BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the most significant cause of cervical cancer. In view of the number of drawbacks associated with endocervical sampling, the gold standard for HPV detection, this study examined the utility and specificity of vaginal sampling as an alternative for endocervical sampling for the routine detection of HPV. CASE STUDY: The study comprised 51 women who tested positive and 54 women who tested negative for endocervical HPV by polymerase chain reaction (PCR), confirmed by histopathology. At the time of specimen collection, both (speculum-assisted) endocervical and vaginal (no speculum) scrapings were isolated from HPV-positive and negative women, and HPV DNA was assessed by PCR using the MY09/MY11 primer system; HPV type was identified by hybridization of PCR products with type-specific biotinylated DNA probes. Each participant served as her own control. HPV was detected in vaginal and cervical scrapes from all HPV-positive but not HPV-negative women. In HPV-positive women the same HPV type was found in vaginal and endocervical scrapings (positive predictive value = 1.0). CONCLUSION: Correlation between vaginal and endocervical sampling methods was excellent in detecting the presence of HPV DNA and for identifying distinct HPV genotypes. Utilization of vaginal testing for routine HPV detection, and for the long-term follow-up of persistent HPV infection, is therefore recommended.
BACKGROUND:Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the most significant cause of cervical cancer. In view of the number of drawbacks associated with endocervical sampling, the gold standard for HPV detection, this study examined the utility and specificity of vaginal sampling as an alternative for endocervical sampling for the routine detection of HPV. CASE STUDY: The study comprised 51 women who tested positive and 54 women who tested negative for endocervical HPV by polymerase chain reaction (PCR), confirmed by histopathology. At the time of specimen collection, both (speculum-assisted) endocervical and vaginal (no speculum) scrapings were isolated from HPV-positive and negative women, and HPV DNA was assessed by PCR using the MY09/MY11 primer system; HPV type was identified by hybridization of PCR products with type-specific biotinylated DNA probes. Each participant served as her own control. HPV was detected in vaginal and cervical scrapes from all HPV-positive but not HPV-negative women. In HPV-positive women the same HPV type was found in vaginal and endocervical scrapings (positive predictive value = 1.0). CONCLUSION: Correlation between vaginal and endocervical sampling methods was excellent in detecting the presence of HPV DNA and for identifying distinct HPV genotypes. Utilization of vaginal testing for routine HPV detection, and for the long-term follow-up of persistent HPV infection, is therefore recommended.
Authors: A Lytwyn; J W Sellors; J B Mahony; D Daya; W Chapman; N Ellis; P Roth; A T Lorincz; A Gafni Journal: CMAJ Date: 2000-09-19 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: M A Duggan; S E McGregor; G C Stuart; S Morris; V Chang-Poon; A Schepansky; L Honore Journal: Eur J Gynaecol Oncol Date: 1997 Impact factor: 0.196
Authors: L Rozendaal; J M Walboomers; J C van der Linden; F J Voorhorst; P Kenemans; T J Helmerhorst; M van Ballegooijen; C J Meijer Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 1996-12-11 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: J W Sellors; A T Lorincz; J B Mahony; I Mielzynska; A Lytwyn; P Roth; M Howard; S Chong; D Daya; W Chapman; M Chernesky Journal: CMAJ Date: 2000-09-05 Impact factor: 8.262