Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in the management of women with abnormal Pap smears. Experience of a colposcopy referral clinic.

Laboratory of Clinical Microbiology and Virology, University Hospital Policlinico Tor Vergata (Italy).
European journal of gynaecological oncology (Impact Factor: 0.61). 02/2004; 25(5):577-84.
Source: PubMed


Several detailed algorithms for the appropriate use of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in the management of women with abnormal Pap (Papanicolaou) smears have been launched, but their direct country-to-country adoption is difficult. This necessitates their testing in individual settings, which is ongoing in our colposcopy referral clinic.
A series of 224 consecutive women attending the clinic with the usual referral indications (ASC-US or higher in Pap) were examined by the conventional diagnostic tools (PAP smear, colposcopy, punch biopsy) and subjected to HPV testing and viral typing for both low-risk (L-R) and high-risk (H-R) types by nested PCR-based techniques. Predictors of the high-grade diagnostic categories were analysed using both univariate- and multivariate modelling, and the performance characteristics (sensitivity, specificity, NPV, PPV) of all tests in detecting high-grade CIN were calculated.
In the PAP test, ASC-US smears were most common (37.9%), followed by low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL) (26.3%) and high-grade SIL (HSIL) (4.9%). Colposcopy was performed for 180 women, of whom 48.3% had a normal transformation zone (TZ), 40.6% had ATZ1 (abnormal TZ grade 1), and 5.6% had ATZ2. In biopsy (n = 71), 49.3% had CIN1, 5.6% CIN2, and 16.9% CIN3. The HPV test was positive in 64 (28.8%) women, more often in those aged < 35 years (p = 0.025). High-grade colposcopy (ATZ2) was significantly associated with HSIL in the Pap test (OR 20.5; 95% CI: 4.34-96.47), and with HPV test positivity (OR 6.37; 95% CI: 1.58-25.73). The most significant predictors of CIN3 were HSIL in the PAP, HPV test positivity, and high-grade colposcopy. HSIL and HPV test (for H-R types), but not colposcopy, retained their significance as independent predictors of CIN3 also in adjusted multivariate models: OR 88.27; 95% CI 4.17-1867.04, and OR 19.46; 95% CI 2.01-187.75, for the HSIL and H-R HPV test, respectively. Changing the cut-off level of the Pap test from ASC-US to HSIL increased the specificity of the test up to 96.4%, with the loss in sensitivity from 87.5% to 43.8%. Colposcopy (ATZ2) had 92% specificity, and NPV competing with that of the Pap test. The sensitivity of HPV test exceeds that of the Pap test at HSIL cut-off level, but the specificity of the PAP test is clearly superior.
Accurate predictors of significant cervical pathology (CIN3) are well defined, but the problem is the different performance of the diagnostic tools in clinical practice. A proficient combination of the tests is likely to result in the most satisfactory clinical practice in the management of women with abnormal Pap tests (MAPS).

Download full-text


Available from: Pierpaolo Paba, Oct 04, 2015
1 Follower
23 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To explore the predictors of intermediate endpoints of cervical cancer in 500 women living in Porto Alegre. Five hundred randomly selected women (mean age 20.3 years, range 15-25) were screened using PCR detecting 25 HPV types (HPV6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 34, 35, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 45, 51, 52, 53, 54, 56, 58, 59, 66, 68, 70, and 74). Women were interviewed and serum samples were analysed for antibodies to HPV16 and HPV18 VLPs. Regression models were constructed to analyse predictive factors for (a) HPV PCR status, (b) HPV16-seropositivity, (c) HPV18-seropositivity, and (d) SIL in the PAP smear, used as intermediate endpoints of cervical cancer. Specific HPV types were identified in 137 (27.4%) of the 157 (31.4%) PCR-positive women. PAP test result was the most powerful independent predictor of HPV status in PCR (p = 0.0001), followed by the sexual activity started (p = 0.001) (adjusted OR 34.075, 95% CI: 4.650-249.715). PAP test SIL was independently predicted only by the HPV PCR status (p = 0.0001) (OR 7.561, 95% CI: 2.787-20.514). HPV16 and HPV18 serostatus were the most significant predictors of each other (p=0.0001), and the life-time number of sexual partners was more significant (p=0.001) predictor of HPV16 than HPV18 serostatus (p = 0.049). These data are useful in evaluating the exposure status of the women to the risk factors of cervical cancer in south of Brazil.
    European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology 02/2006; 124(1):110-8. DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2005.02.001 · 1.70 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: As a part of our search for oncogenic viruses as potential etiological agents in human malignancies, our studies on human papillomaviruses (HPV) were extended to analysis of the 3 polyomaviruses (SV40, BKV and JCV) in colorectal carcinomas. Archival tumour samples from 71 patients with colorectal cancer were analyzed for the sequences of SV40, BKV, JCV and HPV using PCR-based techniques. HPV genotypes were determined using sequencing and reverse blot hybridization (InnoLipa). Amplification of BKV and JCV with the primer pair PEP-1 and PEP-2 and subsequent restriction digestion of the amplified products with BamH I disclosed BKV in 6/66 (9%) of the samples, whereas none contained JCV. SV40 was amplified in 10/66 (15.1%) samples and confirmed by sequencing analysis. In pair-wise analysis for co-infections, the samples were significantly different in their BKV-JCV and JCV-SV40 status, in contrast to their BKV-SV40 co-infection status. HPV DNA was detected in 22/66 (33.3%) of the samples analysed with either the MY09/11 or SPF primer mix. Of these 22 HPV infections, 7 were single-type infections and 15 contained multiple HPV types. HPV detection or type distribution showed no relationship to the gender of the patients or histological grade of the tumour. HPV status was not significantly related to detection of BKV, JCV or SV40. Similarly, in pair-wise analysis for co-infections, the samples were significantly different in their status of HPV-BKV (p=0.0006), HPV-JCV (p=0.0001), and HPV-SV40 (p=0.019), implicating that HPV and the 3 polyomaviruses are rarely detected concomitantly in the same samples. Taking the known molecular mechanisms of action of these individual viruses, there is a chance that these viruses could alter the mechanisms of cell cycle control and inhibit apoptosis, thus potentially causing chromosomal instability and promoting colorectal oncogenesis.
    Anticancer research 03/2008; 28(2B):1405-10. · 1.83 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To identify the prevalence of human papillomavirus vaccine genotypes and non-vaccine genotypes implicated in the appearance of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2-3). Prospective study of 519 women with abnormal cytology. All the women underwent a second Papanicolaou test, cervicovaginal sampling for type-specific HPV detection and colposcopy, and women with abnormal colposcopy results were referred to biopsy. Pearson's chi-square test was used for statistical analysis. HPV was detected in 340 patients (65.5%), and in 125 (24%) more than one HPV genotype was present. We selected 206 patients with CIN2 or CIN3 confirmed by biopsy. In 88 (42.7%) of these patients, HPV types 16 and 18 were detected, but only 58 (28.2%) without co-infection by other high-risk or probable high-risk HPV types. In 115 (55.8%) women diagnosed with CIN2 or CIN3 high-risk or probable high-risk HPV types other than 16 or 18 were found. High-risk and/or probable high-risk HPV genotypes not included in the vaccine were isolated in this study more frequently than 16 or 18, and this difference was statistically significant (p=0.047). Of the 206 women diagnosed with CIN2 or CIN3, 19 tested negative for HPV and 14 tested positive for low-risk HPV types. Only 28.2% of women with CIN2 or CIN3 confirmed by biopsy were infected exclusively by HPV type 16 or 18, a finding that places in doubt the degree of protection afforded by HPV vaccination.
    Gynecologic Oncology 09/2008; 111(1):9-12. DOI:10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.06.012 · 3.77 Impact Factor
Show more