Correlates of Human Papillomavirus Vaccination and Association with HPV-16 and HPV-18 DNA Detection in Young Women.

Background: Despite a reduction in the prevalence of vaccine-preventable types of human papillomavirus (HPV), attributed to increased HPV vaccine uptake, HPV continues to be a major cause of cancer in the United States. Methods: We assessed factors associated with self-reported HPV vaccine uptake, HPV vaccination effectiveness, using DNA testing to assess HPV types 16 and/or 18 (HPV 16/18) positivity, and patterns of HPV vaccination in 375 women aged 21-29 years who were eligible to receive catch-up vaccination, using baseline data collected from March 2012 to December 2014 from a randomized controlled trial evaluating a novel approach to cervical cancer screening. Results: More than half (n = 228, 60.8%) of participants reported receipt of at least one HPV vaccine dose and 16 (4.3%) tested positive for HPV 16/18 at baseline. College-educated participants were four times more likely to have been vaccinated than those reporting high school education or less. 56.5% of HPV-vaccinated participants reported first dose after age 18 and 68.4% after first vaginal intercourse. Women vaccinated after age 18 and women vaccinated after first vaginal intercourse were somewhat more likely to be infected with HPV 16/18 infection compared with women vaccinated earlier, but these associations did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions: HPV vaccination is common among college-educated women in the catch-up population but less common among those without college education. Contrary to current guidelines, catch-up females frequently obtain HPV vaccination after age 18 and first vaginal intercourse. Women without a college education represent an ideal population for targeted HPV vaccination efforts that emphasize vaccination before sexual debut.

Effect of Human Papillomavirus Vaccine to Interrupt Recurrence of Vulvar and Anal Neoplasia (VIVA): A Trial Protocol.

Importance: Human papillomavirus (HPV), particularly HPV type 16, causes most anal and vulvar high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL), which are precursors to cancer. After initial treatment of HSIL, more than 30% of patients will have disease recurrence, with even higher recurrence among HIV-positive individuals and men who have sex with men. Recurrences can be debilitating and lead to significant morbidity and medical expense. Observational studies suggest a possible therapeutic benefit of the licensed HPV vaccines in reducing recurrent lesions in previously infected persons. Objective: To test whether the licensed prophylactic HPV vaccine (Gardasil-9) can reduce the risk of HSIL recurrence by 50% in previously unvaccinated individuals recently treated for anal or vulvar HSIL. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a trial protocol for a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, proof-of-concept clinical trial. Eligible participants are aged 27 to 69 at study start and have not received prior HPV vaccination, have had anal or vulvar HSIL diagnosed on or after January 1, 2014, and have no evidence of HSIL recurrence at screening. Persons infected with HIV are eligible for the study provided they are receiving antiretroviral therapy. Target enrollment is 345 individuals. The primary outcome is time to histopathologically confirmed recurrence of HSIL. Differences in the risk for recurrence of HSIL will be evaluated using Cox proportional hazard models. Additional analyses include (1) frequency of HSIL recurrence; (2) role of HPV antibodies in deterring recurrence; (3) role of HPV persistence in recurrence, as measured by HPV genotype or HPV-16 variant lineage determined using swab samples collected at months 0, 18, and 36; and (4) incidence of adverse events. The study will be conducted at the University of Washington Virology Research Clinic from 2017 through 2022. Participants will be followed up for up to 36 months in the clinic, and up to 42 months by telephone. Discussion: Management of persistent or rapidly recurring anogenital HSIL remains challenging. Results from this study will provide evidence on whether incorporating the nonavalent HPV vaccine into routine care can decrease recurrence of anal and vulvar HSIL. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03051516.

Understanding Patients' Perspectives and Information Needs Following a Positive Home Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling Kit Result.

OBJECTIVE: We explored patient perspectives after a positive human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling result to describe experiences and information needs for this home-based screening modality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We recruited women who tested high-risk (hr) HPV positive during a pragmatic trial evaluating mailed hrHPV self-sampling kits as an outreach strategy for women overdue for Pap screening in a U.S. integrated health care system. Telephone interviews were conducted from 2014 to 2017. Five independent coders analyzed transcripts using iterative content analysis. RESULTS: Forty-six women (61% of invited; median age 55.5 years) completed a semistructured interview. Six themes emerged: (1) convenience of home-based screening, (2) intense feelings and emotions after receiving positive kit results, (3) importance of seeing provider and discussing kit results, (4) information seeking from various sources, (5) confusion about purpose and meaning of HPV versus Pap tests, and (6) concern that HPV self-sampling is inaccurate when the subsequent Pap test is normal. CONCLUSIONS: Although women liked the kit's convenience, discussion about discordant home HPV and in-clinic Pap results led them to question the accuracy of HPV self-sampling. Patient-provider communication around home HPV kits is more complex than for reflex or cotesting because clinician-collected Pap results are unknown at the time of the positive kit result. Patients need education about differences between HPV and Pap tests and how they are used for screening and follow-up. To reassure patients and keep them interested in self-sampling, education should be provided at multiple time points during the screening process.

Clinician and Patient Acceptability of Self-Collected Human Papillomavirus Testing for Cervical Cancer Screening.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate clinician and patient attitudes toward home self-collected human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical cancer screening. METHODS: Women aged 21-65 years were recruited for a randomized trial comparing home self-collected HPV testing to standard clinician-collected Pap screening. Participants were surveyed about their attitudes toward self-collected HPV testing. Clinicians performing cervical cancer screening in University of Washington medical clinics were also surveyed to determine their acceptability of self-collected HPV testing. RESULTS: Over half (59.1%) of the 1,769 women surveyed preferred self-collected HPV testing to clinician-collected tests. Reasons most often cited were convenience or time saving (82.7%), and avoiding embarrassment or discomfort associated with pelvic exam (38.1%). Women who did not prefer self-collected HPV testing reported greater faith in clinician-collected samples (56.7%) or a desire for a clinic visit to address other issues (42.4%). One hundred eighteen (49.6%) of 238 physicians and midlevel providers surveyed completed the survey. The majority (78.0%) reported that they would recommend a self-collected HPV test if the test had qualities such as high sensitivity and cost effectiveness. Provider concerns mirrored those of patients, namely ensuring adequate sample collection and the opportunity to address other health concerns. CONCLUSION: Patients and clinicians are supportive of self-collected HPV testing. However, concerns regarding adequacy of samples that are self collected and the desire to see a provider in a clinic setting for other health needs highlight areas that need to be addressed if self collection proves to be a viable option for cervical cancer screening.

Impact of Possibly Oncogenic High-Risk Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Types in Triage for ASC-US Cervical Cytology Results.

OBJECTIVE: Current guidelines recommend including 13 or 14 high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) types for triage of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) cervical cytology; however, at least 13 additional types are considered possibly oncogenic. We evaluated the effect of including possibly oncogenic HPV types in the test panel. METHODS: Outcomes for all women 30 years or older with ASC-US and positive HPV testing who underwent colposcopic biopsy at University of Washington Medical Center-affiliated clinics between 2010 and 2011 were reviewed. We compared biopsy results between cases that were HPV positive for 1 or more of 13 possibly oncogenic types only (26/53/55/62/64/67/69/71/73/82/83/84/IS39) versus 1 or more of the 14 established high-risk types (16/18/31/33/35/39/45/51/52/56/58/59/66/68). We used the Fisher exact test to compare cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+) diagnoses between HPV risk groups. RESULTS: Three hundred twenty-six ASC-US HPV-positive cervical cytology results were identified, with 170 that were linked to subsequent cervical biopsy results. Among 51 cases positive for possibly oncogenic types only, 31 (61%) had no neoplasia, 20 (39%) had CIN1, and none had CIN2+. Among 119 controls positive for at least one established high-risk type, 64 (53%) had no neoplasia, 42 (35%) had CIN1, and 13 (11%) had CIN2+ (p = .01 for the comparison of CIN2+ diagnoses between groups). CONCLUSIONS: The inclusion of possibly oncogenic types in the HPV test panel led to an additional 51 colposcopy biopsies (33% increase), with no additional cases of CIN 2+. Our results suggest that including possibly oncogenic HPV types increases the number of colposcopy biopsies with minimal improvements in detection of CIN2 +.

A 9-valent HPV vaccine against infection and intraepithelial neoplasia in women.

BACKGROUND: The investigational 9-valent viruslike particle vaccine against human papillomavirus (HPV) includes the HPV types in the quadrivalent HPV (qHPV) vaccine (6, 11, 16, and 18) and five additional oncogenic types (31, 33, 45, 52, and 58). Here we present the results of a study of the efficacy and immunogenicity of the 9vHPV vaccine in women 16 to 26 years of age. METHODS: We performed a randomized, international, double-blind, phase 2b-3 study of the 9vHPV vaccine in 14,215 women. Participants received the 9vHPV vaccine or the qHPV vaccine in a series of three intramuscular injections on day 1 and at months 2 and 6. Serum was collected for analysis of antibody responses. Swabs of labial, vulvar, perineal, perianal, endocervical, and ectocervical tissue were obtained and used for HPV DNA testing, and liquid-based cytologic testing (Papanicolaou testing) was performed regularly. Tissue obtained by means of biopsy or as part of definitive therapy (including a loop electrosurgical excision procedure and conization) was tested for HPV. RESULTS: The rate of high-grade cervical, vulvar, or vaginal disease irrespective of HPV type (i.e., disease caused by HPV types included in the 9vHPV vaccine and those not included) in the modified intention-to-treat population (which included participants with and those without prevalent infection or disease) was 14.0 per 1000 person-years in both vaccine groups. The rate of high-grade cervical, vulvar, or vaginal disease related to HPV-31, 33, 45, 52, and 58 in a prespecified per-protocol efficacy population (susceptible population) was 0.1 per 1000 person-years in the 9vHPV group and 1.6 per 1000 person-years in the qHPV group (efficacy of the 9vHPV vaccine, 96.7%; 95% confidence interval, 80.9 to 99.8). Antibody responses to HPV-6, 11, 16, and 18 were noninferior to those generated by the qHPV vaccine. Adverse events related to injection site were more common in the 9vHPV group than in the qHPV group. CONCLUSIONS: The 9vHPV vaccine prevented infection and disease related to HPV-31, 33, 45, 52, and 58 in a susceptible population and generated an antibody response to HPV-6, 11, 16, and 18 that was noninferior to that generated by the qHPV vaccine. The 9vHPV vaccine did not prevent infection and disease related to HPV types beyond the nine types covered by the vaccine. (Funded by Merck; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00543543).

Lineages of oncogenic human papillomavirus types other than type 16 and 18 and risk for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.

BACKGROUND: Data on clinical outcomes of infection with variants of oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) types other than HPV16 and HPV18 are rare. We investigated intratypic variations in non-HPV16/18 oncogenic types and their corresponding relationships with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grades 2-3 (CIN2/3). METHODS: Study subjects were women who were positive for one or more of 11 non-HPV16/18 oncogenic types. Subjects were followed every six months for two years for detection of HPV and cervical lesions. Variant lineages were defined by sequencing the 3' part of the long control region and the entire E6/E7 region of HPV genome. Lineage-associated risk of CIN2/3 was assessed using logistic regression with generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: A total of 4591 type-specific HPV infections among 2667 women were included in the analysis. The increase in risk of CIN2/3 was statistically significant for women with HPV31 A or B compared with C variants, HPV33 A1 compared with B variants, HPV45 A3 or B2 compared with B1 variants, HPV56 B compared with A2 variants, and HPV58 A1 or A3 compared with C variants. For these five types, the adjusted odds ratio associated with CIN2/3 was 2.0 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.5 to 2.6) for infections with single-type high-risk (HR) variants, 1.7 (95% CI = 1.0 to 2.7) for infections with two or more types but only one HR variant, and 5.3 (95% CI = 3.1 to 8.4) for infections with HR variants of two or more types as compared with those with single-type non-HR variants. The likelihood of CIN2/3 was similar for women with HPV16 infection and for those with HPV58 A1 variant infection. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that for a given HPV type, intratypic nucleotide changes may alter phenotypic traits that affect the probability of neoplasia.

Adherence to cervical cancer screening guidelines by gynecologists in the Pacific Northwest.

OBJECTIVE: In 2012, US organizations released updated cervical cancer screening guidelines calling for less frequent screening. We surveyed practicing gynecologists in the Pacific Northwest region to understand their screening practices, gauge their uptake of the new guidelines, and identify reasons why they may not follow the new guidelines. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Gynecologists from Washington, Oregon, Montana, and Idaho were sent an online survey on behalf of their state's medical association. The survey consisted of 9 questions on sex, practice setting, community size, cervical cancer screening practices, and reasons for not following the 2012 guidelines. RESULTS: Of 947 gynecologists, 123 (13.0%) completed the survey. Sixty-four respondents (52.0%) reported that they follow or plan to follow the new guidelines. Reasons cited for not following the new guidelines included concern over missed opportunities for women's health education (43 respondents or 72.9%), patients wanting more frequent screening (39 respondents or 66.1%), and concern about missing dysplasia or cancerous lesions (28 respondents or 47.5%). Although the new guidelines call for a 3-year interval between routine Pap tests or a 5-year interval between routine Pap/human papillomavirus cotests, 75 gynecologist respondents (61.0%) still recommended annual or biannual Pap screening for patients younger than 30 years, and 55 respondents (67.9%) recommended rescreening within 3 years for women 30 years and older with negative cotest results. CONCLUSIONS: While over half of the gynecologist survey respondents reported adherence or planned adherence to the 2012 guidelines, over half also reported using screening schedules that are more frequent than recommended by new guidelines. Concerns highlighted by survey participants provide an opportunity for physician and patient education on the evidence supporting the new guidelines.

Accuracy and cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening by high-risk human papillomavirus DNA testing of self-collected vaginal samples.

OBJECTIVE: Estimate the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening strategies based on high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing of self-collected vaginal samples. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A subset of 1,665 women (age range, 18-50 y) participating in a cervical cancer screening study were screened by liquid-based cytology and by high-risk HPV DNA testing of both self-collected vaginal swab samples and clinician-collected cervical samples. Women with positive/abnormal screening test results and a subset of women with negative screening test results were triaged to colposcopy. On the basis of individual and combined test results, 5 screening strategies were defined. Estimates of sensitivity and specificity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse were calculated, and a Markov model was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for each strategy. RESULTS: Compared with cytology-based screening, high-risk HPV DNA testing of self-collected vaginal samples was more sensitive (68%, 95% CI = 58%-78% vs 85%, 95% CI = 76%-94%) but less specific (89%, 95% CI = 86%-91% vs 73%, 95% CI = 67%-79%). A strategy of high-risk HPV DNA testing of self-collected vaginal samples followed by cytology triage of HPV-positive women was comparably sensitive (75%, 95% CI = 64%-86%) and specific (88%, 95% CI = 85%-92%) to cytology-based screening. In-home self-collection for high-risk HPV DNA detection followed by in-clinic cytology triage had a slightly lower lifetime cost and a slightly higher quality-adjusted life year (QALY) expectancy than did cytology-based screening (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of triennial screening compared with no screening was $9,871/QALY and $12,878/QALY, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Triennial screening by high-risk HPV DNA testing of in-home, self-collected vaginal samples followed by in-clinic cytology triage was cost-effective.

Evaluation of an ELISA for p16INK4a as a screening test for cervical cancer.

BACKGROUND: The low sensitivity of cytology and low specificity of human papillomavirus testing prompts searching for more accurate cervical cancer screening strategies. Our goal was to evaluate an ELISA-based test for p16(INK4a). METHODS: 1,781 women undergoing routine screening provided cervical specimens for p16(INK4a) ELISA (original and enhanced versions of a prototype), liquid-based cytology, and Hybrid Capture II (hc2) testing. All women with a positive result and a random sample of those with negative results on all tests were referred for histologic diagnosis. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade >or=3 (>or=CIN3) was the main outcome. The original analysis included all >or=CIN3 outcomes (n = 28). The a posteriori analysis was used to represent clinically relevant results with >or=CIN3 as outcomes only when detected after a positive screening test (n = 27). RESULTS: Participants had a median age of 23 years. The prevalence of high-risk human papillomavirus DNA was 30.6%. In a posteriori analyses, the sensitivity and specificity for p16(INK4a) ELISA (>or=8 pg/mL cut-point), cytology, and hc2 were 50.9%, 58.1%, and 100.0%, respectively, and 90.4%, 89.3%, and 69.2%, respectively. Referral to colposcopy of women with positive results for hc2 and p16(INK4a) (enhanced ELISA, >or=6 pg/mL cut-point) had a sensitivity of 91.8% (95% confidence interval, 79.1-100.0%) and specificity of 86.0% (95% confidence interval, 82.0-89.0%). Results of the original analyses had similar specificity but substantially lower sensitivity due to the strong influence of the single CIN3 case with completely negative screening results. CONCLUSIONS: An enhanced version of this prototypic p16(INK4a) ELISA showed promise in screening, particularly when combined with hc2.

Human Papillomavirus (HPV) type 16 and type 18 DNA Loads at Baseline and Persistence of Type-Specific Infection during a 2-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Studies of viral load-associated persistence of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection are rare, with inconsistent results reported. METHODS: The study subjects were 741 and 289 women who were positive for HPV type 16 (HPV-16) and HPV type 18 (HPV-18), respectively, at the time of enrollment into in the ASCUS-LSIL (Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance-Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion) Triage Study and who returned 1 or more times for HPV testing during a biannual 2-year follow-up. The numbers of HPV-16 and HPV-18 copies per nanogram of cellular DNA at baseline were measured by use of real-time polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: Women with, compared with women without, persistent infection at month 6 of follow-up had a higher viral load at enrollment (P< .001, for HPV-16; P=.01, for HPV-18). The association of each 1-log(10) increase in viral load with persistence of HPV-16 or HPV-18 during the first 6 months of the study was statistically significant among women with multiple HPV types at enrollment (for HPV-16: odds ratio [OR], 1.53 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.29-1.82]; for HPV-18: OR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.09-1.68]) but not among women with monotype infections (in tests assessing the interaction between viral load and coinfection, P=.002 for HPV-16 and P=.34 for HPV-18). Among women who continued to have positive results at month 6, 12, or 18, persistence of infection for another 6 months was unassociated with the viral load at baseline. CONCLUSION: Prevalent infection with a higher viral load of HPV-16 or HPV-18 was associated with short- but not long-term persistence.

Longer term efficacy of a prophylactic monovalent human papillomavirus type 16 vaccine.

We conducted an extended follow-up study (March 2006-May 2008) to assess the longer term efficacy of a prophylactic monovalent human papillomavirus (HPV) type 16 L1 virus-like particle vaccine in women (n=290) who had enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of this vaccine (October 1998-November 1999) in Seattle and remained HPV-16 DNA negative during the course of that trial. During the extended follow-up period, in the per-protocol susceptible population, none of the vaccine recipients was found to be infected with HPV-16 or developed HPV-16-related cervical lesions; among placebo recipients, 6 women were found to be infected with HPV-16 (vaccine efficacy [VE]=100%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 29-100%) and 3 women developed HPV-16-related cervical lesions (VE=100%; 95% CI: <0-100%). Approximately 86% of vaccine recipients remained HPV-16 competitive Luminex immunoassay seropositive at an average of 8.5 years of follow-up. During the combined original trial and extended follow-up period, in the intention-to-treat population, 20 and 22 women developed any cervical lesion regardless of HPV type among the vaccine and placebo recipients, respectively (VE=15%; 95% CI: <0-56%). The results suggest that this monovalent HPV-16 vaccine remains efficacious through 8.5 years after its administration.

Sequence variation of human papillomavirus type 16 and measurement of viral integration by quantitative PCR.

Given that the integration of human papillomavirus type 16 (HPV16) into the host genome occurs preferentially with the disruption of the E2 gene, a ratio of E2 to E7 gene copies is often used as a marker for integration. It is largely undetermined, however, whether ratio estimates are affected by HPV intratypic variations. We assembled four plasmid constructs, each containing a DNA fragment from an HPV16 European, Asian-American, African-1, or African-2 variant. These constructs and nine cervical swab samples were assayed by real-time PCR with two primer-probe sets for each gene: a specific set, fully complementary to the HPV16 prototype, and a degenerate set, incorporating degenerate bases at positions where nucleotides differed among the variants. The ratio of E2 to E7 gene copies for the European variant construct was close to 1, no matter which sets of primers and probes were used. While the ratios for the African-1 and Asian-American variant constructs remained close to 1 with the degenerate sets of primers and probes, the ratios were 0.36 and 2.57, respectively, with the specific sets of primers and probes. In addition, a nucleotide alteration at the position immediately following the 3' end of the E2 forward primer binding site was found to be responsible for an underestimation of E2 gene copies for the African-2 variant construct. Similar patterns were found in nine cervical samples. In conclusion, mismatches between the primers and probes and their targets due to HPV16 intratypic variations would introduce errors in testing for integration; this situation can be sufficiently ameliorated by incorporating degenerate bases into the primers and probes.

Human papillomavirus type 18 DNA load and 2-year cumulative diagnoses of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grades 2-3.

BACKGROUND: The clinical relevance of the amount of human papillomavirus type 18 (HPV18) DNA in cervical tissue (ie, HPV18 DNA load) is unknown. METHODS: Study subjects were 303 women who were HPV18 positive at enrollment into the Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance (ASC-US) and Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion (LSIL) Triage Study. HPV18 DNA load, expressed as copies of HPV18 per nanogram of cellular DNA, at enrollment was quantitatively measured. Subjects were followed up semiannually for a period of 2 years for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2-3 (CIN2-3). A linear regression model was used to examine associations of CIN2-3 with HPV18 DNA load. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: CIN2-3 was confirmed in 92 of 303 (30.4%) HPV18-positive women. Among women without CIN2-3, HPV18 DNA load was positively associated with increasing severity of cervical cytology at enrollment (Ptrend < .001). However, among those with CIN2-3, HPV18 DNA load was not associated with severity of cervical cytology at enrollment (Ptrend = .33). The ratios of geometric means of HPV18 DNA load at enrollment among women with CIN2-3, relative to those without, were 6.06 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.31 to 117.92) for those with normal cytology at enrollment, 0.50 (95% CI = 0.10 to 2.44) for those with ASC-US, 0.11 (95% CI = 0.03 to 0.46) for those with LSIL, and 0.07 (95% CI = 0.01 to 0.80) for those with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL). After adjusting for age and coinfection with other high-risk HPVs, a statistically significant association of lower HPV18 DNA load with CIN2-3 was observed among women with LSIL or HSIL at enrollment (P = .02). Within the 2-year period, HPV18 DNA load was unrelated to the timing of CIN2-3 diagnosis. Overall results were similar when the outcome was CIN3. CONCLUSIONS: HPV18 DNA load was higher for women with LSIL or HSIL at enrollment with no evidence of CIN2-3 during the 2-year follow-up period than it was for women with CIN2-3. Thus, testing for high levels of HPV18 DNA does not appear to be clinically useful.

Evaluation of primary cervical cancer screening with an oncogenic human papillomavirus DNA test and cervical cytologic findings among women who attended family planning clinics in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to evaluate the performance of screening with (1) Papanicolaou and human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing and (2) Papanicolaou testing with reflex HPV testing of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or more in clinics that serve low-income women in the United States. STUDY DESIGN: There were 4799 women who were recruited primarily from Planned Parenthood clinics and who were screened with liquid-based Papanicolaou testing and HPV DNA testing and referred for biopsy based on a positive test result for oncogenic HPV DNA or a Papanicolaou test that showed atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or more. RESULTS: Among 931 women who were 30-50 years of age, the sensitivity of reflex HPV testing was 53.8% (range, 38.2%-72.3%). The sensitivity of HPV DNA and Papanicolaou testing was 91% (range, 74.6%-100%). The specificity of reflex HPV testing was 95.1% (range, 93.8%-96.3%). Generally, the specificity of HPV DNA and Papanicolaou testing was low. CONCLUSION: Among US women who are >or=30 years old, HPV DNA and Papanicolaou testing is a reasonable cervical cancer screening strategy.

Evaluation of a new p16(INK4A) ELISA test and a high-risk HPV DNA test for cervical cancer screening: results from proof-of-concept study.

p16(INK4a), a cell cycle regulation protein, accumulates in abnormal epithelial cells infected with high-risk human papilloma virus (HPV). In immunostaining studies, p16(INK4a) has shown potential as a marker of high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and invasive cervical cancer. To evaluate its potential use in cervical cancer screening, we conducted a feasibility study to compare the performance of a new enzyme linked immunosorbant assay (ELISA) for p16(INK4a) (mtm laboratories, Heidelberg, Germany) to that of the Hybrid Capture 2 (hc2) test for high-risk HPV DNA for the detection of CIN3. Three hundred and nineteen women were referred from Western Washington Planned Parenthood clinics for colposcopy examination and cervical biopsy because of abnormal Pap test results. Cervical samples were obtained from study participants for p16(INK4a) ELISA, liquid-based cytology and hc2. The order (first and second) for obtaining samples for cervical cytology and p16(INK4a) ELISA changed with every other subject. Concentrations of p16(INK4a) protein were higher when the sample was taken before the cytology. The sensitivity of p16(INK4a) ELISA (concentration > or = 8 units/ml) taken as first sample was 90.0% for CIN3, and the sensitivity of HC2 taken as a second sample was 85%. In the same group, the specificity of p16(INK4a) ELISA (46.9%) was slightly better than hc2 (35.4%) Results from this proof-of-concept study suggest that p16(INK4a) ELISA has a similar sensitivity and slightly better specificity for CIN3 compared to hc2. These findings support proceeding with a larger study with samples from a population of women presenting for routine cytology screening.

Efficacy of human papillomavirus-16 vaccine to prevent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Human papillomavirus (HPV) virus-like particle (VLP) vaccines have demonstrated effectiveness in preventing persistent HPV infections. Whether protection lasts longer than 18 months and, thus, impacts rates of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2-3 has not yet been established. We present results from an HPV16 L1 VLP vaccine trial through 48 months. METHODS: A total of 2,391 women, aged 16-23 years, participated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Either 40 mug HPV16 L1 VLP vaccine or placebo was given intramuscularly at day 1, month 2, and month 6. Genital samples for HPV16 DNA and Pap tests were obtained at day 1, month 7, and then 6-monthly through month 48. Colposcopy and cervical biopsies were performed if clinically indicated and at study exit. Serum HPV16 antibody titer was measured by radioimmunoassay. RESULTS: Among 750 placebo recipients in the per protocol population, 12 women developed HPV16-related CIN2-3 (6 CIN2 and 6 CIN3). Among 755 vaccine recipients, there were no cases (vaccine efficacy 100%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 65-100%). There were 111 cases of persistent HPV16 infection in placebo recipients and 7 cases in vaccine recipients (vaccine efficacy 94%, 95% CI 88-98%). After immunization, HPV16 serum antibody geometric mean titers peaked at month 7 (1,519 milli-Merck units [mMU]/mL), declined through month 18 (202 mMU/mL), and remained relatively stable between month 30 and month 48 (128-150 mMU/mL). CONCLUSION: The vaccine HPV16 L1 VLP provides high-level protection against persistent HPV16 infection and HPV16-related CIN2-3 for at least 3.5 years after immunization. Administration of L1 VLP vaccines targeting HPV16 is likely to reduce risk for cervical cancer. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Should liquid-based cytology be repeated at the time of colposcopy?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the usefulness of repeated liquid cytology at the time of colposcopy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We screened 5,100 women with liquid-based cytology and human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing. Women with any abnormal cytology result including atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) or a positive high-risk HPV DNA test result were referred for colposcopy. One thousand three hundred thirty-three women returned for colposcopy with repeated cytology and cervical biopsy. RESULTS: Twenty-one women had less than high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) screening cytology and cervical biopsy results; however, their repeated cytology at the colposcopy visit revealed HSIL, and excisional treatment was recommended. Repeated cytology at colposcopy significantly changed the clinical management for 1.6% (21) of 1,333 women. CONCLUSIONS: As an adjunct test to colposcopy, liquid cytology was similar to conventional cytology. Given current practice patterns, repeated liquid cytology at the time of colposcopy is rarely clinically useful.

Cigarette smoking, oncogenic human papillomavirus, Ki-67 antigen, and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.

Although cigarette smoking has been identified as a cofactor for cervical neoplasia, it is not clear whether smoking exerts an early or late effect on the evolution of human papillomavirus (HPV)-related lesions. A case-control study of Washington State women who presented for routine gynecologic care from 1997 to 2001 was conducted. All women underwent cytologic testing and HPV DNA screening. Those with abnormal cytology findings or a positive oncogenic HPV test and a random sample of women negative on both tests were referred for colposcopically directed cervical biopsy with repeated testing. Among 461 women with oncogenic HPV were 181 controls with negative histology, 137 cases with histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 1 (CIN1), and 143 cases with histologically confirmed CIN grades 2-3 or higher (>/= CIN2-3). Smoking information was obtained by questionnaire. Immunohistochemistry testing for Ki-67 was performed on a subset of biopsy specimens (n = 139). Smoking 10 or more cigarettes per day was associated with >/= CIN2-3 (adjusted odds ratio = 2.6, 95% confidence interval: 1.3, 5.5) and CIN1 (adjusted odds ratio = 2.5, 95% confidence interval: 1.2, 5.3). Heavy smoking was positively associated with Ki-67 but not with repeated detection of oncogenic HPV. Since smoking was associated with both CIN1 and >/= CIN2-3, cigarette by-products may affect the early evolution of HPV-related lesions, possibly by increasing the rate of cell turnover.

p16(INK4a) expression correlates with degree of cervical neoplasia: a comparison with Ki-67 expression and detection of high-risk HPV types.

Although recent studies have suggested that p16(INK4a) may be a useful surrogate biomarker of cervical neoplasia, Ki-67 and human papillomavirus testing have also been shown to be useful in detecting neoplasia. To help delineate the utility of p16(INK4a), biopsy samples (n = 569: negative, 133; reactive, 75; atypical, 39; low grade, 76; moderate, 80; and severe intraepithelial neoplasia, 113; also, squamous cell carcinoma, 46; adenocarcinoma, 7) were analyzed by immunohistochemistry for expression of p16(INK4a) and Ki-67 (n = 432), as well as by in situ hybridization for human papillomavirus Type 16 (n = 219). Testing for high-risk human papillomavirus types by polymerase chain reaction and HybridCapture2 was performed on concurrent cervical swab specimens. Recuts of the original blocks were reexamined (n = 198). Endometrial biopsies (n = 10) were also analyzed for p16(INK4a) expression. Degree of p16(INK4a) and Ki-67 expression correlated with degree of cervical neoplasia (P <.001) and with presence of high-risk human papillomavirus types (P <.001). There was no relationship between p16(INK4a) overexpression and inflammation or hormonal status. Ki-67 expression correlated with inflammation (P = 0.003) and was expressed in more reactive and atypical lesions than p16(INK4a) (P = 0.008). Probes for human papillomavirus 16 stained 54% of cervical neoplastic lesions; the degree of staining correlated significantly with degree of neoplasia (P <.001) and p16(INK4a) staining (P <.001). Interobserver reproducibility was substantial for p16(INK4a) and Ki-67 interpretation (weighted kappa: 0.74 and 0.70, respectively). Expression of p16(INK4a) was observed in all endometrial biopsies. Compared with Ki-67 expression and detection of high-risk human papillomavirus, p16(INK4a) was less likely to be positive in samples from women with negative, reactive, and atypical biopsies. Although expression of p16(INK4a) in endometrial epithelium may be problematic in terms of screening, the potential of p16(INK4a) as a screening test warrants investigation.