Objectives: Robust evidence now supports human papillomavirus (HPV) testing as a more effective option to screening and as more sensitive than cytology in detecting high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia . Our goal was to analyze the performance of the Hybrid Capture II (HC2) assay for high-risk HPV (hrHPV) in women undergoing gynecological examination at a public health hospital as part of the evaluation of HPV screening as an alternative or complement to cytology. Study Design: This analysis is a subset of a cross-sectional study carried out at a large public hospital serving a predominantly low-resource population. A total of 705 women were enrolled; the sensitivity and specificity of each test were estimated and compared. Results: The analysis identified 272 hrHPV-positive women (mean age 36.3 years) and 433 hrHPV-negative women (mean age 41.2 years). HPV testing showed a significantly increased sensitivity of the HC2 assay versus cytology (84.5 vs. 69.7%; p < 0.0001) but a lower specificity (49.90 vs. 88.78%; p < 0.0001). Conclusion: The combination of both methods seems to be useful in improving detection of cervical lesions.

Keywords:
Cytology, Pap test, Human papillomavirus testing, Primary screening
1.
Parkin DM, Whelan SL, Ferlay J, Raymind L, Young J (eds): Cancer Incidence in Five Continents, vol VII. Lyon, IARC Scientific Publications No. 143, 1997.
2.
Castle PE, Rodrígues AC, Burk RD, Herrero R, Hildesheim A, et al: Neither one-time negative screening tests or negative colposcopy provides absolute reassurance against cervical cancer. Int J Cancer 2009;125:1649–1656.
3.
Cuzick J, Arbyn M, Sankaranarayanan R, et al: Overview of human papillomavirus-based and other novel options for cervical cancer screening in developed and developing countries. Vaccine 2008;26S:K29–K41.
4.
Bulkmans NWJ, Berkhof J, Rozendal L, et al: Human papillomavirus DNA testing for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 and cancer: 5-year follow-up of a randomized controlled implementation trial. Lancet 2007;370:1764–1772.
5.
Meijer C, Berkhof J, Castle PE, et al: Guidelines for human papillomavirus DNA test requirement for primary cervical cancer screening in women 30 years old and older. Int J Cancer 2009;124:516–520.
6.
Ronco G, Rossi PG, Carozzi F, et al: Results at recruitment from a randomized controlled trial comparing human papillomavirus testing alone with conventional cytology as the primary cervical cancer screening test. JNCI 2008;100:492–501.
7.
Alameda F, Bellosillo B, Lloveras B, Pairet S, Musset M, Pijuan L, Mariñoso L, Mancebo G, Larrazabal F, Carreras R, Serrano S: PCR study of a series of ASCUS cases HPV-positive by HCII. Diagn Cytopathol 2011, E-pub ahead of print.
8.
Dillner J, Reboli M, Birembaut P, et al: Long-term predictive values of cytology and human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screening: joint European cohort study. BMJ 2008;377:a1754.
9.
Sansieni P, Castanon A, Cuzick J, Snow J: Effectiveness of cervical screening with age: population-based case-control study of prospectively recorded data. BMJ 2009;339:b2968.
10.
Katki HA, Kinney WK, Fetterman B, Lorey T, Poitras NE, Cheung L, Demuth F, Schiffman M, Wacholder S, Castle PE: Cervical cancer risk for women undergoing concurrent testing for human papillomavirus and cervical cytology: a population-based study in routine clinical practice. Lancet Oncol 2011;12:663–672.
11.
Cuzick J, Mayrand MH, Rong G, Snijders P, Wardle J: Chapter 10: new dimensions in cervical cancer screening. Vaccine 2006;24s:3/90–s3/97.
12.
Ogilvie GS, Patrick DM, Schulzer M, et al: Diagnostic accuracy of self-collected vaginal specimens for human papillomavirus compared to clinician-collected human papillomavirus specimens: meta-analysis. Sex Transm Infect 2005;81:207–212.
13.
Arbyn M, Sankaranarayanan R, Muwonge R, Keita N, Dolo A, Mbalawa, et al: Analysis of the accuracy of five cervical cancer screening tests assessed in eleven studies in Africa and India. Int J Cancer 2008;123:153–160.
14.
Goldhaber-Filbert J, Goldie S: Estimating the cost of cervical cancer screening in five developing countries. Cost Eff Resour Alloc 2006;4:13.
15.
Schiffman M, Wentzensen N, Wacholder S, Kinney W, Gage JC, Castle PE: Human papillomavirus testing in the prevention of cervical cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011;103:368–383.
© 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel
2012
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.