D A M Heideman1, L Xu2, A T Hesselink3, S Doorn3, D M Ejegod4, H Pedersen4, W G V Quint5, J Bonde4, M Arbyn2. 1. Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Electronic address: dam.heideman@amsterdamumc.nl. 2. Unit of Cancer Epidemiology, Belgian Cancer Centre, Scientific Institute of Public Health, Brussels, Belgium. 3. Self-screen B.V, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 4. Molecular Pathology Laboratory, Department of Pathology, Hvidovre Hospital, Hvidovre, Denmark. 5. DDL Diagnostic Laboratory, Rijswijk, the Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The VALidation of HPV GENoyping Tests (VALGENT) framework is designed for comparison and clinical validation of HPV assays. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of the HPV-Risk assay within VALGENT-4, relative to clinically validated comparator HPV tests. STUDY DESIGN: The VALGENT-4 panel comprises consecutive SurePath cervical samples from routine screening (n=998), of which 51 had abnormal cytology and 13 women had cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or worse (CIN2+), enriched with SurePath cervical samples from 297 women with abnormal cytology and 109 CIN2+. HPV-Risk assay was performed on DNA extracted panel samples (n=1,295), blinded to clinical data, cytology results, and results from other HPV assays evaluated in VALGENT-4. All assay results were reported to the central VALGENT coordination institute for data and statistical analysis. HPV prevalence was analysed and accuracy for detection of CIN grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) and CIN2+ were assessed relative to GP5+/6+-PCR-EIA and GP5+/6+-PCR-EIA-LMNX. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the HPV-Risk assay for detection of CIN3+ and CIN2+ was similar to that of GP5+/6+-PCR-EIA (relative sensitivity for CIN3+1.01; 95%CI: 0.97-1.06; pMcN=1.000, and for CIN2+1.01; 95%CI: 0.96-1.06; pMcN=1.000) at significantly higher specificity (relative specificity 1.04; 95%CI: 1.02-1.06; pMcN<0.001). The accuracy of the HPV-Risk assay for CIN3+ and CIN2+ was non-inferior compared to GP5+/6+-PCR- EIA and GP5+/6+-PCR-EIA-LMNX, with all p-values ≤0.002. HPV16/18 genotype agreement between HPV-Risk assay and GP5+/6+-PCR-LMNX was high. CONCLUSIONS: The HPV-Risk assay demonstrated non-inferiority to clinically validated comparator assays on cervical samples in SurePath medium using the VALGENT-4 panel, and is therefore suitable for cervical cancer screening.
BACKGROUND: The VALidation of HPV GENoyping Tests (VALGENT) framework is designed for comparison and clinical validation of HPV assays. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of the HPV-Risk assay within VALGENT-4, relative to clinically validated comparator HPV tests. STUDY DESIGN: The VALGENT-4 panel comprises consecutive SurePath cervical samples from routine screening (n=998), of which 51 had abnormal cytology and 13 women had cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or worse (CIN2+), enriched with SurePath cervical samples from 297 women with abnormal cytology and 109 CIN2+. HPV-Risk assay was performed on DNA extracted panel samples (n=1,295), blinded to clinical data, cytology results, and results from other HPV assays evaluated in VALGENT-4. All assay results were reported to the central VALGENT coordination institute for data and statistical analysis. HPV prevalence was analysed and accuracy for detection of CIN grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) and CIN2+ were assessed relative to GP5+/6+-PCR-EIA and GP5+/6+-PCR-EIA-LMNX. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the HPV-Risk assay for detection of CIN3+ and CIN2+ was similar to that of GP5+/6+-PCR-EIA (relative sensitivity for CIN3+1.01; 95%CI: 0.97-1.06; pMcN=1.000, and for CIN2+1.01; 95%CI: 0.96-1.06; pMcN=1.000) at significantly higher specificity (relative specificity 1.04; 95%CI: 1.02-1.06; pMcN<0.001). The accuracy of the HPV-Risk assay for CIN3+ and CIN2+ was non-inferior compared to GP5+/6+-PCR- EIA and GP5+/6+-PCR-EIA-LMNX, with all p-values ≤0.002. HPV16/18 genotype agreement between HPV-Risk assay and GP5+/6+-PCR-LMNX was high. CONCLUSIONS: The HPV-Risk assay demonstrated non-inferiority to clinically validated comparator assays on cervical samples in SurePath medium using the VALGENT-4 panel, and is therefore suitable for cervical cancer screening.
Authors: Daniëlle A M Heideman; Anja Oštrbenk Valenčak; Saskia Doorn; Jesper Bonde; Peter Hillemanns; Grega Gimpelj Domjanič; Jana Mlakar; Albertus T Hesselink; Chris J L M Meijer; Mario Poljak Journal: Viruses Date: 2022-04-25 Impact factor: 5.818