Campos N.G.,Center for Health Decision Science |
Maza M.,Basic Health International |
Alfaro K.,Basic Health International |
Gage J.C.,U.S. National Cancer Institute |
And 6 more authors.
International Journal of Cancer | Year: 2015
Cervical cancer is the leading cause of cancer death among women in El Salvador. Utilizing data from the Cervical Cancer Prevention in El Salvador (CAPE) demonstration project, we assessed the health and economic impact of HPV-based screening and two different algorithms for the management of women who test HPV-positive, relative to existing Pap-based screening. We calibrated a mathematical model of cervical cancer to epidemiologic data from El Salvador and compared three screening algorithms for women aged 30-65 years: (i) HPV screening every 5 years followed by referral to colposcopy for HPV-positive women (Colposcopy Management [CM]); (ii) HPV screening every 5 years followed by treatment with cryotherapy for eligible HPV-positive women (Screen and Treat [ST]); and (iii) Pap screening every 2 years followed by referral to colposcopy for Pap-positive women (Pap). Potential harms and complications associated with overtreatment were not assessed. Under base case assumptions of 65% screening coverage, HPV-based screening was more effective than Pap, reducing cancer risk by ∼60% (Pap: 50%). ST was the least costly strategy, and cost $2,040 per year of life saved. ST remained the most attractive strategy as visit compliance, costs, coverage, and test performance were varied. We conclude that a screen-and-treat algorithm within an HPV-based screening program is very cost-effective in El Salvador, with a cost-effectiveness ratio below per capita GDP. What's new? While most high-income countries have reduced cervical cancer incidence through widespread Pap smear testing, Pap-based screening programs in low-resource settings have faced challenges achieving adequate population coverage, quality, and management of abnormal Pap results. Utilizing data from the Cervical Cancer Prevention in El Salvador (CAPE) demonstration project - a phased project implementing HPV DNA-based screening with the careHPV test - the authors assessed the cost-effectiveness of two algorithms for the management of women who test HPV-positive, relative to existing Pap-based screening. This is one of the earliest assessments of the cost-effectiveness of careHPV testing incorporating data from a real-world demonstration project. © 2015 UICC. Source
Stoler M.H.,University of Virginia |
Stoler M.H.,University of New Mexico |
Ronnett B.M.,Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions |
Joste N.E.,University of New Mexico |
And 15 more authors.
American Journal of Surgical Pathology | Year: 2015
Diagnostic interpretation of a cervical biopsy is a key element in the decision to treat or not to treat a woman with an abnormal screening test. This study assesses the variability of these diagnostic interpretations on a population basis using the New Mexico HPV Pap Registry database. An experienced panel of gynecologic pathologists reviewed a stratified random sample of 6272 biopsies, which was then extrapolated to the entire population of 21,297 biopsies read by the community pathologists. Diagnoses by the community and panel pathologists were compared, and paired diagnoses were correlated with positivity for human papillomavirus 16 (HPV16) and any high-risk HPV as objective measures of progressive potential. Panel agreement with the community diagnosis was 38.2% for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 (CIN1), 38.0% for CIN grade 2 (CIN2), 68.0% for CIN grade 3 (CIN3), and 70.6% for cancer. The κ value was 0.46 overall but higher for dichotomous categorization based on CIN2 or CIN3 cutoff points (0.68 and 0.67, respectively). On a population basis, there were fewer CIN1 and more negative diagnoses in the panel review but similar proportions of CIN2 and CIN3. HPV16 and high-risk HPV positivity increased with disease severity, but panel review did not improve the correlation of higher-grade disease with these objective measures. In this population-based study of the variability in cervical diagnoses, we noted significant variability in the community and panel diagnoses, especially for CIN2, the threshold for excisional treatment. New biomarkers are needed to more accurately stratify precursor lesions according to their malignant potential. Copyright © 2015 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. Source
Schiffman M.,U.S. National Cancer Institute |
Burk R.D.,Yeshiva University |
Boyle S.,Roche Molecular Systems |
Raine-Bennett T.,Kaiser Permanente |
And 10 more authors.
Journal of Clinical Microbiology | Year: 2015
The effective management of women with human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive, cytology-negative results is critical to the introduction of HPV testing into cervical screening. HPV typing has been recommended for colposcopy triage, but it is not clear which combinations of high-risk HPV types provide clinically useful information. This study included 18,810 women with Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2)-positive, cytology-negative results and who were age ≥30 years from Kaiser Permanente Northern California. The median follow-up was 475 days (interquartile range [IQR], 0 to 1,077 days; maximum, 2,217 days). The baseline specimens from 482 cases of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or cancer (CIN3+) and 3,517 random HC2-positive noncases were genotyped using 2 PCR-based methods. Using the case-control sampling fractions, the 3-year cumulative risks of CIN3+ were calculated for each individual high-risk HPV type. The 3-year cumulative risk of CIN3+ among all women with HC2-positive, cytology-negative results was 4.6%. HPV16 status conferred the greatest type-specific risk stratification; women with HC2-positive/HPV16-positive results had a 10.6% risk of CIN3+, while women with HC-2 positive/HPV16-negative results had a much lower risk of 2.4%. The next most informative HPV types and their risks in HPV-positive women were HPV33 (5.9%) and HPV18 (5.9%). With regard to the etiologic fraction, 20 of 71 cases of cervical adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) and adenocarcinoma in the cohort were positive for HPV18. HPV16 genotyping provides risk stratification useful for guiding clinical management; the risk among HPV16-positive women clearly exceeds the U.S. consensus risk threshold for immediate colposcopy referral. HPV18 is of particular interest because of its association with difficult-to-detect glandular lesions. There is a less clear clinical value of distinguishing the other high-risk HPV types. Copyright © 2015, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved. Source
Valdez M.,PATH |
Jeronimo J.,PATH |
Bansil P.,PATH |
Qiao Y.-L.,Peking Union Medical College |
And 12 more authors.
International Journal of Cancer | Year: 2016
This study examined the efficacy of the OncoE6™ Cervical Test, careHPV™ and visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) in identifying women at risk for cervical cancer and their capability to detect incident cervical precancer and cancer at 1-year follow-up. In a population of 7,543 women living in rural China, women provided a self-collected and two clinician-collected specimens and underwent VIA. All screen positive women for any of the tests, a ∼10% random sample of test-negative women that underwent colposcopy at baseline, and an additional ∼10% random sample of test-negative women who did not undergo colposcopy at baseline (n = 3,290) were recruited. 2,904 women were rescreened 1 year later using the same tests, colposcopic referral criteria, and procedures. Sensitivities of baseline tests to detect 1-year cumulative cervical intraepithelial neoplasia Grade 3 or cancer (CIN3+) were 96.5% and 81.6% for careHPV™ on clinician-collected and self-collected specimens, respectively, and 54.4% for OncoE6™ test. The OncoE6™ test was very specific (99.1%) and had the greatest positive predictive value (PPV; 47.7%) for CIN3+. Baseline and 1-year follow-up cervical specimens testing HPV DNA positive was sensitive (88.0%) but poorly predictive (5.5-6.0%) of incident CIN2+, whereas testing repeat HPV16, 18 and 45 E6 positive identified only 24.0% of incident CIN2+ but had a predictive value of 33.3%. This study highlights the different utility of HPV DNA and E6 tests, the former as a screening and the latter as a diagnostic test, for detection of cervical precancer and cancer. What's new? Low-cost technologies for the detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) types are of particular interest for use in cervical cancer screening in developing countries. Promising technologies include those that are capable of detecting the HPV E6 oncoprotein or hrHPV DNA. This evaluation of women in rural China shows that tests for E6 and HPV DNA differ in their detection performance yet are complementary in cervical cancer assessment. HPV DNA detection showed superior screening performance, because of its high sensitivity and negative predictive value. HPV E6 detection performed better in diagnosis, because of its specificity and positive predictive value. © 2015 UICC. Source
Wentzensen N.,U.S. National Institutes of Health |
Fetterman B.,Kaiser Permanente |
Tokugawa D.,Kaiser Permanente |
Schiffman M.,U.S. National Institutes of Health |
And 6 more authors.
Cancer Cytopathology | Year: 2014
BACKGROUND Dual-stain cytology for p16 and Ki-67 has been proposed as a biomarker in cervical cancer screening. The authors evaluated the reproducibility and accuracy of dual-stain cytology among 10 newly trained evaluators. METHODS In total, 480 p16/Ki-67-stained slides from human papillomavirus-positive women were evaluated in masked fashion by 10 evaluators. None of the evaluators had previous experience with p16 or p16/Ki-67 cytology. All participants underwent p16/Ki-67 training and subsequent proficiency testing. Reproducibility of dual-stain cytology was measured using the percentage agreement, individual and aggregate κ values, as well as McNemar statistics. Clinical performance for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or greater (CIN2+) was evaluated for each individual evaluator and for all evaluators combined compared with the reference evaluation by a cytotechnologist who had extensive experience with dual-stain cytology. RESULTS The percentage agreement of individual evaluators with the reference evaluation ranged from 83% to 91%, and the κ values ranged from 0.65 to 0.81. The combined κ value was 0.71 for all evaluators and 0.73 for cytotechnologists. The average sensitivity and specificity for the detection of CIN2+ among novice evaluators was 82% and 64%, respectively; whereas the reference evaluation had 84% sensitivity and 63% specificity, respectively. Agreement on dual-stain positivity increased with greater numbers of p16/Ki-67-positive cells on the slides. CONCLUSIONS Good to excellent reproducibility of p16/Ki-67 dual-stain cytology was observed with almost identical clinical performance of novice evaluators compared with reference evaluations. The current findings suggest that p16/Ki-67 dual-stain evaluation can be implemented in routine cytology practice with limited training. © 2014 American Cancer Society. Source