Social media use in HPV-, cervical cancer-, and cervical screening-related research: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: In response to the World Health Organization's global call to eliminate cervical cancer, many countries have targets to implement human papillomavirus (HPV) primary screening. Social media may offer opportunities to promote uptake of HPV screening. We aimed to describe the extent of the scientific literature regarding social media research on HPV, cervical cancer and cervical screening. METHODS: Seven databases were searched for peer-reviewed English-language studies related to social media research and HPV, cervical cancer and cervical screening published up to November 2023. One reviewer completed the title/abstract screening and two reviewers independently reviewed full-text articles. Data extraction was carried out by one reviewer and verified by a second reviewer. Information such as the research topic, social media platform of interest, participant characteristics, methods, analysis type, outcome measures, and key findings were collected. RESULTS: In the 58 articles included, researchers used social media in the following ways: evaluate content, recruit participants or disseminate a survey/questionnaire, disseminate health communication content, examine the relationship between social media use and outcomes, and to conduct experiments testing the effects of social media content on outcomes. Twitter and Facebook were the most common platforms mentioned. Four articles explicitly mentioned theory. CONCLUSIONS: Opportunities for research are identified such as further exploration of how newer social media platforms such as Instagram and TikTok can be used to share HPV content, examination of appropriate images for effective communication, and determining key features of social media content to promote information sharing and improve cervical screening knowledge, attitudes and behaviours.

Home-based self-sampling vs clinician sampling for anal precancer screening: The Prevent Anal Cancer Self-Swab Study.

Sexual minority men are at increased risk for anal squamous cell carcinoma. Our objective was to compare screening engagement among individuals randomized to self-collect an anal canal specimen at home or to attend a clinic appointment. Specimen adequacy was then assessed for human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA genotyping. A randomized trial recruited cisgendered sexual minority men and transgender people in the community and assigned them to use a home-based self-collection swabbing kit or attend a clinic-based swabbing. Swabs were sent for HPV genotyping. The proportions of participants completing screening in each study arm and the adequacy of their specimens for HPV genotyping were assessed. Relative risks were estimated for factors associated with screening. A total of 240 individuals were randomized. Age (median, 46 years) and HIV status (27.1% living with HIV) did not differ by study arm. A total of 89.2% and 74.2% of home-arm and clinic-arm individuals returned the swab, respectively (P = .003), difference between groups, 15.0% (95% CI 5.4%-24.6%). Among black individuals, 96.2% and 63.2% in the home and clinic arms screened (P = .006). Among individuals with HIV, 89.5% and 51.9% in the home and clinic arms screened (P < .001). Self-collected swabs and clinician-collected swabs were comparable in adequacy for HPV genotyping (96.3% and 93.3%, respectively). People at highest risk for anal cancer may be more likely to screen if they are able to self-collect swabs at home rather than attend a clinic.

Prevalence of cervical human papillomavirus in Mexico, 2010-2017: analysis of 2.7 million women.

PURPOSE: Prevalence of cervical high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) infection varies greatly. Data on distribution of hrHPV infection constitute important evidence for decision-making when implementing HPV testing into cervical cancer screening programs. We estimate the prevalence of cervical hrHPV infection in a large sample of women in a middle-income country and explore variation by age, community marginalization and region in women using public cervical cancer screening services. METHODS: Records covering 2010-2017 from a registry of hrHPV test results (Hybrid Capture 2 and polymerase chain reaction) in 2,737,022 women 35-64 years were analyzed. In this observational study, 32 states were categorized into five geographical regions and classified by degree of marginalization. We stratified by test type and estimated crude and adjusted prevalence and rate ratios and used Poisson models and joinpoint regression analysis. RESULTS: Prevalence was higher in women 35-39 years, at 10.4% (95% CI 10.3-10.5) and women 60-64 years, at 10.1% (95% CI 10.0-10.3). Prevalence was higher in the southeast, at 10.5% (95% CI 10.4-10.6). Women living in less marginalized areas had a significantly higher prevalence, at 10.3% (95% CI 10.2-10.4) compared to those in highly marginalized areas, at 8.7% (95% CI 8.5-8.7). HPV16 infection was detected in 0.92% (2,293/23,854) of women and HPV18 infection was detected in 0.39% (978/23,854) of women. CONCLUSION: Understanding the distribution of HPV prevalence has value as evidence for developing policy in order to improve cervical cancer screening strategies. These results will constitute evidence to allow decision makers to better choose where to focus those resources that they do have.

Comparative performance of the human papillomavirus test and cytology for primary screening for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia at the population level.

The World Health Organization recommends high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)-based screening for women 39 to 49 years, based on the greater accuracy of hrHPV-based screening for cervical cancer detection. Many cervical cancer screening programs have incorporated hrHPV testing and multiple early cervical cancer detection strategies have been evaluated, mostly under controlled conditions. However, there are few evaluations of combined hrHPV and cytology strategies post-implementation at the population level. Our study sought to estimate the relative yield of hrHPV testing compared to cervical cytology, as a primary screening test for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN2+), used at the population level. We analyzed screening data from Mexico's public cervical cancer prevention program from 2010 to 2015 in women 35 to 64 years. The study population consisted of two cohorts: one from a total of 2 881 962 cytology-based screening tests and another from a total of 2 004 497 hrHPV-based screening tests, which are concurrent in time. We performed a relative yield analysis using Poisson regression models to compare the effectiveness of hrHPV testing for CIN2+ with cervical cytology. A total of 4 886 459 records were analyzed, including 23 999 biopsies; 0.12% (n = 6166) had a CIN2+ histologic diagnosis. hrHPV testing with cytological triage detects twice as many CIN2+ cases as screening using cytology alone.

Real-world effectiveness of primary screening with high-risk human papillomavirus testing in the cervical cancer screening programme in China: a nationwide, population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials have shown a higher sensitivity and longer negative predictive value of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) testing than cytology for cervical cancer screening; however, little is known about the effectiveness of HPV testing in middle-income countries. Understanding the characteristics of HPV testing may increase the priority of HPV testing in health policies. The study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of HPV testing in the national cervical cancer screening programme in China. METHODS: We performed a nationwide, population-based study using individual data from the national cervical cancer screening programme in rural China between 2015 and 2017. The analyses included 1,160,981 women aged 35-64 years who underwent cytology alone or high-risk HPV testing with cytology or genotyping triage. The main outcome was cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse (CIN2+). We used multivariate logistic regressions and performed sensitivity analyses with propensity score matching to compare the screening positive, colposcopy referral, detection rate, and positive predictive value (PPV). RESULTS: The screening positive rates for HPV testing and cytology were 10.1% and 4.0%, respectively. The per protocol colposcopy referral rate of HPV testing was significantly lower than that of cytology (3.5% vs 4.0%), and this difference was mostly due to the low referral threshold of cytology (≥ASC-US). Overall, HPV testing detected more CIN2+ (5.5 vs. 4.4 per 1000, adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=1.18, 95% confidence interval 1.11-1.25) and had a higher PPV (13.8% vs 10.9%, aOR 1.29, 95% CI 1.21-1.37) than cytology. The colposcopy referrals of HPV testing in comparison to cytology differed by income status; it significantly increased in lower-middle-income areas (3.7% vs 3.1%, aOR 1.21, 95% CI 1.17-1.25) and significantly decreased in upper-middle-income areas (3.4% vs 4.9%, aOR 0.69, 95% CI 0.67-0.71). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated the reliability and robustness of the results. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of HPV testing could improve both the CIN2+ detection rate and efficiency of cervical cancer screening programme, supporting the introduction of primary screening with high-risk HPV testing in China. Further study is needed to investigate the long-term effect of this change.

Long-term cervical precancer outcomes after a negative DNA- or RNA-based human papillomavirus test result.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer, a preventable disease associated with the human papillomavirus, is responsible for significant morbidity and mortality globally. Primary human papillomavirus testing is more sensitive in detecting precancerous cervical lesions than cytologic screening and can be conducted using either DNA- or RNA-based assays. Screening programs must select the most appropriate assay from several available assays for their population. It is not yet known whether these assays perform equivalently in the long term, particularly among women with a negative human papillomavirus test result. This study aims to compare long-term safety after a negative human papillomavirus test result across both DNA- and RNA-based testing assays. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare long-term high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher) outcomes of 2 DNA-based assays (Digene Hybrid Capture 2 High-Risk HPV DNA Test and cobas 4800 HPV Test) and 1 messenger RNA-based assay (Aptima HPV Assay) using data from the Human Papillomavirus For Cervical Cancer Trial-DECADEl (FOCAL-DECADE) cohort, by first comparing the positive and negative rates between the assays and then investigating the cumulative incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 and higher and grade 3 or higher detection among participants in the FOCAL DECADE cohort over follow-up according to human papillomavirus testing assays. STUDY DESIGN: The FOCAL Trial was a randomized controlled trial that evaluated human papillomavirus testing for primary cervical cancer screening. The FOCAL-DECADE cohort subsequently followed FOCAL Trial participants passively through the British Columbia Cervix Screening Program Database for approximately 10 years after the FOCAL Trial study exit to examine the rates of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher. For this study, eligible participants had baseline human papillomavirus-negative results from at least 1 assay and had 1 or more cytologic screens after baseline (9509 participants for DNA-based and 3473 participants for DNA- vs RNA-based assay comparisons). We constructed cumulative incidence curves and compared the hazard ratios for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher detection according to the assays. RESULTS: Over 10 years of follow-up, the cumulative incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher did not significantly differ between the DNA-based assays (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.06; P=.35 and hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-1.01; P=.06 for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or higher, respectively) or between the DNA- and RNA-based assays (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.87-1.06; P=.48 and hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-1.13; P=.52 for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or higher, respectively). CONCLUSION: Among participants who tested negative for human papillomavirus at baseline, the long-term risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher did not significantly differ regardless of whether DNA- or RNA-based human papillomavirus testing assays were used. Screening program decision makers can be confident that for women who test negative for human papillomavirus, DNA- and RNA-based assays exhibit similar cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher outcomes over several years.

Accuracy of combined molecular and morphology-based triage for HPV-positive women in routine cervical cancer screening services from Colombia.

WHO cervical cancer elimination goals comprise 70% of highly-sensitive screening coverage and 90% treatment of precancerous lesions. Triage for HPV-positive women may challenge sensitivity of screening algorithms and women's follow-up, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) where screening quality and protocol adherence are frequently deficient. We aimed to determine the accuracy of triage for HPV positive women in routine screening services from Colombia by a prospective cross-sectional study. Consecutively, HPV DNA-positive women underwent six triage strategies (conventional cytology, two methods of visual inspection, HPV16/18/45-genotyping, telomerase, and HPV mRNA). Positive triage results underwent regular colposcopy/biopsy in public hospitals. Adjusted sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values for CIN2+/CIN3+ were estimated for stand-alone and combined tests. We explored the impact of triage strategies on referral rates and the complete screening algorithm (screening plus triage). Overall 16,242 women underwent HPV screening and 1789 (11.0%) were HPV-positive. In total, 20.1% of women were lost to follow-up. mRNA showed the highest positivity rate (0.64 among HPV-positive and 0.05 among the total screened cohort), the highest sensitivity (0.94 95%CI 0.75-0.96), and the lowest specificity (0.36 95%CI 0.29-0.43). Parallel testing with HPV-mRNA revealed the highest increase in sensitivity for all triage strategies. Accuracy of cytology and visual inspection differ between screening units but parallel testing with HPV16/18/45 genotyping significantly increased their sensitivity (over 0.80). Morphology-based triage for HPV-positive women remains a suitable alternative for routine practice in LMIC if combined with HPV16/18/45-genotyping; however, point-of-care triage would be preferable to reduce losses to follow-up. HPV-mRNA triage deserves cost-benefit analyses.

Cost-effectiveness of HPV-based cervical screening based on first year results in the Netherlands: a modelling study.

OBJECTIVE: We aim to compare the cost-effectiveness of the old cytology programme with the new high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) screening programme, using performance indicators from the new Dutch hrHPV screening programme. DESIGN: Model-based cost-effectiveness analysis. SETTING: The Netherlands. POPULATION: Dutch 30-year-old unvaccinated females followed up lifelong. METHODS: We updated the microsimulation screening analysis (MISCAN) model using the most recent epidemiological and screening data from the Netherlands. We simulated both screening programmes, using the screening behaviour and costs observed in each programme. Sensitivity analyses were performed on screening behaviour, utility losses and discount rates. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cervical cancer incidence and mortality rates, number of screening tests and repeat tests, colposcopy referrals by lesion grade, costs from a societal perspective, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: The new Dutch cervical cancer screening programme decreased the cervical cancer mortality by 4% and the incidence by 1% compared with the old programme. Colposcopy referrals of women without cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse, increased by 172%, but 13% more QALYs were still achieved. Total costs were reduced by 21%, mainly due to fewer screening tests. Per QALY gained, the hrHPV programme cost 46% less (€12,225) than the cytology programme (€22,678), and hrHPV-based screening remained more cost-effective in all sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The hrHPV-based screening programme was found to be more effective and cost-effective than the cytology programme. Alternatives for the current triage strategy should be considered to lower the number of unnecessary referrals. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: First results after implementation confirm that HPV screening is more cost-effective than cytology screening.

Human papillomavirus genotyping predicts residual/recurrent disease after local treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia better than viral DNA testing.

AIM: Type-specific persistent infection (TSPI) of human papillomavirus (HPV) is reportedly associated with a high risk of residual/recurrent disease after local treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). This study aimed to evaluate whether HPV genotyping is more accurate in detecting residual/recurrent disease than HPV DNA testing and identify which HPV genotype can predict a high risk of residual/recurrent disease. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patient outcomes and results of HPV DNA testing and genotyping at 6-12 months after local treatment for CIN2/3 for 439 women. We investigated residual/recurrent disease occurrence according to the TSPI and new infections. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV, respectively) of the two testing methods for predicting residual/recurrent diseases were also evaluated. RESULTS: Eighty-five (19.4%) patients were positive for HPV DNA testing after treatment, of which 74 (87.1%) had TSPI. Residual/recurrent disease was identified in 34 (7.7%) patients, of which 30 were positive for HPV DNA testing and had TSPI of HPV16, 18, 31, 33, 52, and 58 (six HPV genotypes). The sensitivity and NPV of HPV DNA testing and TSPI were equal at 88.2% and 98.9%, respectively. The specificity and PPV of TSPI were higher than those of HPV DNA testing (89.1% vs. 86.4%, 40.5% vs. 35.2%, respectively). Furthermore, the TSPI of the six HPV genotypes further improved specificity (90.6%) and PPV (44.1%) with the same sensitivity and NPV. CONCLUSION: HPV genotyping is more useful than HPV DNA testing for determining TSPI, especially of the six HPV genotypes.

Koilocytic changes are not elicited by human papillomavirus genotypes with higher oncogenic potential.

Koilocytes are considered a common cytopathological effect in patients with human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. Thus, we aimed to elucidate whether koilocytes are common to all HPV infections. Liquid-based cytology samples from 651 patients with abnormal Papanicolaou (Pap) test results were used to analyze the presence of koilocytes and HPV genotype. HPV genotype was determined in complete liquid cytology samples and microdissected cell samples from Pap smear slides using the uniplex E6/E7 polymerase chain reaction method, which can detect 39 mucosal HPV genotypes. Koilocytes were found in 29.3% (191) of all patients. Logistical regression analysis of diverse HPV genotypes revealed that infections with low-risk HPV types (HPV-6b, HPV-40, HPV-42, HPV-61, HPV-74, HPV-89, and HPV-90), probably high-risk HPV types (HPV-53 and HPV-66), and high-risk types (HPV-39 and HPV-56) were significantly associated with the presence of koilocytes. However, HPV-16, HPV-18, and HPV-52, which have higher oncogenic potential, were not found to be associated with koilocytes. These results were confirmed by HPV genotyping using microdissected koilocytes in 27 patients.Most common high-risk types belonging to α-9 and α-7 genotypes appear to rarely induce koilocytic changes. Therefore, koilocytes may provide additional useful information for predicting the risk of progression to high-grade lesions.

Cost-Effectiveness of Primary HPV Screening Strategies and Triage With Cytology or Dual Stain for Cervical Cancer.

To identify the optimal cost-effective strategy for cervical cancer screening program in Thailand by comparing the different algorithms which based on the use of primary human papilloma virus (HPV) assay. We use a Microsoft Excel-based spreadsheet to calculate the accumulated cases of preinvasive and invasive cervical cancer and the budget impact of each screening program. The model was developed to determine the cost-effectiveness of 3 screening strategies: pooled HPV test with reflex liquid-based cytology triage, HPV genotyping with reflex p16/ki67 dual stain cytology, and pooled HPV test with dual stain. The main outcomes were the total cost, incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Strategy entailing primary HPV genotyping and reflex dual stain cytology is the least costly strategy (total cost US$37 893 407) and provides the similar QALY gained compared to pooled high-risk HPV testing with reflex dual stain (Average QALY 24.03). Pooled HPV test with reflex dual staining is more costly compared to strategy without reflex dual staining. The ICER was US$353.40 per QALY gained. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the model is sensitive to the cost of dual stain and the cost of cancer treatment. Decreasing the incidence of cervical cancer case and increasing the QALYs can be successful by using dual stain cytology as the triage test for pooled HPV test or HPV genotyping. The result of our analysis favors the use of HPV genotyping with the reflex dual stain as it offers the most QALY at the lowest cost.

Integrated cervical cancer screening in Mayuge District Uganda (ASPIRE Mayuge): a pragmatic sequential cluster randomized trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is almost entirely preventable through vaccination and screening, yet remains one of the 'gravest threats to women's lives' according to the World Health Organization. Specific high-risk subtypes of human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) are well-established as the primary cause of cervical cancer. Uganda has one of the highest cervical cancer incidence rates in the world (54.8 per 100,000) as a result of limited screening access and infrastructure. The integration of a self-collected cervical cancer screening program using HPV testing within existing community-based primary health care services could increase access to screening and reduce cervical cancer rates among Ugandan women. METHODS: Using a pragmatic, sequential, cluster randomized trial design; we will compare the effectiveness of two cervical cancer screening models for self-collected HPV testing: 1) community health worker recruitment (door-to-door); and 2) community health meetings. In Mayuge district, Uganda, 31 villages are randomized to one of two treatment arms. Due to the nature of this trial, blinding is not possible. Women are eligible to participate if they have no previous history of hysterectomy or treatment for cervical cancer or pre-cancer and are aged 25-49 years old. All participants receive an integrated package of cervical cancer screening and education. Samples are tested for HPV using GeneXpert point of care testing. All women who test positive for HR-HPV types are referred to a designated health centre for follow-up inspection by Visual Inspection with Acetic acid (VIA) and treatment with thermal ablation. The primary outcome for the trial is the number of women who attend follow-up for VIA screening at a designated Health Centre after a positive HR-HPV test out of all women screened per arm. Secondary outcomes include: cervical cancer screening knowledge; patient-reported experience measures for self-collected cervical cancer screening; and HPV incidence. DISCUSSION: Results from this study will inform the national scale-up of cervical cancer screening in Uganda, aligning with the World Health Organization's target of achieving cervical cancer elimination through the pillar of increased HPV screening coverage. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN12767014. Registered 14 May 2019, https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN12767014; clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04000503; Registered 27 June 2019, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04000503 PROTOCOL VERSION: January 8, 2020, version 1.

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

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

Estimation of the prevalence and distribution of HPV genotypes and identification of related risk factors among Turkish women.

AIM OF THE STUDY: The present study aims to estimate the prevalence and distribution of HPV genotypes and identify related risk factors among Turkish women. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 11 624 Turkish women attending our gynaecological clinic and expressing a desire for access to cervical cancer screening were assessed during the years 2014-2016. Cervical specimens were collected and transported using the HC2 HPV DNA Collection Device (consisting of a cervical brush and digene Specimen Transport Medium). RESULTS: Among these 11 624 individuals, positive HPV test results were obtained for 325 (2.79%), and negative results were observed for 11 299 (97.2%). The vast majority of patients were between the 3rd and 5th decades and the mean age of the patients was 44 ±9.12 (range 27-66). Among the HPV-positive women, 205 were positive for a single HPV type (205/325 = 63.1% of HPV infections; 205/11624 = 1.76% of all samples) and 120 were positive for multiple types (120/325 = 36.9% of HPV infections; 120/11624 = 1.03% of all samples). The four most prevalent high-risk types were HPV 16, 31, 51 and 52, with frequencies of 11.25%, 7.83%, 6.06% and 3.16%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There appears to be geographic variation in the distribution of HPV genotypes. In this study, the four most prevalent high-risk types were HPV 16, 31, 51 and 52, with frequencies of 11.25%, 7.83%, 6.06% and 3.16%, respectively.

The potential harms of primary human papillomavirus screening in over-screened women: a microsimulation study.

BACKGROUND: It is well acknowledged that HPV testing should not be performed at young age and at short intervals. Cytological screening practices have shown that over-screening, i.e., from a younger age and at shorter intervals than recommended, is hard to avoid. We quantified the consequences of a switch to primary HPV screening for over-screened women, taking into account its higher sensitivity but lower specificity than cytology. METHODS: The health effects of using the HPV test instead of cytology as the primary screening method were determined with the MISCAN-Cervix model. We varied the age women start screening and the interval between screens. In the sensitivity analyses, we varied the background risk of cervical cancer, the HPV prevalence, the discount rate, the triage strategy after cytology, and the test characteristics of both cytology and the HPV test. RESULTS: For women screened 5 yearly from age 30, 32 extra deaths per 100,000 simulated women were prevented when switching from primary cytology to primary HPV testing. For annual screening from age 20, such a switch resulted in 6 extra deaths prevented. It was associated with 9,044 more positive primary screens in the former scenario versus 76,480 in the latter. Under all conditions, for women screened annually, switching to HPV screening resulted in a net loss of quality-adjusted life years. CONCLUSION: For over-screened women, the harms associated with a lower test specificity outweigh the life years gained when switching from primary cytology to primary HPV testing. The extent of over-screening should be considered when deciding on inclusion of primary HPV screening in cervical cancer screening guidelines.

High Risk Human Papillomavirus Infection of the Foreskin in Asymptomatic Men and Patients with Phimosis.

PURPOSE: There has been increasing interest in understanding the natural history of HPV and the diseases that it causes in men. HPV infection is strongly associated with penile cancer, lack of neonatal circumcision and phimosis. We investigated the incidence of HPV infection in asymptomatic men and patients with phimosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We assessed 110 asymptomatic men and 30 patients who underwent circumcision due to phimosis. DNA was extracted from swabbed samples collected from asymptomatic men and from foreskin samples collected at circumcision. Polymerase chain reaction using consensus primers for detecting HPV-MY09/11 was performed to detect generic HPV DNA. HPV genotyping was done by polymerase chain reaction amplification with primers for the E6 gene DNA sequences HPV6, HPV11, HPV16, HPV18, HPV31, HPV33, HPV35, HPV45 and HPV58. RESULTS: HPV was present in 46.66% of patients with phimosis, of whom 50% had high risk HPV genotypes. Of asymptomatic cases 16.36% were HPV positive but only 1 sample showed high risk HPV. We detected a significantly high rate of HPV genital infection in patients presenting with phimosis compared with asymptomatic men (p = 0.00167). The prevalence of high risk HPV genotypes in patients with phimosis was also statistically significant (p = 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS: We found a robust association between phimosis and the genital HPV prevalence in men and a significant frequency of high risk HPV. Other studies are needed to investigate the occurrence of factors that can increase the incidence of penile carcinoma and determine its impact on female genital infection in cervical cancer.

Epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition in penile squamous cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition is a phenomenon in epithelial tumors that involves loss of intercellular adhesion, mesenchymal phenotype acquisition and enhanced migratory potential. While the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition process has been extensively linked to metastatic progression of squamous cell carcinoma, studies of the role of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition in squamous cell carcinoma containing high risk human papillomaviruses are scarce. Moreover, to our knowledge epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition involvement in human penile squamous cell carcinoma, which can arise through transforming HPV infections or independently of HPV, has not been investigated. We evaluated the presence of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition markers and their relationship to HPV in penile squamous cell carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We assessed the expression of E-cadherin, vimentin and the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition related transcription factors Twist, Zeb1 and Snail by immunohistochemical staining in 64 penile squamous cell carcinoma cases. HPV was detected by polymerase chain reaction amplification. RESULTS: Simultaneous loss of membranous E-cadherin expression and vimentin over expression were noted in 43.5% of penile squamous cell carcinoma cases. HPV was significantly associated with loss of membranous E-cadherin but not with epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition. Recurrence and mortality rates were significantly higher in cases showing epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that in penile squamous cell carcinoma epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition is associated with poor prognosis but not with the presence of HPV.

A DNA methylation classifier of cervical precancer based on human papillomavirus and human genes.

Testing for high-risk (hr) types of human papillomavirus (HPV) is highly sensitive as a screening test of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplastic (CIN2/3) disease, the precursor of cervical cancer. However, it has a relatively low specificity. Our objective was to develop a prediction rule with a higher specificity, using combinations of human and HPV DNA methylation. Exfoliated cervical specimens from colposcopy-referral cohorts in London were analyzed for DNA methylation levels by pyrosequencing in the L1 and L2 regions of HPV16, HPV18, HPV31 and human genes EPB41L3, DPYS and MAL. Samples from 1,493 hrHPV-positive women were assessed and of these 556 were found to have CIN2/3 at biopsy; 556 tested positive for HPV16 (323 CIN2/3), 201 for HPV18 (73 CIN2/3) and 202 for HPV31 (98 CIN2/3). The prediction rule included EPB41L3 and HPV and had area under curve 0.80 (95% CI 0.78-0.82). For 90% sensitivity, specificity was 36% (33-40) and positive predictive value (PPV) was 46% (43-48). By HPV type, 90% sensitivity corresponded to the following specificities and PPV, respectively: HPV16, 38% (32-45) and 67% (63-71); HPV18, 53% (45-62) and 52% (45-59); HPV31, 39% (31-49) and 58% (51-65); HPV16, 18 or 31, 44% (40-49) and 62% (59-65) and other hrHPV 17% (14-21) and 21% (18-24). We conclude that a methylation assay in hrHPV-positive women might improve PPV with minimal sensitivity loss.

Comparison of Hybribio-H13 and Hybrid Capture® 2 human papillomavirus tests for detection of CIN2+ and CIN3. / Comparación de las pruebas para el virus del papiloma humano Hybribio-H13 y Hybrid Capture® 2 para la detección de NIC2+ y NIC3+

INTRODUCTION: Low-cost, accurate high-risk HPV tests are needed for cervical cancer screening in limited-resource settings. OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of the low-cost Hybribio-H13 test with the Hybrid Capture® 2 to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3 (CIN2 and CIN3). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Archived baseline samples tested by the Hybrid Capture® 2 from women of the ASCUS-COL trial, aged 20 to 69 years, with biopsy-colposcopy directed diagnosis of CIN2+ (n = 143), CIN3+ (n = 51), and < CIN2 (n = 632) were blindly tested by the Hybribio-H13 test. RESULTS: The relative sensitivity of the Hybribio-H13 test versus the Hybrid Capture® 2 for detecting CIN2+ was 0.89 (90% CI = 0,80-0,98; NIT = 0,66), and for CIN3+ was 0,92 (90% CI = 0,85-0,98; NIT = 0,35). Relative specificity was 1.19 (90% CI = 1.05-1.33; NIT <0.00001). In the analysis restricted to women older than 30 years, the relative sensitivity of the Hybribio-H13 for CIN3+ was marginally below unity (ratio = 0.97; 90% CI = 0.95-0.99), and the specificity remained higher than the Hybrid Capture® 2 test. CONCLUSION: The Hybribio-H13 test was as specific as the Hybrid Capture® 2 for detecting CIN2+ or CIN3+ but less sensitive. Considering these results and the young age of the population recruited for screening because of ASCUS cytology, we suggest our results warrant the evaluation of the Hybribio-H13 for screening cervical cancer, especially in the evaluated population.

Introducción. Se necesitan pruebas para detectar genotipos de VPH de alto riesgo, precisas y de bajo costo, para la tamización del cáncer de cuello uterino en entornos de recursos limitados. Objetivo. Comparar el desempeño de la prueba de bajo costo Hybrid-H13 con la de Hybrid Capture® 2 para detectar NIC2+ y NIC3+. Materiales y métodos. Se analizaron en ciego muestras de la línea base provenientes de mujeres del estudio ASCUS-COL, entre los 20 y los 69 años, con diagnóstico dirigido por biopsia-colposcopia de NIC2+ (n = 143), NIC3 + (n = 51) y < NIC2 (n = 632) con la prueba para detección de virus de papiloma humano Hybribio-H13. Estas muestras fueron previamente evaluadas con la prueba Hybrid Capture® 2. Resultados. La sensibilidad relativa de Hybribio-13 versus la de Hybrid Capture® 2 para detectar NIC2+ fue de 0,89 (IC90%: 0,80-0,98; NIT = 0,66) y para NIC3+ fue de 0,92 (IC90%: 0,85-0,98; NIT = 0,35). La especificidad relativa fue de 1,19 (IC90%: 1,05-1,33; NIT <0,00001). En el análisis restringido a mujeres mayores de 30 años, la sensibilidad relativa de Hybribio-H13 para NIC3+ estuvo marginalmente por debajo de la unidad (proporción = 0,97; IC90%: 0,95-0,99) y la especificidad permaneció más alta que la de la prueba Hybrid Capture® 2. Conclusión. La prueba de Hybribio-H13 fue tan específica como la de Hybrid Capture® 2, pero menos sensible para detectar NIC2+ o NIC3+. Teniendo en cuenta estos resultados y la temprana edad de la población reclutada en la tamización por la presencia de ASCUS en la citología, se sugiere continuar con la evaluación de la prueba Hybribio-H13 para la detección de cáncer de cuello uterino en poblaciones con las mismas características que las de la aquí evaluada.

Primary human papillomavirus testing by clinician- versus self-collection: Awareness and acceptance among cervical cancer screening-eligible women.

OBJECTIVES: Primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing by clinician-collection is endorsed by U.S. guideline organizations for cervical cancer screening, but uptake remains low and insights into patients' understanding are limited. This study aims to primarily address patient awareness of primary HPV screening by clinician-collection and acceptance of primary HPV screening by clinician- and self-collection, and secondarily assess factors associated with awareness and acceptance. SETTING: Primary care practices affiliated with an academic medical center. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey study of screening-eligible women aged 30-65 years was conducted to assess awareness and acceptability of primary HPV screening. We analyzed bivariate associations of respondent characteristics with awareness of primary HPV screening by clinician-collection, willingness to have clinician- or self-collected primary HPV testing, and reasons for self-collection preference. RESULTS: Respondents (n = 351; response rate = 23.4%) reported cervical cancer screening adherence of 82.8% but awareness of clinician-collected primary HPV as an option was low (18.9%) and only associated with HPV testing with recent screening (p = 0.003). After reviewing a description of primary HPV screening, willingness for clinician-collected (81.8%) or home self-collected (76.1%) HPV testing was high, if recommended by a provider. Acceptability of clinician-collected HPV testing was associated with higher income (p = 0.009) and for self-collection was associated with higher income (p = 0.002) and higher education (p = 0.02). Higher education was associated with reporting self-collection as easier than clinic-collection (p = 0.02). Women expected self-collection to be more convenient (94%), less embarrassing (85%), easier (85%), and less painful (81%) than clinician-collection. CONCLUSIONS: Educational interventions are needed to address low awareness about the current clinician-collected primary HPV screening option and to prepare for anticipated federal licensure of self-collection kits. Informing women about self-collection allows them to recognize benefits which could address screening barriers.