Self‑sampling for high‑risk human papillomavirus as a follow‑up alternative after treatment of high‑grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

Östensson,Ellinor; Belkić,Karen; Ramqvist,Torbjörn; Mints,Miriam; Andersson,Sonia

doi:10.3892/ol.2021.12501

Self‑sampling for high‑risk human papillomavirus as a follow‑up alternative after treatment of high‑grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

Authors:
- Ellinor Östensson
- Karen Belkić
- Torbjörn Ramqvist
- Miriam Mints
- Sonia Andersson
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Women's and Children's Health, Obstetrics‑Gynecology Division, Karolinska Institute, SE‑17176 Stockholm, Sweden, Department of Oncology‑Pathology, Karolinska Institute, SE‑17176 Stockholm, Sweden
Published online on: January 31, 2021 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2021.12501
Article Number: 240
Copyright: © Östensson et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

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

Women treated for high‑grade cervical‑intraepithelial‑neoplasia (CIN) require long‑term follow‑up with high‑risk human‑papillomavirus (HPV) testing. Self‑sampling for HPV is well‑accepted among these patients, but its role in follow‑up for this group requires investigation. The present study examined how well HPV findings from self‑sampled vaginal (VSS) and urine specimens correctly identified women from this cohort with recurrent CIN2+ compared with samples collected by clinicians. At 1st post‑conization follow‑up, 531 patients (99.8% participation) gave urine samples, performed VSS, underwent colposcopy with punch biopsy of visible lesions and clinician‑collected cervical sampling for HPV analysis and liquid‑based cytology. A total of 113 patients with positive HPV and/or abnormal cytology at 1st follow‑up underwent 2nd follow‑up. At 1st follow‑up, all patients with recurrent CIN3 had positive HPV results by all methods. Clinician sampling and VSS revealed HPV16 positivity in 50% of recurrent cases and urine sampling revealed HPV16 positivity in 25% of recurrent cases. At 2nd follow‑up, all 7 newly‑detected CIN2/3 recurrences were associated with HPV positivity on VSS and clinician‑samples. Only clinician‑collected samples detected HPV positivity for two adenocarcinoma‑in‑situ recurrences, and both were HPV18 positive. A total of 77 patients had abnormal cytology at 1st follow‑up, for which HPV positivity via VSS yielded highest sensitivity. The HPV findings were positive from VSS in 12 patients with high‑grade squamous‑intraepithelial‑lesions (HSIL), and 11 patients with HSIL had positive HPV findings in clinician‑collected and urine samples. All methods for assessing HPV presence yielded significant age‑adjusted odds ratios for predicting abnormal lesions at 1st follow‑up. For overall HPV results, Cohen's kappa revealed substantial agreement between VSS and clinician sampling, and moderate agreement between urine and clinician sampling. Clinician sampling and VSS were highly concordant for HPV16. Insofar as the pathology was squamous (not glandular), VSS appeared as sensitive as clinician sampling for HPV in predicting outcome among the present cohort. Since VSS can be performed at home, this option can maximize participation in the required long‑term follow‑up for these women at high‑risk.

View Figures

View References

1	Ebisch RMF, Rutten DWF, IntHout J, Melchers WJG, Massuger LFAG, Bulten J, Bekkers RLM and Siebers AG: Long-lasting increased risk of human papillomavirus-related carcinomas and premalignancies after cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3: A population-based cohort study. J Clin Oncol. 35:2542–2550. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Kocken M, Helmerhorst TJ, Berkhof J, Louwers JA, Nobbenhuis MA, Bais AG, Hogewoning CJ, Zaal A, Verheijen RH, Snijders PJ and Meijer CJ: Risk of recurrent high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia after successful treatment: A long-term multi-cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 12:441–450. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Hoffman SR, Le T, Lockhart A, Sanusi A, Dal Santo L, Davis M, McKinney DA, Brown M, Poole C, Willame C and Smith JS: Patterns of persistent HPV infection after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN): A systematic review. Int J Cancer. 141:8–23. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Arbyn M, Ronco G, Anttila A, Meijer CJ, Poljak M, Ogilvie G, Koliopoulos G, Naucler P, Sankaranarayanan R and Peto J: Evidence regarding human papillomavirus testing in secondary prevention of cervical cancer. Vaccine. 30 (Suppl 5):F88–F99. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Bruhn LV, Andersen SJ and Hariri J: HPV-testing versus HPV-cytology co-testing to predict the outcome after conization. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 97:758–765. 2018. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Arbyn M, Verdoodt F, Snijders PJ, Verhoef VM, Suonio E, Dillner L, Minozzi S, Bellisario C, Banzi R, Zhao F, et al: Accuracy of human papillomavirus testing on self-collected versus clinician-collected samples: A meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. 15:172–183. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Arbyn M, Snijders PJ, Meijer CJ, Berkhof J, Cuschieri K, Kocjan BJ and Poljak M: Which high-risk HPV assays fulfill criteria for use in primary cervical cancer screening? Clin Microbiol Infect. 21:817–826. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Jentschke M, Chen K, Arbyn M, Hertel B, Noskowicz M, Soergel P and Hillemans P: Direct comparison of two vaginal self-sampling devices for the detection of human papillomavirus infections. J Clin Virol. 82:46–50. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Östensson E, Hellström AC, Hellman K, Gustavsson I, Gyllensten U, Wilander E, Zethraeus N and Andersson S: Projected cost-effectiveness of repeat HPV testing using self-collected vaginal samples in the Swedish cervical cancer screening program. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 92:830–840. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Andersson S, Belkić K, Mints M and Östensson E: Is self-sampling to test for high-risk papillomavirus an acceptable option among women who have been treated for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia? PLoS One. 13:e01990382018. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Andersson S, Belkić K, Safer Demirbüker SS, Mints M and Östensson E: Perceived cervical cancer risk among women treated for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: The importance of specific knowledge. PLoS One. 12:e1901562017. View Article : Google Scholar
12	Richart RM: Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Pathol Annu. 8:301–328. 1973.PubMed/NCBI
13	Jordan J, Martin-Hirsch P, Arbyn M, Schenck U, Baldauf JJ, Da Silva D, Anttila A, Nieminen P and Prendiville W: European guidelines for clinical management of abnormal cervical cytology, part-2. Cytopathology. 20:5–16. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, Moriarty A, O'Connor D, Prey M, Raab S, Sherman M, Wilbur D, Wright T Jr, et al: The 2001 Bethesda system: Terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA. 287:2114–2119. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Brismar S, Johansson B, Borjesson M, Arbyn M and Andersson S: Follow-up after treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia by human papillomavirus genotyping. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 201:17.e1–8. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar
16	Kocken M, Uijterwaal MH, de Vries AL, Berkhof J, Ket JC, Helmerhorst TJ and Meijer CJ: High-risk human papillomavirus testing versus cytology in predicting post-treatment disease in women treated for high-grade cervical disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 125:500–507. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Persson M, Brismar Wendel S, Ljungblad L, Johansson B, Weiderpass E and Andersson S: High-risk human papillomavirus E6/E7 mRNA and L1 DNA as markers of residual/recurrent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Oncol Rep. 28:346–352. 2012.PubMed/NCBI
18	Asciutto KC, Henic E, Darlin L, Forslund O and Borgfeldt C: Follow up with HPV test and cytology as test of cure, 6 months after conization, is reliable. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 95:1251–1257. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Garutti P, Borghi C, Bedoni C, Bonaccorsi G, Greco P, Tognon M and Martini F: HPV-based strategy in follow-up of patients treated for high-grade cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia: 5-year results in a public health surveillance setting. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 210:236–241. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Saville M, Hawkes D, Keung M, Ip E, Silvers J, Sultana F, Malloy MJ, Velentzis LS, Canfel LK, Wrede CD and Brotherton J: Analytical performance of HPV assays on vaginal self-collected vs. practitioner-collected cervical samples. J Clin Virol. 127:1043752020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Norman I, Hjerpe A and Dillner J: Risk of high-grade lesions after atypical glandular cells in cervical screening: A population-based cohort study. BMJ Open. 7:e0170702017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22	Patadji S, Li Z, Pradhan D and Zhao C: Significance of high-risk HPV detection in women with atypical glandular cells on pap testing: Analysis of 1857 cases from an academic institution. Cancer Cytopathol. 125:205–211. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
23	Andersson S, Larson B, Hjerpe A, Silfverswärd C, Sällström J, Wilander E and Rylander E: Adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix: The presence of human papillomavirus and the method of detection. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 82:960–965. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
24	Dahlström LA, Ylitalo N, Sundström K, Palmgren J, Ploner A, Eloranta S, Sanjeevi CB, Andersson S, Rohan T, Dillner J, et al: Prospective study of human papillomavirus and risk of cervical adenocarcinoma. Int J Cancer. 127:1923–1930. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
25	Fambrini M, Penna C, Pieralli A, Bussani C, Fallani MG, Andersson KL, Scarselli G and Marchionni M: PCR detection rates of high risk human papillomavirus DNA in paired self-collected urine and cervical scrapes after laser CO2 conization for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Gynecol Oncol. 109:59–64. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
26	Rohner E, Rahangdale L, Sanusi B, Knittel AK, Vaughan L, Chesko K, Faherty B, Tulenko SE, Schmitt JW, Romocki LS, et al: Test accuracy of human papillomavirus in urine for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Clin Microbiol. 58:e01443–19. 2020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
27	Vorsters A, Van Damme P and Clifford G: Urine testing for HPV: Rationale for using first void. BMJ. 349:g62522014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
28	Pathak N, Dodds J, Zamora J and Khan K: Accuracy of urinary human papillomavirus testing for presence of cervical HPV: Systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 349:g52642014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
29	Pattyn J, Van Keer S, Biesmans S, Ieven M, Vanderborght C, Beyers K, Vankerckhoven V, Bruyndonckx R, Van Damme P and Vorsters A: Human papillomavirus detection in urine: Effect of a first-void urine collection device and timing of collection. J Virol Methods. 264:23–30. 2019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
30	Vorsters A, Micalessi I, Bilcke J, Ieven M, Bogers J and Van Damme P: Detection of human papillomavirus DNA in urine. A review of the literature. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 31:627–640. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
31	Fröberg M, Östensson E, Belkić K, Oštrbenk A, Poljak M, Mints M, Arbyn M and Andersson S: Impact of the human papillomavirus status on development of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in women negative for intraepithelial lesions or malignancy at baseline: A 9-year Swedish nested case-control follow-up study. Cancer. 125:239–248. 2019.PubMed/NCBI
32	Baasland I, Hagen B, Vogt C, Valla M and Romundstad PR: Colposcopy and additive diagnostic value of biopsies from colposcopy-negative areas to detect cervical dysplasia. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 95:1258–1263. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
33	Andersson S, Belkić K, Mints M and Östensson E: Acceptance of self-sampling among long-term cervical screening non-attenders with HPV positive results: Promising opportunity for specific cancer education. J Cancer Educ. 36:126–133. 2021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
34	Galbraith KV, Gilkey MB, Smith JS, Richman AR, Barclay L and Brewer NT: Perceptions of mailed HPV self-testing among women at higher risk for cervical cancer. J Community Health. 39:849–856. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
35	Crofts V, Flahault E, Tebeu PM, Untiet S, Fosso GK, Boulvain M, Vassilakos P and Petignat P: Education efforts may contribute to wider acceptance of human papillomavirus self-sampling. Int J Womens Health. 7:149–154. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
36	Arrossi S, Ramos S, Straw C, Thouyaret L and Orellana L: HPV testing: A mixed-method approach to understand why women prefer self-collection in a middle-income country. BMC Public Health. 16:8322016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
37	Ma'som M, Bhoo-Pathy N, Nasir NH, Bellinson J, Subramaniam S, Ma Y, Yap SH, Goh PP, Gravitt P and Woo YL: Attitudes and factors affecting acceptability of self-administered cervicovaginal sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping as an alternative to Pap testing among multiethnic Malaysian women. BMJ Open. 6:e0110222016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
38	Vahabi M and Lofters A: Muslim immigrant women's views on cervical cancer screening and HPV self-sampling in Ontario, Canada. BMC Public Health. 16:8682016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
39	Racey CS and Gesink DC: Barriers and facilitators to cervical cancer screening among women in rural Ontario, Canada: The role of self-collected HPV testing. J Rural Health. 32:136–145. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
40	de Melo Kuil L, Lorenzi AT, Stein MD, Resende JCP, Antoniazzi M, Longatto-Filho A, Scapulatempo-Neto C and Fregnani JHTG: The role of self-collection by vaginal lavage for the detection of HPV and high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia. Acta Cytol. 61:425–433. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
41	Mao C, Kulasingam SL, Whitham HK, Hawes SE, Lin J and Kiviat NB: Clinician and patient acceptability of self-collected human papillomavirus testing for cervical cancer screening. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 26:609–615. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
42	Bergengren L, Kaliff M, Larsson GL, Karlsson MG and Helenius G: Comparison between professional sampling and self-sampling for HPV-based cervical cancer screening among postmenopausal women. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 142:359–364. 2018. View Article : Google Scholar
43	Kahn JA, Slap GB, Bernstein DI, Kollar LM, Tissot AM, Hillard PA and Rosenthal SL: Psychological, behavioral, and interpersonal impact of human papillomavirus and pap test results. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 14:650–659. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
44	Luszczynska A, Durawa AB, Scholz U and Knoll N: Empowerment beliefs and intention to uptake cervical cancer screening: Three psychosocial mediating mechanisms. Women Health. 52:162–181. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI