Objective: To determine whether high-risk types of human papilloma virus (hrHPV) DNA testing is reliable for selection patients in need of further investigation with colposcopy in women with increased risk of high-grade cervical lesions as a result of false negative cytology. The secondary objective was to compare the sensitivity of hrHPV testing on self-collected versus physician-collected samples for the detection of histological high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+). Methods: Sixty-three patients identified with a missed abnormality following the re-evaluation of benign cervical cytology were included. A patient-collected and a physician-collected sample for HPV, colposcopy and cervical specimen collection for histology and cytology were performed. Results: The sensitivity of hrHPV testing of physician-collected samples for CIN2+ was 100% (95% CI 82.7–100), and the negative predictive value (NPV) was 100% (95% CI 93.3–100). The sensitivity of the self-sampling device to identify CIN2+ was 84.6% (95% CI 59.1–96.7), and the NPV was 94.4% (95% CI 83.4–98.8). The differences in the sensitivity and NPV between the 2 methods were non-significant. The agreement between the 2 methods regarding the HPV results was good, with a kappa value of 0.74 (95% CI 0.57–0.91). Conclusion: The current findings indicate that physician-collected samples for hrHPV DNA testing may be used as triage for the colposcopy of women with false negative cytology.

Keywords:
Cervical screening, Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, False negative cytology, Triage for colposcopy, Human papilloma virus, High-risk types of human papilloma virus DNA testing , Physician-collected sample, Self-collected sample
1.
Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, et al: GLOBOCAN 2012 v 1.0, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 11. http://globocan.iarc.fr/Pages/fact_sheets_cancer.aspx. Lyon, International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2013 (accessed January 18, 2017).
2.
Arbyn M, Castellsagué X, de Sanjosé S, Bruni L, Saraiya M, Bray F, et al: Worldwide burden of cervical cancer in 2008. Ann Oncol 2011; 22: 2675–2686.
3.
Andrae B, Kemetli L, Sparén P, Silfverdal L, Strander B, Ryd W, et al: Screening-preventable cervical cancer risks: evidence from a nationwide audit in Sweden. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008; 100: 622–629.
4.
Silfverdal L: Cervical cancer prevention. Studies on outcome of cervical cancer screening and on managment of abnormal cytology findings (disseration). Umeå, Umeå University, 2011.
5.
Bosch FX, Lorincz A, Muñoz N, Meijer CJ, Shah KV: The causal relation between human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. J Clin Pathol 2002; 55: 244–265.
6.
Koshiol J, Lindsay L, Pimenta JM, Poole C, Jenkins D, Smith JS: Persistent human papillomavirus infection and cervical neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Epidemiol 2008; 168: 123–137.
7.
Meijer CJ, Berkhof J, Castle PE, Hesselink AT, Franco EL, Ronco G, et al: Guidelines for ­human papillomavirus DNA test requirements for primary cervical cancer screening in women 30 years and older. Int J Cancer 2009; 124: 516–520.
8.
Ronco G, Dillner J, Elfström KM, Tunesi S, Snijders PJ, Arbyn M, et al: Efficacy of HPV-based screening for prevention of invasive cervical cancer: follow-up of four European randomised controlled trials. Lancet 2014; 383: 524–532.
9.
Petignat P, Faltin DL, Bruchim I, Tramèr MR, Franco EL, Coutlée F: Are self-collected samples comparable to physician-collected cervical specimens for human papillomavirus DNA testing? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol 2007; 105: 530–535.
10.
Stenvall H, Wikström I, Backlund I, Wilander E: Accuracy of HPV testing of vaginal smear obtained with a novel self-sampling device. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2007; 86: 16–21.
11.
Socialstyrelsen. Sos-rapport: Gynekologisk cellprovskontroll – Förslag till screeningprogram. (The National Board of Health and Welfare. Report: Cytological Screening for Cervical Cancer – Screening Programme Suggestion) (In Swedish). The National Board of Health and Welfare, Article number 1998–3–15.
12.
Andrae B, Dillner J, Elfgren K, Ryd V, Sparén P: Gynekologisk cellprovskontroll i Sverige. Nationellt kvalitetsregister för gynekologisk cellprovskontroll. Verksamhetsberättelse och Årsrapport 2011. (Swedish National Cervical Screening Registry. Systematic national audit and annual report 2011.) Stockholm, Karolinska Univeristy Hospital, 2011.
13.
Sparén P, Lashkariani M, Almstedt P, Eck Å, Wallgard E, Strander B: Gynekologisk cellprovskontroll i Sverige. Nationellt kvalitets- register för gynekologisk cellprovskontroll. Verksamhetsberättelse och Årsrapport 2013. (Swedish National Cervical Screening Registry. Systematic national audit and annual report 2013.) Stockholm, Karolinska Univeristy Hospital, 2013.
14.
Sanner K, Wikström I, Strand A, Lindell M, Wilander E: Self-sampling of the vaginal fluid at home combined with high-risk HPV testing. Br J Cancer 2009; 101: 871–874.
15.
Wikström I, Lindell M, Sanner K, Wilander E: Self-sampling and HPV testing or ordinary Pap-smear in women not regularly attending screening: a randomised study. Br J Cancer 2011; 105: 337–339.
16.
Qvintip. Healthcare professionals. http://www.aprovix.com/en/healthcare-professionals (accessed January 18, 2017).
17.
DasGupta A, Cai TT, Brown LD: Interval estimation for a binomial proportion. Statist Sci 2001; 16: 101–133.
18.
GraphPad Software: Quick Calcs. http://www.graphpad.com/quickcalcs/Kappa2.cfm (accessed August 7, 2016).
19.
Thrall MJ, Russell DK, Facik MS, Yao JL, Warner JN, Bonfiglio TA, et al: High-risk HPV testing in women 30 years or older with negative Papanicolaou tests: initial clinical experience with 18-month follow-up. Am J Clin Pathol 2010; 133: 894–898.
20.
Cormier K, Schaaf M, Hamilton S, Tickman RJ, Perez-Reyes N, Sturgis CD: NILM Pap slides from women 30 years of age and older with positive high-risk HPV DNA. Focused rescreening prior to report issuance, an enhanced quality control measure. Am J Clin Pathol 2014; 141: 494–500.
21.
Sherman ME, Schiffman M, Cox JT; Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance/Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion Triage Study Group: Effects of age and human papilloma viral load on colposcopy triage: data from the randomized Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance/Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion Triage Study (ALTS). J Natl Cancer Inst 2002; 94: 102–107.
22.
Arbyn M, Sasieni P, Meijer CJ, Clavel C, Koliopoulos G, Dillner J: Chapter 9: Clinical applications of HPV testing: a summary of meta-analyses. Vaccine 2006; 24(suppl 3):S78–S89.
23.
Arbyn M, Martin-Hirsch P, Wentzensen N: Human papillomavirus-based triage of women showing a cervical cytology result of borderline or mild dyskaryosis. BJOG 2010; 117: 641–644.
24.
Jentschke M, Chen K, Arbyn M, Hertel B, Noskowicz M, Soergel P, et al: Direct comparison of two vaginal self-sampling devices for the detection of human papillomavirus infections. J Clin Virol 2016; 82: 46–50.
25.
Snijders PJ, Verhoef VM, Arbyn M, Ogilvie G, Minozzi S, Banzi R, et al: High-risk HPV testing on self-sampled versus clinician-collected specimens: a review on the clinical accuracy and impact on population attendance in cervical cancer screening. Int J Cancer 2013; 132: 2223–2236.
26.
Arbyn M, Verdoodt F, Snijders PJ, Verhoef VM, Suonio E, Dillner L, et al: Accuracy of human papillomavirus testing on self-collected versus clinician-collected samples: a meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol 2014; 15: 172–183.
27.
Belinson JL, Hu S, Niyazi M, Pretorius RG, Wang H, Wen C, et al: Prevalence of type-specific human papillomavirus in endocervical, upper and lower vaginal, perineal and vaginal self-collected specimens: implications for vaginal self-collection. Int J Cancer 2010; 127: 1151–1157.
© 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel
2018
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.