Objectives: This work is aimed to summarize the first year of the high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) screening test and compare it to the cytology screening test, regarding positivity rates and premalignant lesions diagnosed in the Israeli population. A specific consideration is for the age group 25–30 that is not considered mandatory for the HPV primary screening testing. Methods: A retrospective study was performed in women who were screened for prevention of cervical cancer in Maccabi HealthCare HMO from March 2017 to March 2019. Screening methods included hrHPV typing for types 16, 18, and the other 12 hrHPV types and the PAP LBC test. Results: A total of 115,807 cervical samples were tested for HPV presence and 91% (105,225) were found negative for hrHPV. The other 9% (10,582) were positive for one or more of the 14 hrHPV types tested, and 37% (3,916) of them showed abnormal PAP LBC results. In the age group of 25–30, 3,104 (17.5%) women were found positive for hr-HPV (825 had hrHPV types 16 and/or 18), of which 42% (1,293) of them showed abnormal PAP LBC results. During the hrHPV versus PAP LBC screening era, 258 more women were diagnosed with precancerous cervical lesions (CIN2/3), 70% increased detection versus cytology screening. Conclusions: The hrHPV screening test is currently the best method for the detection of precancerous cervical lesions and cervical cancer, and it is better started at age 25.

Keywords:
Precancerous lesions test, Human papillomavirus, Primary screening, Cervical cancer screening
© 2021 S. Karger AG, Basel
2021
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.