Literature DB >> 16757701

Human papillomavirus testing and liquid-based cytology: results at recruitment from the new technologies for cervical cancer randomized controlled trial.

Guglielmo Ronco1, Nereo Segnan, Paolo Giorgi-Rossi, Marco Zappa, Gian Piero Casadei, Francesca Carozzi, Paolo Dalla Palma, Annarosa Del Mistro, Stefania Folicaldi, Anna Gillio-Tos, Gaetano Nardo, Carlo Naldoni, Patrizia Schincaglia, Manuel Zorzi, Massimo Confortini, Jack Cuzick.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) has higher sensitivity and lower specificity than cytology alone for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), studies comparing conventional and liquid-based cytology have had conflicting results.
METHODS: In the first phase of a two-phase multicenter randomized controlled trial, women aged 35-60 years in the conventional arm (n = 16,658) were screened using conventional cytology, and women in the experimental arm (n = 16,706) had liquid-based cytology and were tested for high-risk HPV types using the Hybrid Capture 2 assay. Women in the conventional arm were referred to colposcopy with atypical cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) or higher and those in the experimental arm were referred with ASCUS or higher cytology or with a positive (> or = 1 pg/mL) HPV test. Sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+) were calculated.
RESULTS: The screening methods and referral criterion applied in the experimental arm had higher sensitivity than that in the conventional arm (relative sensitivity = 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03 to 2.09) but a lower PPV (relative PPV = 0.40; 95% CI = 0.23 to 0.66). With HPV testing alone at > or = 1 pg/mL and at > or = 2 pg/mL, the gain in sensitivity compared with the conventional arm remained similar (relative sensitivity = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.00 to 2.04 and relative sensitivity = 1.41, 95% CI = 0.98 to 2.01, respectively) but PPV progressively improved (relative PPV = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.33 to 0.98 and relative PPV = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.45 and 1.27, respectively). Referral based on liquid-based cytology alone did not increase sensitivity compared with conventional cytology (relative sensitivity = 1.06; 95% CI = 0.72 to 1.55) but reduced PPV (relative PPV = 0.57; 95% CI = 0.39 to 0.82).
CONCLUSIONS: HPV testing alone was more sensitive than conventional cytology among women 35-60 years old. Adding liquid-based cytology improved sensitivity only marginally but increased false-positives. HPV testing using Hybrid Capture 2 with a 2 pg/mL cutoff may be more appropriate than a 1 pg/mL cutoff for primary cervical cancer screening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16757701     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djj209

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  58 in total

1.  Feasibility of collecting self-sampled vaginal swabs by mail: quantity and quality of genomic DNA.

Authors:  M F D Baay; V Verhoeven; H A J Lambrechts; G G O Pattyn; F Lardon; P Van Royen; J B Vermorken
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2009-07-15       Impact factor: 3.267

2.  Human papillomavirus-related gynecologic neoplasms: screening and prevention.

Authors:  Whitfield B Growdon; Marcela Del Carmen
Journal:  Rev Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008

3.  Comparison of linear array and line blot assay for detection of human papillomavirus and diagnosis of cervical precancer and cancer in the atypical squamous cell of undetermined significance and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion triage study.

Authors:  Philip E Castle; Patti E Gravitt; Diane Solomon; Cosette M Wheeler; Mark Schiffman
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2007-11-07       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 4.  Primary HPV screening for cervical cancer prevention: results from European trials.

Authors:  Elsebeth Lynge; Matejka Rebolj
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 66.675

5.  Human papillomavirus infection and risk factors in a cohort of Tuscan women aged 18-24: results at recruitment.

Authors:  Massimo Confortini; Francesca Carozzi; Marco Zappa; Leonardo Ventura; Anna Iossa; Paola Cariaggi; Livia Brandigi; Mario Franchini; Francesco Mirri; Paolo Viacava; Aurora Scarfantoni; Daniela Bazzanti; Cristina Sani
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2010-06-07       Impact factor: 3.090

6.  Comparison of Hybrid capture 2 testing at different thresholds with cytology as primary cervical screening test.

Authors:  D C Rijkaart; V M H Coupe; F J van Kemenade; D A M Heideman; A T Hesselink; W Verweij; L Rozendaal; R H Verheijen; P J Snijders; J Berkhof; C J L M Meijer
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2010-08-31       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 7.  New paradigms in cervical cancer prevention: opportunities and risks.

Authors:  Guglielmo Ronco; Paolo Giorgi Rossi
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2008-12-17       Impact factor: 2.809

8.  Guidelines of the Italian Society for Virology on HPV testing and vaccination for cervical cancer prevention.

Authors:  Luisa Barzon; Colomba Giorgi; Franco M Buonaguro; Giorgio Palù
Journal:  Infect Agent Cancer       Date:  2008-12-16       Impact factor: 2.965

9.  Epidemiology and costs of cervical cancer screening and cervical dysplasia in Italy.

Authors:  Paolo Giorgi Rossi; Alessandro Ricciardi; Catherine Cohet; Fabio Palazzo; Giacomo Furnari; Sabrina Valle; Nathalie Largeron; Antonio Federici
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2009-02-25       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  Occult HCV infection: an unexpected finding in a population unselected for hepatic disease.

Authors:  Laura De Marco; Anna Gillio-Tos; Valentina Fiano; Guglielmo Ronco; Vittorio Krogh; Domenico Palli; Salvatore Panico; Rosario Tumino; Paolo Vineis; Franco Merletti; Lorenzo Richiardi; Carlotta Sacerdote
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-12-02       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.