BACKGROUND: During the last decade, increasing efforts have focused on HPV detection in self-obtained samples, to increase the overall proportion of patients participating in cervical cancer screening procedures. OBJECTIVES: A clinical evaluation study of an optimized protocol for PCR detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) types in urine compared with cervical samples in consecutive women referred to the colposcopy clinic with abnormal cervical cytology. STUDY DESIGN: Paired urine and cervical specimens were collected from 100 consecutive women referred to the colposcopy clinic with abnormal cervical cytology and normal urine parameters. In-house and a commercial PCR method for the detection of HPV types 16 and 18, and a commercial multiplex PCR for HPV types 6, 11, 16, 18, and 33 were performed. All HPV cervix-positive/urine-negative paired urine samples were spiked with serial dilutions of cell lines infected with HPV 16 or 18 to test the sensitivity of HPV detection in these urine samples. RESULTS: In all but two cases HPV type 16 was detected. In cancer cases, the urine/cervix HPV detection sensitivity was 88.8%; in cases with high-grade lesions it was 76.5%; and in cases with low-grade lesions it was 45.5%. In all concordant cases the same HPV type was detected in both samples. The urine/cervix HPV detection sensitivity was higher when urine samples contained two or more epithelial cells per field in urine microscopy. HPV detection in 9 cervix-positive but urine-negative urine samples spiked with serial dilutions of HPV-positive cell lines showed that in these cases urine PCR inhibitors did not affect PCR amplification. CONCLUSIONS: A higher urine/cervix HPV detection sensitivity in cancer and high-grade lesions suggests that urine testing could be used to detect HPV mainly when these lesions are present.
BACKGROUND: During the last decade, increasing efforts have focused on HPV detection in self-obtained samples, to increase the overall proportion of patients participating in cervical cancer screening procedures. OBJECTIVES: A clinical evaluation study of an optimized protocol for PCR detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) types in urine compared with cervical samples in consecutive women referred to the colposcopy clinic with abnormal cervical cytology. STUDY DESIGN: Paired urine and cervical specimens were collected from 100 consecutive women referred to the colposcopy clinic with abnormal cervical cytology and normal urine parameters. In-house and a commercial PCR method for the detection of HPV types 16 and 18, and a commercial multiplex PCR for HPV types 6, 11, 16, 18, and 33 were performed. All HPV cervix-positive/urine-negative paired urine samples were spiked with serial dilutions of cell lines infected with HPV 16 or 18 to test the sensitivity of HPV detection in these urine samples. RESULTS: In all but two cases HPV type 16 was detected. In cancer cases, the urine/cervix HPV detection sensitivity was 88.8%; in cases with high-grade lesions it was 76.5%; and in cases with low-grade lesions it was 45.5%. In all concordant cases the same HPV type was detected in both samples. The urine/cervix HPV detection sensitivity was higher when urine samples contained two or more epithelial cells per field in urine microscopy. HPV detection in 9 cervix-positive but urine-negative urine samples spiked with serial dilutions of HPV-positive cell lines showed that in these cases urine PCR inhibitors did not affect PCR amplification. CONCLUSIONS: A higher urine/cervix HPV detection sensitivity in cancer and high-grade lesions suggests that urine testing could be used to detect HPV mainly when these lesions are present.
Authors: Vikrant V Sahasrabuddhe; Patti E Gravitt; S Terence Dunn; David Brown; Richard A Allen; Yolanda J Eby; Katie Smith; Rosemary E Zuna; Roy R Zhang; Michael A Gold; Mark Schiffman; Joan L Walker; Philip E Castle; Nicolas Wentzensen Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2013-11-06 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: A Vorsters; J Van den Bergh; I Micalessi; S Biesmans; J Bogers; A Hens; I De Coster; M Ieven; P Van Damme Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2014-06-12 Impact factor: 3.267
Authors: Anne M Johnson; Catherine H Mercer; Simon Beddows; Natasha de Silva; Sarika Desai; Rebecca Howell-Jones; Caroline Carder; Pam Sonnenberg; Kevin A Fenton; Catherine Lowndes; Kate Soldan Journal: Sex Transm Infect Date: 2012-01-17 Impact factor: 3.519
Authors: Brenda Y Hernandez; Lynne R Wilkens; Xuemei Zhu; Pamela Thompson; Katharine McDuffie; Yurii B Shvetsov; Lori E Kamemoto; Jeffrey Killeen; Lily Ning; Marc T Goodman Journal: Emerg Infect Dis Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 6.883