HPV testing on self collected cervicovaginal lavage specimens as screening method for women who do not attend cervical screening: cohort study

Objective To determine whether offering self sampling of cervicovaginal material for high risk human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is an effective screening method for women who do not attend regular cervical screening programmes

Flat penile lesions: the infectious "invisible" link in the transmission of human papillomavirus

Although it has been widely accepted that high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) is sexually transmitted, limited insight is available about the clinical manifestations of hrHPV infection in men and their contribution in the viral spread. Here, we reviewed the literature on the relationship between hrHPV and the presence of penile lesions. Flat penile lesions have similar predilection sites as HPV, often contain hrHPV as identified by DNA in situ hybridization in biopsy specimens, show a high association with hrHPV as identified by PCR in penile scrapes of lesional sites and are associated with high viral copy numbers. Absence of flat lesions is generally associated with very low HPV copy numbers or absence of HPV. Therefore, we argue that these lesions form the reservoir of hrHPV in men and contribute to the viral spread. Their bare visibility with the naked eye and their high degree of spontaneous healing explain why flat penile lesions have slipped the attention of the clinician. Combining an HPV DNA test with a visual inspection after acetic acid application offers a more reliable interpretation of a positive HPV test in men, as it helps to distinguish positivity that is very likely to reflect a productive HPV infection from potentially HPV infections with very low copy numbers or HPV contamination by the sex partner. Future trials of HPV vaccines in men should take into account not only the presence of penile HPV but also the presence of flat penile lesions as an outcome measure for the efficacy of a vaccine

Prevalence of types 16 and 33 is increased in high-risk human papillomavirus positive women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse

High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) types are causally related to cervical cancer and its high-grade precursor lesions. The risk posed by the different hrHPV types for the development of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (> or =CIN2) needs to be established. Here, we present the hrHPV type-distribution in relation to cytology and histology for women participating in a cervical screening program. From 44,102 women who participated in a population-based cervical screening program in the Netherlands, 2,154 hrHPV GP5+/6+ PCR positive women were recruited to determine the distribution of 14 hrHPV types by reverse line blotting of GP5+/6+ PCR products. For each HPV type, associations with cytology and histologically confirmed > or =CIN2 were measured by odds ratios. HPV types 16 and 33 were more prevalent in women, amongst those containing a single hrHPV type, with moderate dyskaryosis or worse (>BMD) than in women with normal cytology, but only in case of underlying > or =CIN2 (OR 4.10, 95%CI 2.98-5.64 and OR 2.68, 95%CI 1.39-5.15, respectively). Similar results were obtained for women with double infections (OR 3.29, 95% CI 1.61-6.75 and OR 4.37, 95% CI 1.17-16.34). Coexisting types did not influence the prevalence of > or =CIN2 in HPV 16 or 33 positive women. The increased prevalence of type 16 and 33 in hrHPV positive women with > or =CIN2, compared to women with normal cytology, suggests that infection with these types confers an increased risk for development of > or =CIN2. Distinguishing these types may therefore have implications for future cervical screening strategies

Human papillomavirus type-specific 18-month risk of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in women with a normal or borderline/mildly dyskaryotic smear.

INTRODUCTION: High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) DNA testing is an increasingly used instrument in cervical cancer prevention along cervical cytology. The inclusion of hrHPV testing in cervical screening requires efficient management as many hrHPV infections are transient. We investigated the potential value of hrHPV genotyping in normal and borderline/mildly dyskaryotic (BMD) smears. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From a screening population of 44,102 women in the Netherlands, we included hrHPV-positive women with a normal or BMD smear. We assessed the type-specific 18-month risk of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). RESULTS: In hrHPV-positive women, 18-month risk of CIN grade 3 or invasive cancer (> or =CIN3) was 6% [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 4-9] after normal cytology and 20% (95% CI, 16-25) after BMD. If positive for HPV16, > or =CIN3 risks were 14% (95% CI, 9-21) and 37% (95% CI, 28-48), respectively. In the subset of hrHPV-positive women without HPV16, HPV18 was associated with an increased risk of high-grade CIN after normal cytology and HPV31 and HPV33 were associated with an increased risk, particularly after BMD. HPV16 and HPV18 were also associated with an increased risk of high-grade CIN in women with an hrHPV-positive normal baseline smear and a repeat normal smear at 6 months. DISCUSSION: HrHPV-positive women without type 16, 18, 31, or 33 had a relatively low risk of high-grade CIN. Among women with baseline normal cytology and among women with a baseline and repeat normal smear, HPV16/18-positive women showed an increased risk of high-grade CIN. This warrants more aggressive management of HPV16/18-positive women compared with other hrHPV-positive women

Determination of viral load thresholds in cervical scrapings to rule out CIN 3 in HPV 16, 18, 31 and 33-positive women with normal cytology

An increased high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) viral load in cervical scrapings has been proposed as a determinant for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and cervical cancer (> or =CIN 2), but data so far for HPV types different from HPV 16 are limited and inconsistent. In addition, a viral load threshold to distinguish hrHPV positive women without > or =CIN 2 still has not been defined. Here, we used baseline cervical scrapings of women with normal cytology participating in a large population-based cervical screening trial (i.e. POBASCAM) who were GP5+/6+-PCR positive for 4 common hrHPV types, i.e. HPV 16, 18, 31 or 33, as a reference to arbitrarily define various viral load thresholds (i.e. 25th, 33rd, 50th, 67th and 75th percentiles of the lowest viral load values) for distinguishing women having single infections with these types without high-grade CIN. Viral load assessment was performed by real time type-specific PCR. The viral load threshold values were subsequently validated on abnormal cervical scrapes of 162 women with underlying, histologically confirmed CIN lesions containing 1 of these 4 hrHPV types. All 59 women with CIN 3 had viral load levels that were higher than those of 33% of the women with normal cytology containing the respective hrHPV type detectable by GP5+/6+-PCR (i.e. higher than the 33rd percentile of viral load). By using this 33rd percentile viral load cut-off, sensitivity for CIN 3 of 100% (95% CI 93.9-100) was obtained. Hence, application of this viral load threshold would increase the specificity of HPV testing for HPV 16, 18, 31 and 33-associated prevalent CIN 3 without the cost of a marked reduction in sensitivity. In practice, on the basis of viral load analysis, a less aggressive management can be foreseen for 33% of the women with normal cytology participating in a population-based screening program who are GP5+/6+-PCR positive for HPV 16, 18, 31 or 33

Addition of high-risk HPV testing improves the current guidelines on follow-up after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

We assessed a possible role for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in the policy after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 or 3 (moderate to severe dysplasia). According to the Dutch guidelines follow-up after treatment consists of cervical cytology at 6, 12 and 24 months. Colposcopy is only performed in case of abnormal cervical cytology. In this observational study 184 women treated for CIN 2 or 3 were prospectively monitored by cervical cytology and high-risk HPV testing 3, 6, 9, 12 and 24 months after treatment. Post-treatment CIN 2/3 was present in 29 women (15.8%). A positive high-risk HPV test 6 months after treatment was more predictive for post-treatment CIN 2/3 than abnormal cervical cytology (sensitivity 90% and 62% respectively, with similar specificity). At 6 months the negative predictive value of a high-risk HPV negative, normal smear, was 99%. Largely overlapping, partly different groups of women with post-treatment CIN 2/3 were identified by HPV testing and cervical cytology. Based on these results we advocate to include high-risk HPV testing in monitoring women initially treated for CIN 2/3. In case of a high-risk HPV positive test or abnormal cervical cytology, colposcopy is indicated. All women should be tested at 6 and 24 months after treatment and only referred to the population-based cervical cance

Success predictors of adjuvant chemotherapy in node-negative breast cancer patients under 55 years

Abstract. Background: Adjuvant systemic chemotherapy (ASCT) in lymph node-negative breast (LN−) cancers improves survival. The majority of (LN−) patients receive ASCT when the St. Gallen criteria or its modifications are used, as accurate identifiers which patients benefit from ASCT are lacking. This may imply over-treatment in many patients. Aim: To evaluate which patients or primary tumor factors predict ASCT success. Material and method: Retrospective analysis by single and multivariate survival analysis of clinical and tumor characteristics in (LN−) breast cancers <55 years, related to ASCT (n = 125) or-not (n = 516). Results: The two patient groups did not differ in age, tumor diameter, grade, type, number of mitoses and other factors. Fourteen-year survival for the ASCT and non-ASCT patients was 83% and 74% (Hazard Ratio = HR = 0.33; p < 0.0001, 9% absolute = 12% relative difference). Subgroup analysis showed that the recurrence-free survival = RFS of ASCT treated vs. non-treated patients differed in patients with grade 1 cancers (p = 0.008), grade 2 cancers (p = 0.004), grades 3 (p = 0.02), tumors under and 2 cm (p = 0.001 and 0.0002), oestrogen receptor-positive or -negative tumors (p = 0.003, 0.04), MAI < 10 and 10 (p = 0.005, 0.003) and fibrotic focus absent (p = 0.002). With multivariate analysis the most important predictor of ASCT effect was the MAI. In patients with slowly proliferating tumors (MAI < 3) no advantage was found between patients treated-or-not with adjuvant chemotherapy (RFS = 92% and 91%, p = 0.13, p = 0.63 for overall survival), contrasting those with MAI 3 (p = 0.0001; HR = 0.32, 95% CI 0.18-0.58). Conclusion: MAI is the strongest predictor of adjuvant systemic chemotherapy success. In patients with MAI < 3 (31% of all patients), ASCT does not improve survival

Success Predictors of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Node-Negative Breast Cancer Patients Under 55 years1

Background: Adjuvant systemic chemotherapy (ASCT) in lymph node-negative breast (LN−) cancers improves survival. The majority of (LN−) patients receive ASCT when the St. Gallen criteria or its modifications are used, as accurate identifiers which patients benefit from ASCT are lacking. This may imply over-treatment in many patients. Aim: To evaluate which patients or primary tumor factors predict ASCT success. Material and method: Retrospective analysis by single and multivariate survival analysis of clinical and tumor characteristics in (LN−) breast cancers <55 years, related to ASCT (n = 125) or-not (n = 516). Results: The two patient groups did not differ in age, tumor diameter, grade, type, number of mitoses and other factors. Fourteen-year survival for the ASCT and non-ASCT patients was 83% and 74% (Hazard Ratio = HR = 0.33; p < 0.0001, 9% absolute = 12% relative difference). Subgroup analysis showed that the recurrence-free survival = RFS of ASCT treated vs. non-treated patients differed in patients with grade 1 cancers (p = 0.008), grade 2 cancers (p = 0.004), grades 3 (p = 0.02), tumors under and ≧2 cm (p = 0.001 and 0.0002), oestrogen receptor-positive or -negative tumors (p = 0.003, 0.04), MAI < 10 and ≧10 (p = 0.005, 0.003) and fibrotic focus absent (p = 0.002). With multivariate analysis the most important predictor of ASCT effect was the MAI. In patients with slowly proliferating tumors (MAI < 3) no advantage was found between patients treated-or-not with adjuvant chemotherapy (RFS = 92% and 91%, p = 0.13, p = 0.63 for overall survival), contrasting those with MAI ≧ 3 (p = 0.0001; HR = 0.32, 95% CI 0.18–0.58). Conclusion: MAI is the strongest predictor of adjuvant systemic chemotherapy success. In patients with MAI < 3 (31% of all patients), ASCT does not improve survival