Evaluation of the detection of 14 high-risk human papillomaviruses with HPV 16 and HPV 18 genotyping for cervical cancer screening

Bian,Mei-Lu; Cheng,Jiao-Ying; Ma,Li; Cong,Xiao; Liu,Jun; Chen,Ying; Chen,Xi

doi:10.3892/etm.2013.1309

Evaluation of the detection of 14 high-risk human papillomaviruses with HPV 16 and HPV 18 genotyping for cervical cancer screening

Authors:
- Mei-Lu Bian
- Jiao-Ying Cheng
- Li Ma
- Xiao Cong
- Jun Liu
- Ying Chen
- Xi Chen
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing 100029, P.R. China
Published online on: September 18, 2013 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2013.1309
Pages: 1332-1336

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

The American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP) suggests that women ≥30 years old, with a negative cytopathological test but a positive high-risk (HR) human papillomavirus (HPV) test should undergo HPV 16 and HPV 18 genotyping. If this test is positive, immediate cervical pathology is required. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and clinical value of testing for 14 HR HPVs with HPV 16 and HPV 18 genotyping for cervical cancer (CC) screening. A total of 424 females from the China-Japan Friendship Hospital were selected and randomly divided into two groups (A and B). All participants underwent two different testing methods: the liquid-based cytology test (LCT) and a HPV DNA test. For the HPV DNA test, participants in group A underwent the hybrid capture II (HC-II) testing method while participants in group B were tested using the quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR; HBRT‑H14) method. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade II or greater using HBRT-H14 were 96.30, 78.17, 23.21 and 99.68%, respectively. In Group B, compared with other HR HPV types, HPV 16 and HPV 18 infection led to the increased possibility of cervical lesions graded CIN II or higher (8.11 and 51.28%, respectively). A significant difference in the rates of CC and CIN II or higher was observed among women who were i) infected with HPV 16 and/or HPV 18, ii) infected with other HR HPV types and iii) diagnosed as negative for HR HPV infection (χ2=93.976, P=0.0001). In conclusion, HBRT-H14 is applicable for CC screening with the advantage of genotyping for HPV 16 and HPV 18, which may help to improve triage management for women with negative cytology.

View Figures

View References

1.	de Villiers EM, Fauquet C, Broker TR, Bernard HU and zur Hausen H: Classification of papillomaviruses. Virology. 324:17–27. 2004.
2.	Mahmud SM and Franco EL: An overview of epidemiological and public health research on HPVs presented at the 21st International Papillomavirus Conference in Mexico City, 20–26 February 2004. Papillomavirus Rep. 15:121–123. 2004.
3.	Kitchener HC, Almonte M, Thomson C, et al: HPV testing in combination with liquid-based cytology in primary cervical screening (ARTISTIC): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 10:672–682. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4.	McLachlin CM: Human papillomavirus in cervical neoplasia. Role, risk factors, and implications. Clin Lab Med. 20:257–270. 2000.PubMed/NCBI
5.	Smith JS, Lindsay L, Hoots B, Keys J, Franceschi S, Winer R and Clifford GM: Human papillomavirus type distribution in invasive cervical cancer and high-grade cervical lesions: a meta-analysis update. Int J Cancer. 121:621–632. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6.	Bulkmans NW, Berkhof J, Rozendaal L, et al: Human papillomavirus DNA testing for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 and cancer: 5-year follow-up of a randomised controlled implementation trial. Lancet. 370:1764–1772. 2007.
7.	Dillner J, Rebolj M, Birembaut P, et al: Long term predictive values of cytology and human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screening: joint European cohort study. BMJ. 337:a17542008. View Article : Google Scholar
8.	Mayrand MH, Duarte-Franco E, Rodrigues I, et al Canadian Cervical Cancer Screening Trial Study Group: Human papillomavirus DNA versus Papanicolaou screening tests for cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 357:1579–1588. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9.	Naucler P, Ryd W, Törnberg S, et al: Human papillomavirus and Papanicolaou tests to screen for cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 357:1589–1597. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10.	Castle PE, Sadorra M, Lau T, Aldrich C, Garcia FA and Kornegay J: Evaluation of a prototype real-time PCR assay for carcinogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) detection and simultaneous HPV genotype 16 (HPV16) and HPV18 genotyping. J Clin Microbiol. 47:3344–3347. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar
11.	Wright TC Jr, Massad LS, Dunton CJ, et al 2006 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology-sponsored Consensus Conference: 2006 consensus guidelines for the management of women with abnormal cervical cancer screening tests. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 197:346–355. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar
12.	Bosch FX and de Sanjosé S: Chapter 1: Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer - burden and assessment of causality. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 31:3–13. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar
13.	Clifford GM, Smith JS, Plummer M, Muñoz N and Franceschi S: Human papillomavirus types in invasive cervical cancer worldwide: a meta-analysis. Br J Cancer. 88:63–73. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14.	Muňoz N, Bosch X, de Sanjosé S, et al: Epidemiologic classification of Human Papilloma Virus types associated with cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 348:518–527. 2003.
15.	Poljak M, Ostrbenk A, Seme K, et al: Comparison of clinical and analytical performance of the Abbott realtime high risk HPV test to the performance of hybrid capture 2 in population-based cervical cancer screening. J Clin Microbiol. 49:1721–1729. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16.	Schiffman M, Wentzensen N, Wacholder S, Kinney W, Gage JC and Castle PE: Human papillomavirus testing in the prevention of cervical cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 103:368–383. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17.	Apgar BS, Zoschnick L and Wright TC Jr: The 2001 Bethesda System terminology. Am Fam Physician. 68:1992–1998. 2003.
18.	Ermel A, Qadadri B, Morishita A, et al: Human papillomavirus detection and typing in thin prep cervical cytologic specimens comparing the Digene Hybrid Capture II Assay, the Roche Linear Array HPV Genotyping Assay, and the Kurabo GeneSquareMicroarray Assay. J Virol Methods. 169:154–161. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar
19.	Sherman ME, Lorincz AT, Scott DR, et al: Baseline cytology, human papilomavirus testing, and risk for cervical neoplasia: a 10-year cohort analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 95:46–52. 2003.PubMed/NCBI
20.	Gage JC, Sadorra M, Lamere BJ, et al PaP Cohort Study Group: Comparison of the cobas human papillomavirus (HPV) test with the hybrid capture 2 and linear assay HPV DNA tests. J Clin Microbiol. 50:61–65. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21.	Burd EM: Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. Clin Microbiol Rev. 16:1–17. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22.	Kaliterna V, Lepej SZ and Vince A: Comparison between the Abbott RealTime high risk HPV assay and the Hybrid Capture 2 assay for detecting high-risk human papillomavirus DNA in cervical specimens. J Med Microbiol. 58:1662–1663. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
23.	Kovacic MB, Castle PE, Herrero R, et al: Relationships of human papillomavirus type, qualitative viral load, and age with cytologic abnormality. Cancer Res. 66:10112–10119. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
24.	Lapierre SG, Sauthier P, Mayrand MH, et al: Human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA triage of women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance with cobas 4800 HPV and Hybrid Capture 2 test for detection of high-grade lesions of the uterine cervix. J Clin Microbiol. 50:1240–1244. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar
25.	Song SH, Hong JH, Kwak SH, Lee JK and Kim MK: Clinical performance assessment of five human papillomavirus DNA tests using liquid-based cytology samples. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 38:408–414. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
26.	Cortes J, Martinón-Torres F, Ramony Cajal JM, et al: Primary and secondary prevention of cervical cancers and vulva: recommendations for clinical practice. Prog Obstet Gynecol. 53(Suppl 1): 1–19. 2010.(In Spanish).
27.	Wong AA, Fuller J, Pabbaraju K, Wong S and Zaharadia G: Comparison of the hybrid capture 2 and cobas 4800 tests for detection of high-risk human papillomavirus in specimens collected in PreservCyt medium. J Clin Microbiol. 50:25–29. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI