https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140673607614160.pdf

Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer

An update to the American Cancer Society (ACS) guideline regarding screening for the early detection of cervical precancerous lesions and cancer is presented. The guidelines are based on a systematic evidence review, contributions from 6 working groups, and a recent symposium cosponsored by the ACS, the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and the American Society for Clinical Pathology, which was attended by 25 organizations. The new screening recommendations address age-appropriate screening strategies, including the use of cytology and high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, follow-up (eg, the management of screen positives and screening intervals for screen negatives) of women after screening, the age at which to exit screening, future considerations regarding HPV testing alone as a primary screening approach, and screening strategies for women vaccinated against HPV16 and HPV18 infections.

https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.3322/caac.21139

American Cancer Society, American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and American Society for Clinical Pathology screening guidelines for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer

Worldwide distribution of human papillomavirus types in cytologically normal women in the International Agency for Research on Cancer HPV prevalence surveys: a pooled analysis.

Several studies suggest that HPV testing is more sensitive than cytology in primary cervical screening. These studies had different designs and were reported in different ways. Individual patient data were collected for all European and North American studies in which cytology was routinely performed and HPV testing was included as an additional parallel test. More than 60,000 women were included. The sensitivity and specificity of HPV testing were compared with routine cytology, both overall and for ages <35, 35–49 and 50+. The age-specific prevalence of high risk HPV (hr-HPV) was also analysed. HPV testing was substantially more sensitive in detecting CIN2+ than cytology (96.1% vs. 53.0%) but less specific (90.7% vs. 96.3%). The sensitivity of HPV testing was similar in all studies carried out in different areas of Europe and North America, whereas the sensitivity of cytology was highly variable. HPV sensitivity was uniformly high at all ages, whereas the sensitivity of cytology was substantially better in women over the age of 50 than in younger women (79.3% vs. 59.6%). The specificity of both tests increased with age. Positivity rates for HPV testing in women without high-grade CIN were region dependent. These results support the use of HPV testing as the sole primary screening test, with cytology reserved for women who test HPV positive. Large demonstration projects are needed to fully evaluate this strategy. © 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/ijc.21955

Overview of the European and North American studies on HPV testing in primary cervical cancer screening.

Background: Human papillomavirus (HPV) types 16 and 18 cause 60% – 70% of cervical cancer worldwide, and other HPV types cause virtually all remaining cases. Pooled HPV testing for 13 oncogenic types, including HPV16 and 18, is currently used in clinical practice for triage of equivocal cytology and, in conjunction with Pap tests, is an option for general screening among women 30 years of age and older. It is not clear to what extent individual identifi cation of HPV16 or HPV18 as an adjunct to pooled oncogenic HPV testing might effectively identify women at particularly high risk of cervical cancer or its immediate precursor, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3 (CIN3). Methods: From April 1, 1989, to November 2, 1990, a total of 20 810 women in the Kaiser Permanente health plan in Portland, OR, enrolled in a cohort study of HPV and cervical neoplasia. Women were tested for 13 oncogenic HPV types by Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2), and those women with a positive HC2 test were tested for HPV16 and 18. Enrollment Pap smear interpretation and HPV test results were linked to histologically confi rmed CIN3 and cervical cancer ( ≥ CIN3) occurring during 10 years of cytologic follow-up. We calculated cumulative incidence rates with 95% confi dence intervals for each interval up to 122 months using Kaplan – Meier methods. Results: The 10-year cumulative incidence rates of ≥ CIN3 were 17.2% (95% confi dence interval [CI] = 11.5% to 22.9%) among HPV16+ women and 13.6% (95% CI = 3.6% to 23.7%) among HPV18+ (HPV16 − ) women, but only 3.0% (95% CI = 1.9% to 4.2%) among HC2+ women negative for HPV16 or HPV18. The 10-year cumulative incidence among HC2 − women was 0.8% (95% CI = 0.6% to 1.1%). A subanalysis among women 30 years of age and older with normal cytology at enrollment strengthened the observed risk differences. Conclusions: HPV screening that distinguishes HPV16 and HPV18 from other oncogenic HPV types may identify women at the greatest risk of ≥ CIN3 and may permit less aggressive management of other women with oncogenic HPV infections. [J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:1072 – 9]

The Elevated 10-Year Risk of Cervical Precancer and Cancer in Women With Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Type 16 or 18 and the Possible Utility of Type-Specific HPV Testing in Clinical Practice

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140673603149550.pdf

C Gie

Papers

Management of women who test positive for high-risk types of human papillomavirus: The HART study