9 research outputs found

    Diagnostic value of human papillomavirus (HPV) 16 and HPV18 viral loads for the detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+) in a cohort of African women living with HIV.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: African women living with HIV (WLHIV) are at high risk of cervical cancer but rarely adequately screened. Better strategies enabling identification of WLHIV with high-grade cervical intraepithelial lesions (CIN2+) are required. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the diagnostic value of HPV16 and HPV18 viral loads in a cohort of African WLHIV. DESIGN: HPV16 and HPV18 viral loads were determined by quantitation of the E6 gene DNA by real-time PCR in cervical specimens collected at baseline and endline (16 months) from 245 African WLHIV positive for HPV16 or/and HPV18. Cervical biopsies were graded using the histopathological CIN classification. RESULTS: Women with CIN2+ had higher viral load for HPV16 (p < 0.0001) or HPV18 (p = 0.03) than those without CIN2+. HPV16 viral load ≥3.59 log copies/1000 cells detected CIN2+ with sensitivity and specificity of 93.5% (95%CI: 81.7-98.3%) and 74.1% (95%CI: 66.3-80.6%), respectively, whereas HPV18 viral load ≥1.63 log copies/1000 cells detected CIN2+ with sensitivity and specificity of 59.1% (95%CI: 38.7-76.7%) and 66.9% (95%CI: 58.8-74.1%), respectively. A high baseline HPV16 viral load was significantly associated with persistence of, or progression to CIN2+ at endline; these findings were not observed for HPV18. CONCLUSIONS: HPV16 viral load is a powerful marker of CIN2+ in African WLHIV. HPV18 viral load is of lower diagnostic value in this population

    Associations of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes with high-grade cervical neoplasia (CIN2+) in a cohort of women living with HIV in Burkina Faso and South Africa.

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVE: To describe associations of high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) with high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+) in women living with HIV (WLHIV) in Burkina Faso (BF) and South Africa (SA). METHODS: Prospective cohort of WLHIV attending HIV outpatient clinics and treatment centres. Recruitment was stratified by ART status. Cervical HPV genotyping using INNO-LiPA and histological assessment of 4-quadrant cervical biopsies at enrolment and 16 months later. RESULTS: Among women with CIN2+ at baseline, the prevalence of any HR-HPV genotypes included in the bi/quadrivalent (HPV16/18) or nonavalent (HPV16/18/31/35/45/52/58) HPV vaccines ranged from 37% to 90%. HPV58 was most strongly associated with CIN2+ (aOR = 5.40, 95%CI: 2.77-10.53). At 16-months follow-up, persistence of any HR-HPV was strongly associated with incident CIN2+ (aOR = 7.90, 95%CI: 3.11-20.07), as was persistence of HPV16/18 (aOR = 5.25, 95%CI: 2.14-12.91) and the additional HR types in the nonavalent vaccine (aOR = 3.23, 95%CI: 1.23-8.54). CONCLUSION: HR-HPV persistence is very common among African WLHIV and is linked to incident CIN2+. HPV vaccines could prevent between 37-90% of CIN2+ among African WLHIV

    Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) in African women living with HIV: role and effect of rigorous histopathological review by a panel of pathologists in the HARP study endpoint determination.

    No full text
    AIMS: To analyse the effect of the expert end-point committee (EPC) review on histological endpoint classification of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). METHODS: A cohort of women living with HIV were recruited in Burkina Faso (BF) and South Africa (SA) and followed over 18 months. Four-quadrant cervical biopsies were obtained in women with abnormalities detected by at least one screening test. A central review by a panel of five pathologists was organised at baseline and at endline. RESULTS: At baseline the prevalence of high-grade CIN (CIN2+) was 5.1% (28/554) in BF and 23.3% (134/574) in SA by local diagnosis, and 5.8% (32/554) in BF and 22.5% (129/574) in SA by the EPC. At endline the prevalence of CIN2+ was 2.3% (11/483) in BF and 9.4% (47/501) in SA by local diagnosis, and 1.4% (7/483) in BF and 10.2% (51/501) in SA by EPC. The prevalence of borderline CIN1/2 cases was 2.8% (32/1128) and 0.8% (8/984) at baseline and endline. Overall agreement between local diagnosis and final diagnosis for distinguishing CIN2+ from ≤CIN1 was 91.2% (κ=0.82) and 88.9% (κ=0.71) for BF at baseline and endline, and 92.7% (κ=0.79) and 98.7% (κ=0.97) for SA at baseline and endline. Among the CIN1/2 cases, 12 (37.5%) were graded up to CIN2 and 20 (62.5%) were graded down to CIN1 at baseline, and 3 (37.5%) were graded up to CIN2 and 5 (62.5%) were graded down to CIN1 at endline. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the importance of a centralised rigorous re-reading with exchange of experiences among pathologists from different settings
    corecore