BACKGROUND: A rigorous comparison of cervical cancer screening methods utilizing data on immune status, antiretroviral therapy (ART) and colposcopy-directed biopsy has not been performed among HIV-positive women. METHODS: Between June and November 2009, 500 HIV-positive women were enrolled at an HIV treatment clinic in Nairobi, Kenya, and underwent Papanicolau (Pap) smear, visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), human papillomavirus (HPV) and colposcopy-directed biopsy (gold standard). Positive Pap smear (ASCUS+, LSIL+, HSIL+), VIA, HPV and their combinations were compared with CIN2/3+. Sensitivity, specificity and AUC (sensitivity and 1-specificity) were compared using pairwise tests and multivariate logistic regression models that included age, CD4⁺ cell count and ART duration. RESULTS: Of 500 enrolled, 498 samples were collected. On histology, there were 172 (35%) normal, 186 (37%) CIN1, 66 (13%) CIN2, 47 (9%) CIN3 and 27 (5%) indeterminate. Pap (ASCUS+) was the most sensitive screening method (92.7%), combination of both Pap (HSIL+) and VIA positive was the most specific (99.1%) and Pap (HSIL+) had the highest AUC (0.85). In multivariate analyses, CD4⁺ cell count of 350 cells/μl or less was associated with decreased HPV specificity (P = 0.002); ART duration of less than 2 years was associated with decreased HPV (P = 0.01) and VIA (P = 0.03) specificity; and age less than 40 years was associated with increased VIA sensitivity (P < 0.001) and decreased HPV specificity (P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Pap smear is a robust test among HIV-positive women regardless of immune status or ART duration. Results should be cautiously interpreted when using HPV among those younger, immunosuppressed or on ART less than 2 years, and when using VIA among those aged 40 years or more.
BACKGROUND: A rigorous comparison of cervical cancer screening methods utilizing data on immune status, antiretroviral therapy (ART) and colposcopy-directed biopsy has not been performed among HIV-positive women. METHODS: Between June and November 2009, 500 HIV-positive women were enrolled at an HIV treatment clinic in Nairobi, Kenya, and underwent Papanicolau (Pap) smear, visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), human papillomavirus (HPV) and colposcopy-directed biopsy (gold standard). Positive Pap smear (ASCUS+, LSIL+, HSIL+), VIA, HPV and their combinations were compared with CIN2/3+. Sensitivity, specificity and AUC (sensitivity and 1-specificity) were compared using pairwise tests and multivariate logistic regression models that included age, CD4⁺ cell count and ART duration. RESULTS: Of 500 enrolled, 498 samples were collected. On histology, there were 172 (35%) normal, 186 (37%) CIN1, 66 (13%) CIN2, 47 (9%) CIN3 and 27 (5%) indeterminate. Pap (ASCUS+) was the most sensitive screening method (92.7%), combination of both Pap (HSIL+) and VIA positive was the most specific (99.1%) and Pap (HSIL+) had the highest AUC (0.85). In multivariate analyses, CD4⁺ cell count of 350 cells/μl or less was associated with decreased HPV specificity (P = 0.002); ART duration of less than 2 years was associated with decreased HPV (P = 0.01) and VIA (P = 0.03) specificity; and age less than 40 years was associated with increased VIA sensitivity (P < 0.001) and decreased HPV specificity (P = 0.005). CONCLUSION:Pap smear is a robust test among HIV-positive women regardless of immune status or ART duration. Results should be cautiously interpreted when using HPV among those younger, immunosuppressed or on ART less than 2 years, and when using VIA among those aged 40 years or more.
Authors: Tazio Vanni; Paula Mendes Luz; Beatriz Grinsztejn; Valdilea G Veloso; Anna Foss; Marco Mesa-Frias; Rosa Legood Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2011-11-09 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: H De Vuyst; P Claeys; S Njiru; L Muchiri; S Steyaert; P De Sutter; E Van Marck; J Bwayo; M Temmerman Journal: Int J Gynaecol Obstet Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 3.561
Authors: Rika Yamada; Toshiyuki Sasagawa; Leah W Kirumbi; Alan Kingoro; Dominic K Karanja; Michael Kiptoo; George W Nakitare; Hiroshi Ichimura; Masaki Inoue Journal: J Med Virol Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 2.327
Authors: Howard Minkoff; Ye Zhong; Robert D Burk; Joel M Palefsky; Xiaonan Xue; D Heather Watts; Alexandra M Levine; Rodney L Wright; Christine Colie; Gypsyamber D'Souza; L Stewart Massad; Howard D Strickler Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Pragna Patel; Charles E Rose; Pamela Y Collins; Bernardo Nuche-Berenguer; Vikrant V Sahasrabuddhe; Emmanuel Peprah; Susan Vorkoper; Sonak D Pastakia; Dianne Rausch; Naomi S Levitt Journal: AIDS Date: 2018-07-01 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Carol Nakisige; Scott V Adams; Constance Namirembe; Lazarus Okoche; James Ferrenberg; Andrea Towlerton; Anna Larsen; Jackson Orem; Corey Casper; Lisa Frenkel; Thomas S Uldrick Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2022-07-01 Impact factor: 3.771
Authors: Megan J Huchko; Jennifer Sneden; George Sawaya; Karen Smith-McCune; May Maloba; Naila Abdulrahim; Elizabeth A Bukusi; Craig R Cohen Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-06-10 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Salvatore Vaccarella; Hugo De Vuyst; Nelly R Mugo; Samah R Sakr; Martyn Plummer; Daniëlle A M Heideman; Silvia Franceschi; Michael Chung Journal: Infect Agent Cancer Date: 2013-12-19 Impact factor: 2.965
Authors: Hugo De Vuyst; Nelly R Mugo; Silvia Franceschi; Kevin McKenzie; Vanessa Tenet; Julia Njoroge; Farzana S Rana; Samah R Sakr; Peter J F Snijders; Michael H Chung Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-10-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Megan J Huchko; Jennifer Sneden; Jennifer M Zakaras; Karen Smith-McCune; George Sawaya; May Maloba; Elizabeth Ann Bukusi; Craig R Cohen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-04-07 Impact factor: 3.240