Evaluation of the management of Hr-HPV+/PapTest- women: results at 1-year recall.

With cervical cancer screening the choice of 1-year as a period of follow-up in positive high-risk HPV women without cytological lesions is still under discussion. We evaluated the management of these women and the role of HPV genotyping test. We did a cervical cancer screening study of women aged 35-64 with primary high-risk HPV test. Women positive for high-risk HPV with negative cytology were followed-up after 1 year. In this study we selected women with high-risk HPV+/PapTest- resulted high-risk HPV+ at recall and performed the PapTest and HPV genotyping test. The detection rate of squamous high grade (CIN2+) relative to the total screened cohort was 2.1‰, and it was 0.2‰ at the 1-year recall. The colposcopy performed in women referred at the 1-year recall accounted for 48.8% of the total (baseline + 1-year recall), and 84.3% of these women had no cytological lesions. The most frequent hr-HPV genotype detected was HPV16 and 66.7% of co-infections were due to HPV16 and HPV18. 54.5% of women presented a persistent infection at 1-year recall with the same HPV subtype, 50% of persistent infections was due to HPV16 and 16.7% of these were determined to be CIN2+ histological lesions. Our data show that it may be useful to extend the period of follow-up for women hr-HPV+/PapTest- so as to reduce the number of unnecessary colposcopies due to the transitory infections and that the genotyping test could help to identify the persistent infections in which HPV16 is involved.

Prevalence of HPV infection among clinically healthy Italian males and genotype concordance between stable sexual partners.

BACKGROUND: HPV is one of the most common sexually transmitted infections. However little is known about its prevalence in the male population and concordance with female partners. OBJECTIVES: This cross-sectional study aimed to: (a) investigate HPV prevalence and genotype distribution among a series of stable male sexual partners of CIN/HPV positive women and (b) assess HPV infection and type-specific concordance between partners. STUDY DESIGN: 378 stable and monogamous male partners of CIN/HPV positive women were selected. Of these, 238 cases were enrolled at the same time as their female partner. All the subjects were tested by the Linear Array HPV genotyping assay. RESULTS: Overall, 153/378 men (40.5%) and 122/238 women (51.3%) were positive for at least one of the 37 HPV types detectable by the assay used. Among the HPV-positive participants, 69 of the 378 men (18.2%) and 54 of the 238 women (22.7%) harboured multiple genotypes. 75 couples (31.5%) were concordantly HPV positive, while 102 couples (42.9%) were concordantly negative (Kappa value: 0.491, p<0.0001). Among the couples in which both partners were HPV positive, 68% harboured at least one genotype in common. Results from a GEE model evidenced that when the male partner tested HPV positive for at least one genotype, this had a significant effect on the positivity of their relative female partner (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: We evidenced a high prevalence of HPV male infections and a moderate concordance between partners. However, we observed a significant HPV type-specific correlation between partners, which is unlikely to be coincidental.

Impact of p16(INK4a) immunohistochemistry staining on interobserver agreement on the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the interobserver Cohen κ on H&E staining and on H&E plus p16(INK4a) staining of all cervical biopsy specimens in a population-based screening program. METHODS: All the colposcopy-guided biopsies generated by the routine screening of 23,258 women aged 25 to 64 years were stained with H&E and H&E plus p16. Biopsy specimens were reviewed by six external experts. RESULTS: The four diagnoses were available in 441 cases. The interobserver κ values were 0.52 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-0.58) and 0.48 (95% CI, 0.42-0.56) with H&E and H&E + p16, respectively, when using a five-group classification (normal, CIN 1, CIN 2, CIN 3, and cancer); adopting a two-group classification (≤CIN 1 and ≥CIN 2), the values were 0.75 (95% CI, 0.66-0.82) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.61-0.79), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The use of p16 on all cervical biopsy specimens in a screening program showed virtually no effect on reproducibility of the histologic diagnosis.

Prognostic value of p16-INK4A protein in women with negative or CIN1 histology result: a follow-up study.

P16-INK4A overexpression has been proposed as a prognostic marker to manage the follow up of women with positive cytology and/or HPV test but without high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+). This study measures the relative risk (RR) of CIN2+ of p16 positive versus negative in these women. All the women referred to colposcopy from October 2008 to September 2010 with negative or CIN1 colposcopy-guided biopsy were included in the study; women surgically treated or having a CIN2-3 were excluded. All baseline biopsies were dyed with hematoxylin and eosin and p16. Women were followed up according to screening protocols, with cytology or colposcopy at 6 or 12 months. CIN2/3 RRs and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were computed. Of 442 eligible women, 369 (83.5%) had at least one follow-up episode. At baseline, 113 (30.6%) were CIN1, 248 (67.2%) negative, and 8 (2.2%) inadequate histology; 293 (79.4%) were p16-negative, 64 (17.3%) p16 positive and 12 (3.2%) not valid. During follow up, we found ten CIN2 and three CIN3; of these, six were p16 positive (sensitivity 46%, 95% CI 19-75). The absolute risk among p16 positives was 9.4/100 compared to 1.7/100 of the p16 negatives (RR 5.5; 95% CI 1.7-17.4). The risk was also higher for CIN1 than for histologically negative women (RR 4.4; 95% CI 1.3-14.3). The RR for p16 in CIN1 did not change (RR 5.2; 95% CI 0.6-47.5). P16 overexpression is a good candidate for modulating follow-up intensity after a negative colposcopy but is limited by its low prospective sensitivity.

Direct mailing of faecal occult blood tests for colorectal cancer screening: a randomized population study from Central Italy.

BACKGROUND: Sending faecal occult blood tests (FOBT) by mail has been proposed both as a method to increase participation and a way to reduce staff costs in colorectal cancer screening. METHODS: Two multicentre randomized controlled trials (ISRCTN10351276) were performed: one randomly assigned 3196 individuals who had previously participated in colorectal screening to receive a FOBT kit at home or a standard invitation; in the second, 4219 people aged 50-69 years who did not respond to a screening invitation were either sent a FOBT or a standard recall letter. The cost per returned kit was calculated in each arm. RESULTS: Participation was higher with direct FOBT mailing in both trials: relative risk 1.11 (95% CI 1.06-1.17) and 1.36 (95% CI 1.16-1.60) for previous responders and non-responders, respectively. The cost per returned kit for previous responders ranged from 4.24€ to 16.10€, and from 3.29€ to 7.36€ with FOBT mailing and standard invitation, respectively, not including staff costs; for non-responders it ranged from 17.13€ to 46.80€, and from 7.36€ to 18.30€ with FOBT mailing and standard recall, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The FOBT mailing strategy modestly increased participation. This method can be used on a population of previous responders to reduce personnel costs and workload. When used as a reminder to non-responders, this method increases costs.