biopsies, 3.8 times more conizations, and 1.2 times more hysterectomies. There was a particularly high increase in diagnostic confirmation of borderline/low-grade or only HPV-positive findings. With co-testing, 12.7 times more CIN1, 6.4 times more CIN2, and 3.5 times more CIN3 lesions were diagnosed. The proportion of biopsies without dysplasia was 7.6 times higher than in previous years. Cervical carcinomas were diagnosed 1.8 times more frequently, and endometrial carcinomas 0.7 times less frequently. Conclusion: More CIN lesions were found with co-testing, but the increase in histology findings of low-grade or no dysplasia was far greater than findings of CIN3. Lesions not requiring treatment accounted for 94.4% of biopsy results in 2020/21. The use of computer-assisted LBC with progression markers could reduce this.

An audit of 1632 routinely collected cervical cancer screening smears from 398 women in Germany: Results from the TeQaZ Study.

OBJECTIVE: There is evidence in Germany that half of the cervical cancer (CC) cases had undergone screening frequently in the decade preceding their diagnosis, signaling cytology quality issues. This study investigates routine smear assessment accuracy in Germany. METHODS: Within a population-based case-control study in 9 German states, we recruited cases (women with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of CC) and population controls (women with no history of CC or hysterectomy). Two independent expert cytologists audited Pap smears taken within the 10 years preceding CC diagnosis (cases)/study entry (controls). We report the prevalence of positive results, as well as routine assessment's accuracy, as sensitivity, specificity, false-positive and false-negative rates along with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). We also examined cases' smear history, to investigate possible false-positive recurrence. RESULTS: We audited 1632 smears of 392 women (18.9% cases, 81.1% controls). In the routine assessment, the overall prevalence of positive results was 4.5% (29.0% among cases). According to the expert audit, the overall prevalence of positive results was 7.7% (40.8% among cases). When restricting analyses to the 3 years preceding diagnosis/study entry, this prevalence increased to 11.9% overall (61.4% among cases). The overall sensitivity of the routine assessment was 54.9% (66.8% for cases). CONCLUSION: As cytology remains an important part of CC screening, quality issues must be urgently addressed in Germany. Shifting to objective methods such as primary high-risk HPV screening followed by triaging may help CC elimination in Germany.

Comparison of the Hologic Genius Digital Diagnostics System with the ThinPrep Imaging System-A retrospective assessment.

BACKGROUND: Digital cytology (DC) with artificial intelligence (AI) is a new approach. The authors compared DC with liquid-based cytology (LBC) using computer assistance (CAS) in a retrospective, noninterventional study. METHODS: In total, 1994 ThinPrep LBC slides (Hologic), which were previously analyzed in 2020 using an imaging system with CAS in routine cotesting for cytology/human papillomavirus, were reviewed in a blinded mode using the Genius Digital Diagnostics System (Hologic). In 555 cases, a histology result was available. The slides were digitally scanned (volumetric scan) at 14 levels integrated into one. AI algorithms were used to present a gallery of six tiles each (containing objects of interest) in five categories. Six additional tile rows were available, from which the diagnoses were made. All cases with a mismatch between DC and imaging system results were reviewed by an additional cytopathologist. RESULTS: In 86.56% of cases, a complete match between both systems was observed using the same cytology categories. When also considering the histology results, the match was 90.37%. In addition, when a cytology follow-up and/or a retrospective review was applied, the match reached 97.34%. In only 0.65% of cases was a major discrepancy observed (two grades of cytology or a low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion/high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion [LSIL/HSIL] shift), and none were identified by DC. Significantly more cases of higher severity (atypical squamous cells cannot exclude high grade [ASC-H], high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion [HSIL]) were identified with DC, and its negative predictive value was higher. The screening time was significantly shorter with DC. CONCLUSIONS: With the Genius system for DC, the sensitivity for HSIL+/ASC-H and the specificity for LSIL and HSIL were superior to LBC and CAS. Screening time was significantly lower.

Two Years of Cytology and HPV Co-Testing in Germany: Initial Experience.

Introduction On 1 January 2020 the screening programme for the prevention of cervical cancer in women from the age of 35 years of the Statutory Health Insurance (GKV) in Germany changed from an annual cytology examination to cytological and HPV co-testing carried out every three years. A large standard diagnostics laboratory has been using liquid-based cytology (LBC) with computer-assisted screening (CAS) since 1 January 2020 to assess the samples. Patients and Methods The cytological and HPV results for all cases examined with co-testing from 01.01.2020 to 31.12.2021 (n = 395759) are reported and the cytology results obtained using co-testing are compared with the results obtained using only conventional primary cytology screening from the two previous years (n = 588192). Cytology tests were carried out using LBC and computer-assisted screening. A DNA PCR test which can identify 14 types of HPV was used for HPV testing. The cytology results are reported using the Munich Nomenclature III, which is mandatory in Germany, and converted to The Bethesda System (TBS). Problems occurring during the implementation phase are described here. Results A total of 983951 cases who had primary screening between 01.01.2018 and 31.12.2021 were analysed. The HR HPV-positive rate with co-testing for all age groups was 6.41%. Of this group, 16.31% were positive for HPV-16, 4.43% for HPV-18, and 71.40% had one or more of the other 12 HR HPV types. Several different HPV types were identified in 7.86% of cases. The HPV-positive rate for cases with unremarkable cytological findings was 4.03%. 0.46% of tests were technically invalid. The results of primary cytology screening for 2020/21 (LBC) were: Pap 0 (TBS: unsatisfactory) 0.09%, Pap I and Pap II-a (NILM) 96.82%, Pap II-p/g (~ASC-US/AGC) 1.23%, Pap III-p/g (~ASC-H/AGC) 0.19%, Pap III D1 (LSIL) 1.08%, Pap III D2 (HSIL) 0.31%, Pap IVa/b-p/g (HSIL/AIS) 0.18%, and Pap V-p/g (carcinoma) 0.01%. The rates for 2018/19 (conventional cytology without routine testing for HPV) were significantly higher for Pap II-p/g (1.64%) and significantly lower for Pap III-p/g (0.13%), Pap III D1 (0.45%), Pap III D2 (0.10%) and Pap IVa/b-p/g (0.05%). Conclusion Evaluation of the data for the two first years of cytology and HPV co-testing from a standard diagnostics laboratory found low HR HPV-positive rates. As regards the cytology tests, the Pap II-p/g rate was significantly lower and the ≥ Pap III rate was significantly higher compared to the two previous years. This points to a probable higher sensitivity and specificity of the new method.

Colposcopy non-attendance following an abnormal cervical cancer screening result: a prospective population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: A considerable proportion of cervical cancer diagnoses in high-income countries are due to lack of timely follow-up of an abnormal screening result. We estimated colposcopy non-attendance, examined the potential factors associated and described non-attendance reasons in a population-based screening study. METHODS: Data from the MARZY prospective cohort study were analysed. Co-test screen-positive women (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse [ASC-US+] or high-risk human papillomavirus [hrHPV] positive) aged 30 to 65 years were referred to colposcopy within two screening rounds (3-year interval). Women were surveyed for sociodemographic, HPV-related and other data, and interviewed for non-attendance reasons. Logistic regression was used to examine potential associations with colposcopy attendance. RESULTS: At baseline, 2,627 women were screened (screen-positive = 8.7%), and 2,093 again at follow-up (screen-positive = 5.1%; median 2.7 years later). All screen-positives were referred to colposcopy, however 28.9% did not attend despite active recall. Among co-test positives (ASC-US+ and hrHPV) and only hrHPV positives, 19.6% were non-attendees. Half of only ASC-US+ screenees attended colposcopy. Middle age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.55, 95% CI 1.02, 4.96) and hrHPV positive result (aOR = 3.04, 95% CI 1.49, 7.22) were associated with attendance. Non-attendance was associated with having ≥ 3 children (aOR = 0.32, 95% CI 0.10, 0.86). Major reasons for non-attendance were lack of time, barriers such as travel time, need for childcare arrangements and the advice against colposcopy given by the gynaecologist who conducted screening. CONCLUSIONS: Follow-up rates of abnormal screening results needs improvement. A systematic recall system integrating enhanced communication and addressing follow-up barriers may improve screening effectiveness.

German evidence and consensus-based (S3) guideline: Vaccination recommendations for the prevention of HPV-associated lesions.

Anogenital and oropharyngeal infections with human papilloma viruses (HPV) are common. Clinically manifest disease may significantly impact quality of life; the treatment of HPV-associated lesions is associated with a high rate of recurrence and invasive neoplasms, such as cervical, anal, vulvar, penile, and oropharyngeal cancers, which are characterized by significant morbidity and mortality. Vaccination against HPV is an effective and safe measure for the primary prevention of HPV-associated lesions, but immunization rates are still low in Germany. The present publication is an abridged version of the German evidence and consensus-based guideline "Vaccination recommendations for the prevention of HPV-associated lesions", which is available on the website of the German Association of the Scientific Medical Societies (AWMF). On the basis of a systematic review with meta-analyses, a representative panel developed and agreed upon recommendations for the vaccination of different populations against HPV. In addition, consensus-based recommendations were developed for specific issues relevant to everyday practice. Based on current evidence and a representative expert consensus, these recommendations are intended to provide guidance in a field in which there is often uncertainty and in which both patients and health care providers are sometimes confronted with controversial and emotionally charged points of view.

Cervical Cancer Screening: Comparison of Conventional Pap Smear Test, Liquid-Based Cytology, and Human Papillomavirus Testing as Stand-alone or Cotesting Strategies.

BACKGROUND: Some countries have implemented stand-alone human papillomavirus (HPV) testing while others consider cotesting for cervical cancer screening. We compared both strategies within a population-based study. METHODS: The MARZY cohort study was conducted in Germany. Randomly selected women from population registries aged ≥30 years (n = 5,275) were invited to screening with Pap smear, liquid-based cytology (LBC, ThinPrep), and HPV testing (Hybrid Capture2, HC2). Screen-positive participants [ASC-US+ or high-risk HC2 (hrHC2)] and a random 5% sample of screen-negatives were referred to colposcopy. Post hoc HPV genotyping was conducted by GP5+/6+ PCR-EIA with reverse line blotting. Sensitivity, specificity (adjusted for verification bias), and potential harms, including number of colposcopies needed to detect 1 precancerous lesion (NNC), were calculated. RESULTS: In 2,627 screened women, cytological sensitivities (Pap, LBC: 47%) were lower than HC2 (95%) and PCR (79%) for CIN2+. Cotesting demonstrated higher sensitivities (HC2 cotesting: 99%; PCR cotesting: 84%), but at the cost of lower specificities (92%-95%) compared with HPV stand-alone (HC2: 95%; PCR: 94%) and cytology (97% or 99%). Cotesting versus HPV stand-alone showed equivalent relative sensitivity [HC2: 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.00-1.21; PCR: 1.07, 95% CI, 1.00-1.27]. Relative specificity of Pap cotesting with either HPV test was inferior to stand-alone HPV. LBC cotesting demonstrated equivalent specificity (both tests: 0.99, 95% CI, 0.99-1.00). NNC was highest for Pap cotesting. CONCLUSIONS: Cotesting offers no benefit in detection over stand-alone HPV testing, resulting in more false positive results and colposcopy referrals. IMPACT: HPV stand-alone screening offers a better balance of benefits and harms than cotesting.See related commentary by Wentzensen and Clarke, p. 432.

Triage of hrHPV-positive women: comparison of two commercial methylation-specific PCR assays.

AIM: High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)-based screening is becoming increasingly important, either by supplementing or replacing the traditional cytology-based cervical Pap smear. However, hrHPV screening lacks specificity, because it cannot differentiate between transient virus infection and clinically relevant hrHPV-induced disease. Therefore, reliable triage methods are needed for the identification of HPV-positive women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) in need of treatment. Promising tools discussed for the triage of these patients are molecular diagnostic tests based on epigenetic markers. Here, we compare the performance of two commercially available DNA methylation-based diagnostic assays-GynTect® and the QIAsure Methylation Test-in physician-taken cervical scrapes from 195 subjects. FINDINGS: Both GynTect® and the QIAsure Methylation Test detected all cervical carcinoma and carcinoma in situ (CIS). The differences observed in the detection rates between both assays for the different grades of cervical lesions (QIAsure Methylation Test: CIN1 26.7%, CIN2 27.8% and CIN3 74.3%; GynTect®: CIN1 13.3%, CIN2 33.3% and CIN3 60%) were not significant. Concerning the false-positive rates, significant differences were evident. For the healthy (NILM) hrHPV-positive group, the false-positive rates were 5.7% for GynTect® and 26.4% for QIAsure Methylation Test (p = 0.003) and for the NILM hrHPV-negative group 2.2% vs. 23.9% (p = 0.006), respectively. When considering hrHPV-positive samples only for comparison (n = 149), GynTect® delivered significantly higher specificity compared to the QIAsure Methylation Test for CIN2 + (87.6% vs. 67.4% (p < 0.001)) and CIN3 + (84.1% vs. 68.2% (p = 0.002)). Overall our findings suggest that DNA methylation-based tests are suitable for the triage of hrHPV-positive women. With the goal to provide a triage test that complements the limited specificity of HPV testing in HPV-based screening, GynTect® may be preferable, due to its higher specificity for CIN2+ or CIN3+ .

Prevention of Cervical Cancer: Guideline of the DGGG and the DKG (S3 Level, AWMF Register Number 015/027OL, December 2017) - Part 1 with Introduction, Screening and the Pathology of Cervical Dysplasia.

Aims Annual opportunistic screening for cervical carcinoma has been carried out in Germany since 1971. The creation of this S3 guideline meets an important need, outlined in the National Cancer Plan, with regard to screening for cervical cancer, as the guideline aims to provide important information and support for planned organized screening for cervical cancer in Germany. Methods With the financial support of German Cancer Aid, 21 professional societies developed evidence-based statements and recommendations (classified using the GRADE system) for the screening, management and treatment of precancerous conditions of the cervix. Two independent scientific institutes compiled systematic reviews for this guideline. Recommendations The first part of this short summary presents the pathological basis and considers various questions related to screening for cervical cancer. As also reported in earlier reviews, the meta-analysis by Kleijnen Systematic Reviews showed that HPV-based screening offers better protection against invasive cervical cancer compared to cytology-based screening. The authors of this guideline therefore recommend - in accordance with the guideline of the Joint National Committee of Germany (Gemeinsamer Bundesauschuss, G-BA) - that women aged 35 and above should be examined at regular intervals (at least every 3 years) and undergo HPV-based screening. Co-testing can also be carried out. Women between the ages of 20 and 35 should have cytological screening every 2 years.

Prevention of Cervical Cancer: Guideline of the DGGG and the DKG (S3 Level, AWMF Register Number 015/027OL, December 2017) - Part 2 on Triage, Treatment and Follow-up.

Aims Annual opportunistic screening for cervical carcinoma has been done in Germany since 1971. The creation of this S3 guideline meets an important need, outlined in the National Cancer Plan, with regard to screening for cervical cancer, as this guideline aims to provide important information and support for planned organized screening for cervical cancer in Germany. Methods With the financial support of German Cancer Aid, 21 professional societies developed evidence-based statements and recommendations (classified using the GRADE system) for the screening, management and treatment of precancerous conditions of the cervix. Two independent scientific institutes compiled systematic reviews for this guideline. Recommendations The second part of this short summary deals with the triage, treatment and follow-up care of cervical dysplasia. With regard to those women who do not participate in screening, the guideline authors recommend sending out repeat invitation letters or an HPV self-collection kit. Colposcopy should be carried out for further investigation if cytology findings are Pap II-p and HPV test results are positive or if the results of an HPV 16 or HPV 18 screening test are positive. A single abnormal Pap smear should be triaged and investigated using HPV testing or p16/Ki67 dual staining.

Performance of a DNA methylation marker panel using liquid-based cervical scrapes to detect cervical cancer and its precancerous stages.

BACKGROUND: A change of cervical cancer screening algorithms to an HPV-based screening setting is discussed in many countries, due to higher sensitivity of HPV testing compared to cytology. Reliable triage methods are, however, an essential prerequisite in such a setting to avoid overtreatment and higher screening costs. RESULTS: In this study, a series of cervical scrapes collected in PreservCyt liquid-based cytology (LBC) medium from women with cervical cancer (n = 5), cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1-3 (n = 74), and normal cytology (n = 201; further n = 352 collected in SureThin®) were assessed for methylation of the marker regions ASTN1, DLX1, ITGA4, RXFP3, SOX17, and ZNF671 using the GynTect assay and compared to cobas® HPV and CINtec Plus® biomarker results. All samples from women with cervical cancer, 61.2% of CIN3, 44.4% of CIN2 and 20.0% of CIN1 cases were scored positive for the GynTect methylation assay. In contrast, all CIN, irrespective of severity grade, and carcinomas were positive by both, CINtec Plus and cobas HPV. The specificity of GynTect for CIN3+ was 94.6% compared to 69.9% for CINtec Plus and 82.6% for cobas HPV (all HPV types) and 90.6% for cobas HPV 16/18. DNA methylation analysis of this methylation marker panel (GynTect assay) in cervical scrapes consistently detects cervical cancer and the majority of CIN3 as well as a subset of CIN1/2 lesions. The detection rate among cytologically normal samples is extraordinarily low (1.5%). CONCLUSION: GynTect shows excellent performance when using cervical scrape material collected in liquid-based cytology media, a prerequisite for employing such a test as a triage in screening programs. Compared to the other test systems used in this work, GynTect showed higher specificity while still detecting all cancer cases.

Prospective evaluation of p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology for managing women with abnormal Papanicolaou cytology: PALMS study results.

BACKGROUND: Testing for the presence of the human papillomavirus (HPV) is widely accepted for triaging Papanicolaou cytology results categorized as atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US). In contrast, HPV testing has limited use in triaging cytological low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSILs) due to prevalence rates of typically >80%. In the current study, the authors assessed the diagnostic performance of p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology in triaging ASC-US and LSIL cases within the prospective, multicentric Primary ASC-US LSIL Marker Study (PALMS). METHODS: A total of 575 ASC-US cases and 529 LSIL cases from a cohort of 27,349 women who were prospectively enrolled into the PALMS study in 5 European countries were tested with p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology and Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) HPV testing. Colposcopy-guided biopsy results of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) were used as clinical endpoints. RESULTS: p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology demonstrated comparable (ASC-US: 94.4% for dual-stained cytology vs 100% for HC2 testing; P = .317) or lower (LSIL: 85.7% for dual-stained cytology vs 98.4% for HC2 testing; P = .005) sensitivity for CIN2+, but higher levels of specificity compared with HC2 HPV testing in both ASC-US (78.7% vs 60.4%; P<.001) and LSIL (53.3% vs 15.6%; P<.001) cases. Positive predictive values for CIN2+ were substantially higher for dual-stained cytology versus HC2 HPV testing, especially in LSIL, and in ASC-US cases for women aged <30 years. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical usefulness and efficiency of triaging women with ASC-US or LSIL Papanicolaou cytology results by p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology testing has been confirmed in this prospective, pan-European study. The high positive predictive value of dual-stained cytology for the presence of high-grade CIN may help to reduce the number of unnecessary colposcopy referrals.

Laboratory diagnosis of human papillomavirus infection.

Human papillomaviruses (HPVs) are associated with numerous cutaneous or mucosal benign and malignant neoplasms. The majority of available data on routine HPV diagnostics has been centered on evaluating the cervix. Consequently, there is limited data on the utility and efficacy of HPV diagnostics in cutaneous lesions. Therefore the vast majority of data presented in this short review are derived from cervical cancer prevention measures. The balance between analytical (low) and clinical (high) sensitivity is crucial for the specificity of a routine HPV test as limited specificity would result in unnecessary treatment of healthy women. Furthermore, HPV-16 and -18 confer a much higher risk for the development of a cervical intraepithelial lesion 2+ compared to the other HPV high-risk types. It is therefore deemed appropriate to test for these HPV types independently. With the exception of testing for these HPV high-risk types, testing for individual HPV types is of very limited clinical value. Until now HPV diagnostics have mainly been based on DNA detection for which signal and target amplification methods are available. PCR techniques can be divided into type-specific and consensus PCRs. Due to its high clinical sensitivity and its relatively high specificity the Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) test became the gold standard in routine HPV testing. The HC2 method hybridizes 13 (near) full-length stabilized RNA probes of high-risk HPV types to denatured target DNA followed by detection with antibodies and chemiluminescence. To avoid costly validation studies for new HPV tests, internationally accepted standards for evaluation have been defined. Meanwhile several new HPV detection assays have been commercialized. Three tests have received Food and Drug Administration approval (Cervista™, signal amplification; Cobas™ HPV test, real-time PCR; APTIMA™ HPV RNA test). Among them the Cobas HPV test has been most broadly validated for use in triage and as an adjunct to cytology. HPV RNA testing is another promising option with potentially higher specificity.

Screening for cervical cancer precursors with p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology: results of the PALMS study.

BACKGROUND: Pap cytology is known to be more specific but less sensitive than testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) for the detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+). We assessed whether p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology, a biomarker combination indicative of transforming HPV infections, can provide high sensitivity for CIN2+ in screening while maintaining high specificity. Results were compared with Pap cytology and HPV testing. METHODS: A total of 27,349 women 18 years or older attending routine cervical cancer screening were prospectively enrolled in five European countries. Pap cytology, p16/Ki-67 immunostaining, and HPV testing were performed on all women. Positive test results triggered colposcopy referral, except for women younger than 30 years with only positive HPV test results. Presence of CIN2+ on adjudicated histology was used as the reference standard. Two-sided bias-corrected McNemar P values were determined. RESULTS: The p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology positivity rates were comparable with the prevalence of abnormal Pap cytology results and less than 50% of the positivity rates observed for HPV testing. In women of all ages, dual-stained cytology was more sensitive than Pap cytology (86.7% vs 68.5%; P < .001) for detecting CIN2+, with comparable specificity (95.2% vs 95.4%; P = .15). The relative performance of the tests was similar in both groups of women: younger than age 30 and 30 years or older. HPV testing in women 30 years or older was more sensitive than dual-stained cytology (93.3% vs 84.7%; P = .03) but less specific (93.0% vs 96.2%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology combines superior sensitivity and noninferior specificity over Pap cytology for detecting CIN2+. It suggests a potential role of dual-stained cytology in screening, especially in younger women where HPV testing has its limitations.

A randomized trial comparing conventional cytology to liquid-based cytology and computer assistance.

Liquid-based cytology (LBC) has replaced conventional cytology (CC) for cervical cancer screening in some countries. However, it remains unclear whether LBC is superior to CC. A randomized controlled trial was conducted between August 2007 and March 2009 in Germany to compare LBC, alone and in combination with computer-assisted imaging technology (CAS), to CC in the detection of histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). The main outcome measures were detection rates, relative sensitivities, positive predictive values (PPVs) and relative PPVs comparing LBC without and with CAS to CC. Primary histological outcome was CIN2 or higher. Included were 20,627 women participating in opportunistic cervical cancer screening at 20 gynecologic practices. The practices were randomized weekly to use LBC (n = 11,331) or CC (n = 9,296). Patients with positive findings were invited to expert colposcopy. The relative sensitivity of LBC versus CC using the CIN2+ cut-off was 2.74 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.66-4.53). The relative sensitivity of LBC/CAS versus CC for CIN2+ was 3.17 (95% CI 1.94-5.19). The PPV of LBC and CC for CIN2+ was 48% and 38%, respectively. The PPV ratio did not differ significantly from unity. Differences between LBC and CC were smaller in some sensitivity and subgroup analyses; however, relative sensitivity of LBC remained increased. LBC without and with CAS compared with CC under the field conditions of an opportunistic screening system had a significantly higher sensitivity for the detection of CIN without deterioration of PPVs. Additional use of CAS did not further improve sensitivity of LBC. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

MALDI imaging as a specific diagnostic tool for routine cervical cytology specimens.

Cervical squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is among the most common malignancies in women worldwide. In developed countries routine cytology screening has dramatically reduced SCC mortality within the last three decades. High risk (HR) human papilloma virus (HPV) infection is the main causal factor in nearly 100% of invasive SCCs, in most cases of low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) and in nearly all cases of high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL). Detection of HR-HPV DNA has been extensively evaluated for the triage of patients with low grade cytological abnormalities in order to identify those at greatest risk for underlying or developing HSIL or SCC. However, the vast majority of HR-HPV-positive precursor lesions will not progress to invasive cancer. A variety of other screening tools are available which aim to stratify clinically significant HPV infections and cytological alterations. Matrix assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI) imaging mass spectrometry is a promising technology to assist in this endeavor. It delivers accurate mass spectrometric information of the sample's proteins and enables the visualization of the spatial distribution of protein expression profiles in correlation with histological features. In this study, 18 samples with Pap IIID or higher (>LSIL) and 14 samples with Pap I-II (WNL) were analyzed by MALDI imaging mass spectrometry (IMS). A genetic algorithm was applied to classify spectra resulting in an overall cross validation, sensitivity for Pap IIID and Pap I-II of 83.7%, 88.9% and 78.6%, respectively. As this IMS based approach allows for unbiased and automated classifiction of cytological samples it appears to be a promising tool for stratification of cervical Pap smears.

Vaccination trial with HPV16 L1E7 chimeric virus-like particles in women suffering from high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 2/3).

Persistent infection with human papillomaviruses (HPV) is a prerequisite for the development of cervical cancer. Vaccination with virus-like particles (VLP) has demonstrated efficacy in prophylaxis but lacks therapeutic potential. HPV16 L1E7 chimeric virus-like particles (CVLP) consist of a carboxy-terminally truncated HPV16L1 protein fused to the amino-terminal part of the HPV16 E7 protein and self-assemble by recombinant expression of the fusion protein. The CVLP are able to induce L1- and E7-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes. We have performed a first clinical trial to gain information about the safety and to generate preliminary data on the therapeutic potential of the CVLP in humans. A randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial has been conducted in 39 HPV16 mono-infected high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) patients (CIN 2/3). Two doses (75 mug or 250 mug) of CVLP were applied. The duration of the study was 24 weeks with 2 optional visits after another 12 and 24 weeks. The vaccine showed a very good safety profile with only minor adverse events attributable to the immunization. Antibodies with high titers against HPV16 L1 and low titers against HPV16 E7 as well as cellular immune responses against both proteins were induced. Responses were equivalent for both vaccine concentrations. A trend for histological improvement to CIN 1 or normal was seen in 39% of the patients receiving the vaccine and only 25% of the placebo recipients. Fifty-six percent of the responders were also HPV16 DNA-negative by the end of the study. Therefore, we demonstrated evidence for safety and a nonsignificant trend for the clinical efficacy of the HPV16 L1E7 CVLP vaccine.

An economic analysis of human papillomavirus triage for the management of women with atypical and abnormal Pap smear results in Germany.

We developed decision-analytic models to determine the cost effectiveness of incorporating human papillomavirus (HPV) testing into the management of atypical and abnormal Pap smear results in Germany. The models compare three management strategies: (1) repeat Pap smear, (2) triage with HPV DNA testing, or (3) immediate treatment. The primary outcome measure is incremental cost per case of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2+ detected and treated. The models take the perspective of the German health system. For patients with initial PapIIw, III, and IIId results, incremental cost effectiveness ratios for HPV triage versus repeat Pap smears are 2,232 euro, 815 euro, and 487 euro per additional case of CIN2+ detected and treated. In addition, the number of cases of CIN2+ detected and treated in a hypothetical population of 1,000 women increases from 17 to 35, 61 to 130, and 157 to 332 for each population, respectively. For patients with initial PapIII and IIId results, immediate treatment of 1,000 patients detects only four and 11 additional cases of CIN2+ versus HPV triage at incremental cost effectiveness ratios of 39,684 euro and 10,716 euro per case, respectively. For each of the populations evaluated, HPV triage is the most cost-effective management strategy versus either repeat Pap smear or immediate treatment.