Hybrid capture 2 viral load and the 2-year cumulative risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or cancer

2004 ◽  
Vol 191 (5) ◽  
pp. 1590-1597 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip E. Castle ◽  
Mark Schiffman ◽  
Cosette M. Wheeler ◽  
for the ALTS Group
Keyword(s):  
Viral Load ◽  
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia ◽  
Cumulative Risk ◽  
Intraepithelial Neoplasia ◽  
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade ◽  
Hybrid Capture ◽  
Hybrid Capture 2 ◽  
Grade 3

scholarly journals HPV Testing With 16, 18, and 45 Genotyping Stratifies Cancer Risk for Women With Normal Cytology

2019 ◽  
Vol 151 (4) ◽  
pp. 433-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark H Stoler ◽  
Thomas C Wright ◽  
Valentin Parvu ◽  
Karen Yanson ◽  
Karen Eckert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia ◽  
Intraepithelial Neoplasia ◽  
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade ◽  
Normal Cytology ◽  
Hpv 16 ◽  
Hybrid Capture ◽  
Assay Performance ◽  
Hybrid Capture 2 ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Intraepithelial Lesions

ABSTRACT Objectives To determine the BD Onclarity human papillomavirus (HPV) assay performance and risk values for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) or higher and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN3) or higher during Papanicolaou/HPV cotesting in a negative for intraepithelial lesions or malignancies (NILM) population. Methods In total, 22,383 of the 33,858 enrolled women were 30 years or older with NILM cytology. HPV+ and a subset of HPV– patients (3,219/33,858 combined; 9.5%) were referred to colposcopy/biopsy. Results Overall, 7.9% of women were Onclarity positive; HPV 16 had the highest prevalence (1.5%). Verification bias-adjusted (VBA) CIN2 or higher and CIN3 or higher prevalences were 0.9% and 0.3%, respectively. Onclarity had VBA CIN2 or higher (44.1%) and CIN3 or higher (69.5%) sensitivities, as well as CIN2 or higher (92.4%) and CIN3 or higher (92.3%) specificities—all similar to Hybrid Capture 2. HPV 16, 18, 45, and the other 11 genotypes had CIN3 or higher risks of 6.9%, 2.6%, 1.1%, and 2.2%, respectively. Conclusions Onclarity is clinically validated for cotesting in NILM women. Genotyping actionably stratifies women at greater CIN3 or higher risk.

Hybrid capture 2 and cobas® 4800: Comparison of performance of two clinically validated tests for human papillomavirus primary screening of cervical cancer

2021 ◽  
pp. 096914132199282
Author(s):  
A Mongia ◽  
G Pompeo ◽  
C Sani ◽  
E Burroni ◽  
G Fantacci ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Human Papillomavirus ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Positive Predictive Value ◽  
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Screening Program ◽  
Intraepithelial Neoplasia ◽  
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade ◽  
Hybrid Capture ◽  
Hybrid Capture 2

Objective To compare, in a primary human papillomavirus screening setting, two different validated human papillomavirus tests, considering their analytical and clinical screening performances. Methods In Tuscany, a human papillomavirus screening program was implemented in 2013. Hybrid capture 2 (Qiagen) was used for testing until May 2016, when it was replaced by the cobas® 4800 human papillomavirus test (Cobas; Roche). We evaluated the performance of Hybrid capture 2 and Cobas on: the same screening population in two different periods (before and after changing to Cobas); the same Hybrid capture 2-positive consecutive samples. Discordant samples (Hybrid capture 2-positive/Cobas negative) were typed on the L1 gene (reverse line blot, AB Analitica) and E6/E7 genes (BD Onclarity assay). Results In the considered time period ( n = 37,775), human papillomavirus positivity was 9.8% and 7.4%, respectively, for Hybrid capture 2 and Cobas ( p < 0.0001). At immediate colposcopy, the cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, grade 2 positive predictive value was, respectively, 23.8% and 34% ( p < 0.001). At one-year recall, human papillomavirus persistence was, respectively, 40.6% and 62.2% ( p < 0.0001). Of Hybrid capture 2-positive re-tested samples ( n = 620), 32.4% were Cobas negative. Of discordant samples typed on L1, 7% were positive for the 12 high-risk human papillomavirus. Of the samples found to be negative for the 12 high-risk human papillomavirus types on L1, 14.5% were positive on E6/E7 typing. Among the discordant samples, the only two cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 3 lesions were non-high-risk human papillomavirus positive on both L1 and E6/E7 typing. Conclusion At baseline, Hybrid capture 2 showed greater human papillomavirus positivity and a lower CIN2+ positive predictive value than Cobas, which was more specific than Hybrid capture 2 in detection of high-risk human papillomavirus: 80% of discordant samples were confirmed as high-risk human papillomavirus negative. This higher analytical specificity determined the non-identification of two CIN3 lesions.

scholarly journals Methylation of HPV18, HPV31, and HPV45 Genomes and Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade 3

2012 ◽  
Vol 104 (22) ◽  
pp. 1738-1749 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas Wentzensen ◽  
Chang Sun ◽  
Arpita Ghosh ◽  
Walter Kinney ◽  
Lisa Mirabello ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia ◽  
Intraepithelial Neoplasia ◽  
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade ◽  
Grade 3

scholarly journals Long-Lasting Increased Risk of Human Papillomavirus–Related Carcinomas and Premalignancies After Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade 3: A Population-Based Cohort Study

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (22) ◽  
pp. 2542-2550 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renée M.F. Ebisch ◽  
Dominiek W.E. Rutten ◽  
Joanna IntHout ◽  
Willem J.G. Melchers ◽  
Leon F.A.G. Massuger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Human Papillomavirus ◽  
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia ◽  
Incidence Rate ◽  
Intraepithelial Neoplasia ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
History Of ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Rate Ratios

Purpose The aim of this study was to determine the risk of human papillomavirus (HPV)–related carcinomas and premalignancies in women diagnosed with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN3). Knowledge of this risk is important to preventing the development and progression of other HPV-related premalignancies and carcinomas, by considering prophylactic HPV vaccination and/or by paying increased attention to other HPV-related carcinomas and premalignancies when CIN3 is identified. Methods Women diagnosed with a CIN3 between 1990 and 2010 were identified from the Dutch nationwide registry of histopathology and cytopathology (PALGA) and matched with a control group of women without CIN3. Subsequently, all cases of high-risk (hr) HPV–associated high-grade lesions and carcinomas in the anogenital region and oropharynx between 1990 and 2015 were extracted. Incidence rate ratios were estimated for carcinomas and premalignancies of the vulva, vagina, anus, and oropharynx. Results A total of 178,036 women were identified: 89,018 with a previous diagnosis of CIN3 and 89,018 matched control subjects without a history of CIN3. Women with a history of CIN3 showed increased risk of HPV-related carcinomas and premalignancies, with incidence rate ratios of 3.85 (95% CI, 2.32 to 6.37) for anal cancer, 6.68 (95% CI, 3.64 to 12.25) for anal intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3, 4.97 (95% CI, 3.26 to 7.57) for vulvar cancer, 13.66 (93% CI, 9.69 to 19.25) for vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3, 86.08 (95% CI, 11.98 to 618.08) for vaginal cancer, 25.65 (95% CI, 10.50 to 62.69) for vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3, and 5.51 (95% CI, 1.22 to 24.84) for oropharyngeal cancer. This risk remained significantly increased, even after long-term follow-up of up to 20 years. Conclusion This population-based study shows a long-lasting increased risk for HPV-related carcinomas and premalignancies of the anogenital and oropharyngeal region after a CIN3 diagnosis. Studies that investigate methods to prevent this increased risk in this group of patients, such as intensified screening or vaccination, are warranted.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document