Incidence of abnormal cervical and vaginal cytology among women over age 65 years living with human immunodeficiency virus.

BACKGROUND: Women with human immunodeficiency virus have higher rates of abnormal cervical and vaginal cytology and, subsequently, of cervical and vaginal cancers. Although professional bodies currently advocate for indefinite cytology screening for women living with human immunodeficiency virus, these recommendations are based on expert opinion, not evidence-based. In the general population, women who have never had an abnormal cytology result can cease screening at age 65 years. This is due to the relatively low incidence of dysplasia in this group and the risk of false-positive results as women age, invasive follow-up testing, and destructive treatments of lesions that are unlikely to progress to cancer. What is unclear, however, is how human immunodeficiency virus-infected women over age 65 years who have no history of abnormal cytology should be screened to maximize benefit while reducing harms of overscreening. This is a crucial question, as women over age 65 years who are living with human immunodeficiency virus comprise a rapidly growing population. OBJECTIVE: To describe the incidence of abnormal cervical and vaginal cytology results in women over the age of 65 years living with human immunodeficiency virus, with the goal of providing evidence for screening recommendations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed, identifying 69 women who received gynecologic follow-up in a county hospital system in Houston, Texas, between 2000 and 2018 and who met study criteria. Incidence of abnormal cytology after age 65 was determined by analyzing all available cytology results after age 65. Demographic and clinical risk factors, including human immunodeficiency virus-specific clinical risk factors, were analyzed. Matched cervical and vaginal pathology results, if conducted, were also evaluated. Statistical analyses were conducted using Stata 15, including χ2 tests and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Estimates of the cumulative probability of developing an abnormal cytology result was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Among 69 women with no history of abnormal cervical cytology, 12 (17%) went on to develop abnormal cytology results, including 3 (4%) showing high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions. The incidence rate was 3.5 cases per 100 woman-years (95% confidence interval, 1.58, 7.81). No demographic or gynecologic characteristics were associated with abnormal cytology. A CD4 count of <200 at the time of human immunodeficiency virus diagnosis or at the time of cytology was associated with an abnormal Papanicolaou test result (P < .0001, P = .031). Of women with pathology results in the county hospital system (n = 8), 4 (50%) had cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2+ or vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia 2+. No women developed invasive cancer. However, 50% of women who had an abnormal Papanicolaou test result in the study period were lost to follow-up; outcomes for these patients are unknown. CONCLUSION: Given the relatively high proportion (4%) of women with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions/cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2+/vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia 2+ during the study period, we agree with current screening recommendations for continued routine Papanicolaou testing after the age of 65 years in women with human immunodeficiency virus. More evidence from larger studies is needed to solidify evidence-based screening recommendations in this unique and growing population.

Rapid HIV versus enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay screening in a low-risk Mexican American population presenting in labor: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus is the most common cause of pediatric human immunodeficiency virus in the United States; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations endorse rapid human immunodeficiency virus testing for women with unknown viral status to quicken antiretroviral therapy. We compared the cost-effectiveness of Oraquick (Orasure Technologies, Bethlehem, Pa) rapid testing versus enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay testing for a low-risk population of Mexican American women who are in labor. STUDY DESIGN: Using decision analysis techniques, we tested 2 strategies: (1) testing with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay that was confirmed by Western blot and (2) testing with Oraquick rapid testing that was confirmed by Western blot. All seropositive parturients received zidovudine treatment in labor. The baseline assumptions were the incidence of human immunodeficiency virus in Mexican American mothers (0.05%), mother-to-child transmission with no treatment (25%), with treatment in labor (10%), sensitivity of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (98%), positive predictive value of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (10%), sensitivity/specificity of Oraquick rapid testing (99%/100%), positive predictive value of Oraquick rapid testing (83%-100%), sensitivity/specificity of Western blot (97%/99%), costs (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [dollar 5], Oraquick rapid testing [dollar 15], Western blot [dollar 25], zidovudine treatment [dollar 76] for 12 hours labor, neonatal treatment [dollar 2.50], lifetime treatment of human immunodeficiency virus-affected child [dollar 194,250]). Sensitivity analyses were done over a wide range of assumptions that included the costs of tests, the sensitivity of Oraquick rapid testing, the positive predictive value of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and Oraquick rapid testing, and the costs of treatments. RESULTS: Oraquick rapid testing was the preferred strategy at dollar 98 spent per human immunodeficiency virus-negative child versus dollar 491 for enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay testing. Much of the cost of the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay strategy was due to the treatment of women and infants with false-positive tests. Sensitivity analysis over test costs, test sensitivity, and other variables found the analysis results to be robust. Threshold analysis revealed that, if the cost remained < dollar 409.90, Oraquick rapid testing was the dominant test. CONCLUSION: In a low prevalence population, the universal use of Oraquick rapid testing is cost-effective because of the low rate of false-positive results, thus preventing the emotional and economic costs of unnecessary treatment for human immunodeficiency virus to the new mother and her family.