V Senkomago1, A C Des Marais1, L Rahangdale2, C R T Vibat3, M G Erlander3, J S Smith4. 1. Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC, USA; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 3. Trovagene Inc., San Diego, CA, USA. 4. Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC, USA; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. Electronic address: JenniferS@unc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Urine testing for high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) detection could provide a non-invasive, simple method for cervical cancer screening. OBJECTIVES: We examined whether HR-HPV detection is affected by urine collection time, portion of urine stream, or urine fraction tested, and assessed the performance of HR-HPV testing in urine for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade II or worse (CIN2+). STUDY DESIGN: A total of 37 female colposcopy clinic attendees, ≥ 30 years, provided three urine samples: "first void" urine collected at home, and "initial stream" and "mid-stream" urine samples collected at the clinic later in the day. Self- and physician-collected brush specimens were obtained at the same clinic visit. Colposcopy was performed and directed biopsies obtained if clinically indicated. For each urine sample, HR-HPV DNA testing was conducted for unfractionated, pellet, and supernatant fractions using the Trovagene test. HR-HPV mRNA testing was performed on brush specimens using the Aptima HPV assay. RESULTS: HR-HPV prevalence was similar in unfractionated and pellet fractions of all urine samples. For supernatant urine fractions, HR-HPV prevalence appeared lower in mid-stream urine (56.8%[40.8-72.7%]) than in initial stream urine (75.7%[61.9-89.5%]). Sensitivity of CIN2+ detection was identical for initial stream urine and physician-collected cervical specimen (89.9%[95%CI=62.7-99.6%]), and similar to self-collected vaginal specimen (79.1%[48.1-96.6%]). CONCLUSION: This is among the first studies to compare methodologies for collection and processing of urine for HR-HPV detection. HR-HPV prevalence was similar in first void and initial stream urine, and was highly sensitive for CIN2+ detection. Additional research in a larger and general screening population is needed.
BACKGROUND: Urine testing for high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) detection could provide a non-invasive, simple method for cervical cancer screening. OBJECTIVES: We examined whether HR-HPV detection is affected by urine collection time, portion of urine stream, or urine fraction tested, and assessed the performance of HR-HPV testing in urine for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade II or worse (CIN2+). STUDY DESIGN: A total of 37 female colposcopy clinic attendees, ≥ 30 years, provided three urine samples: "first void" urine collected at home, and "initial stream" and "mid-stream" urine samples collected at the clinic later in the day. Self- and physician-collected brush specimens were obtained at the same clinic visit. Colposcopy was performed and directed biopsies obtained if clinically indicated. For each urine sample, HR-HPV DNA testing was conducted for unfractionated, pellet, and supernatant fractions using the Trovagene test. HR-HPV mRNA testing was performed on brush specimens using the Aptima HPV assay. RESULTS:HR-HPV prevalence was similar in unfractionated and pellet fractions of all urine samples. For supernatant urine fractions, HR-HPV prevalence appeared lower in mid-stream urine (56.8%[40.8-72.7%]) than in initial stream urine (75.7%[61.9-89.5%]). Sensitivity of CIN2+ detection was identical for initial stream urine and physician-collected cervical specimen (89.9%[95%CI=62.7-99.6%]), and similar to self-collected vaginal specimen (79.1%[48.1-96.6%]). CONCLUSION: This is among the first studies to compare methodologies for collection and processing of urine for HR-HPV detection. HR-HPV prevalence was similar in first void and initial stream urine, and was highly sensitive for CIN2+ detection. Additional research in a larger and general screening population is needed.
Authors: Chandrika J Piyathilake; Suguna Badiga; Michelle M Chambers; Ilene K Brill; Roland Matthews; Edward E Partridge Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-05-31 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Eliane Rohner; F Hunter McGuire; Yutong Liu; Quefeng Li; Kate Miele; Samveg A Desai; John W Schmitt; Andrea Knittel; Julie A E Nelson; Claire Edelman; Vijay Sivaraman; Anna Baker; LaHoma S Romocki; Lisa Rahangdale; Jennifer S Smith Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2020-03-26 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Eliane Rohner; Lisa Rahangdale; Busola Sanusi; Andrea K Knittel; Laurence Vaughan; Kirsty Chesko; Brian Faherty; Samantha E Tulenko; John W Schmitt; LaHoma S Romocki; Vijay Sivaraman; Julie A E Nelson; Jennifer S Smith Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2020-02-24 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Severien Van Keer; Annina P van Splunter; Jade Pattyn; Annemie De Smet; Sereina A Herzog; Xaveer Van Ostade; Wiebren A A Tjalma; Margareta Ieven; Pierre Van Damme; Renske D M Steenbergen; Alex Vorsters Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-04-12 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Hyun-Woong Cho; Jin Hwa Hong; Kyung Jin Min; Yung-Taek Ouh; Seok Ju Seong; Jun Hye Moon; Seong Hwan Cho; Jae Kwan Lee Journal: Cancer Res Treat Date: 2020-12-24 Impact factor: 4.679
Authors: Alex Vorsters; Severien Van Keer; Samantha Biesmans; Annick Hens; Ilse De Coster; Herman Goossens; Margareta Ieven; Pierre Van Damme Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2016-05-17 Impact factor: 5.923