Search

While HC2 and GP5+/6+ PCR‐EIA were pivotal in test validation of new HPV assays, they represent the first generation of comparator tests based upon technologies that are not in widespread use anymore. In the current guideline, criteria for second‐generation comparator tests are presented that include more detailed resolution of HPV genotypes. Second‐generation comparator tests should preferentially target only the 12 genotypes classified as carcinogenic (IARC‐group I), and show consistent non‐inferior sensitivity for CIN2+ and CIN3+ and specificity for ≤CIN1 compared to one of the first‐generations comparators, in at least three validation studies using benchmarks of 0.95 for relative sensitivity and 0.98 for relative specificity. Validation should take into account used storage media and other sample handling procedures. Meta‐analyses were conducted to identify the assays that fulfill these stringent criteria. Four tests fulfilled the new criteria: (1) RealTime High‐Risk HPV Test (Abbott), (2) Cobas‐4800 HPV test (Roche Molecular System), (3) Onclarity HPV Assay (BD Diagnostics), and (4) Anyplex II HPV HR Detection (Seegene), each evaluated in three to six studies. Whereas the four assays target 14 carcinogenic genotypes, the first two identify separately HPV16 and 18, the third assay identifies five types separately and the fourth identifies all the types separately. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

More evidence from population-based cohort studies is required to confirm the application of methylation-based biomarkers in real-world settings. The cross-sectional and 24-month cumulative triage performance of a novel methylation assay targeting the host gene EPB41LE and HPV16/18 DNA L1/L2 regions among hrHPV-positive women was evaluated based on a population-based cohort study from China. Overall methylation positivity was 12.4% among hrHPV-positive women. Methylation-positive women had significantly higher risks of hrHPV persistence at 12M and 24M follow-up (RR12M = 1.9, 95%CI: 1.5–2.6 and RR24M = 1.7, 95%CI: 1.2–2.5). For CIN2+, cross-sectional triage sensitivity of methylation was similar to HPV16/18 (70.6% vs. 64.7%, pexact = 1.000), but was lower than cytology (94.1%), although not significantly (pexact = 0.213). The specificity (91.2%) of methylation was significantly higher than other triage methods (p < 0.001 for all). The longitudinal sensitivity of methylation over 24M follow-up was 56.0%, lower (but not significantly so) than HPV16/18 (64.0%, pexact = 0.688) and cytology (76.0%, pexact = 0.125). Methylation testing showed high positive predictive values for CIN2+ (41.4% at baseline, 50.0% at 24-month), while the CIN2+ risk of methylation negative women (cNPV) remained considerable (2.5% at baseline, 6.9% at 24-month). Study findings indicate that methylation has better specificity and predictive values for the presence or development of cervical precancer and might therefore be considered for the strategy of HPV screening and methylation triage followed by immediate treatment of triage-positive women and delayed follow-up of hrHPV-positive/methylation-negative women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This cross-sectional study evaluated the involvement of patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) in treatment decision-making, assessed the treatment efficacy according to their self-reports, and investigated the influencing factors. Methods: Patients with advanced CRC were recruited from 19 hospitals from March 2020 to March 2021 by a multi-stage multi-level sampling method. A selfdesigned questionnaire was used to collect demographic and clinical characteristics, involvement of CRC patients in treatment decision-making, treatment methods, and self-reported efficacy. Univariate and unordered multinomial logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the factors affecting the involvement in treatment decision-making and self-reported efficacy. Results: We enrolled 4533 patients with advanced CRC. The average age at diagnosis was 58.7 ± 11.8 years. For the treatment method, 32.4% of patients received surgery combined with chemotherapy, 13.1% of patients underwent surgery combined with chemotherapy and targeted therapy, and 9.7% of patients were treated with surgery alone. For treatment decision-making, 7.0% of patients were solely responsible for decision-making, 47.0% of patients shared treatment decision-making with family members, 19.0% of patients had family members solely responsible for treatment decision-making, and 27.0% of patients had their physicians solely responsible for treatment decision-making. Gender, age, education level, family income, marital status, treatment cost, hospital type, and treatment method were significantly associated with the involvement of patients in treatment decision-making. A total of 3824 patients submitted selfreported efficacy evaluations during treatment. The percentage of patients with good self-reported efficacy was 76.5% (for patients treated for the first time), 61.7% (for patients treated for the second time), and 43.2% (for patients treated after recurrence and metastasis), respectively. Occupation, education level, average annual family income, place of residence, time since cancer diagnosis, hospital type, clinical stage, targeted therapy, and involvement in treatment decision-making were the main influencing factors of self-reported efficacy of treatment. Discussion: Conclusively, CRC patients are not highly dominant in treatment decision-making and more likely to make treatment decisions with their family and doctors. Timely and effective communication between doctors and patients can bolster patient involvement in treatment decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A number of publications have demonstrated that deep learning (DL) algorithms matched or outperformed clinicians in image-based cancer diagnostics, but these algorithms are frequently considered as opponents rather than partners. Despite the clinicians-in-the-loop DL approach having great potential, no study has systematically quantified the diagnostic accuracy of clinicians with and without the assistance of DL in image-based cancer identification. Objective: We systematically quantified the diagnostic accuracy of clinicians with and without the assistance of DL in image-based cancer identification. Methods: PubMed, Embase, IEEEXplore, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies published between January 1, 2012, and December 7, 2021. Any type of study design was permitted that focused on comparing unassisted clinicians and DL-assisted clinicians in cancer identification using medical imaging. Studies using medical waveform-data graphics material and those investigating image segmentation rather than classification were excluded. Studies providing binary diagnostic accuracy data and contingency tables were included for further meta-analysis. Two subgroups were defined and analyzed, including cancer type and imaging modality. Results: In total, 9796 studies were identified, of which 48 were deemed eligible for systematic review. Twenty-five of these studies made comparisons between unassisted clinicians and DL-assisted clinicians and provided sufficient data for statistical synthesis. We found a pooled sensitivity of 83% (95% CI 80%-86%) for unassisted clinicians and 88% (95% CI 86%-90%) for DL-assisted clinicians. Pooled specificity was 86% (95% CI 83%-88%) for unassisted clinicians and 88% (95% CI 85%-90%) for DL-assisted clinicians. The pooled sensitivity and specificity values for DL-assisted clinicians were higher than for unassisted clinicians, at ratios of 1.07 (95% CI 1.05-1.09) and 1.03 (95% CI 1.02-1.05), respectively. Similar diagnostic performance by DL-assisted clinicians was also observed across the predefined subgroups. Conclusions: The diagnostic performance of DL-assisted clinicians appears better than unassisted clinicians in image-based cancer identification. However, caution should be exercised, because the evidence provided in the reviewed studies does not cover all the minutiae involved in real-world clinical practice. Combining qualitative insights from clinical practice with data-science approaches may improve DL-assisted practice, although further research is required. Trial Registration: PROSPERO CRD42021281372; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=281372 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cervical cancer screening with cytology suffers from low sensitivity, whereas the efficiency of human papillomavirus (HPV)‐based screening is limited by low specificity. The authors evaluated a novel p16INK4a immunocytology approach in cervical cancer screening compared with HPV‐based and cytology‐based screening. Methods: In total, 2112 women aged 49 to 69 years from Shanxi, China were screened from March to July 2019. HPV testing, liquid‐based cytology (LBC), and p16INK4a immunocytology were performed on samples from all women. Any positive result triggered a referral to colposcopy with biopsy, if indicated. Screening performance for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 and 3 or worse (CIN2+/CIN3+) was evaluated using multiple algorithms. Results: p16INK4a had a lower positive rate (10.0%) than LBC abnormality (vs 12.1%; P =.004) and a high‐risk HPV positivity (21.4%; P <.001). For the detection of CIN3+, the relative sensitivity of p16INK4a compared with HPV and LBC was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.82‐1.07) and 1.12 (95% CI, 0.95‐1.32), respectively. The specificity of p16INK4a was significantly higher than that for HPV and LBC, with a relative specificity of 1.13 (95% CI, 1.11‐1.16) and 1.02 (95% CI, 1.01‐1.04), respectively. In addition, p16INK4a alone yielded a clinical performance very similar to that of the current mainstream strategy of using HPV16/18 with reflex cytology (ASC‐US+, atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse). The immediate risk of CIN3+ was 14.6% if p16INK4a results were positive and 0.2% if p16INK4a results were negative. Conclusions: With minimal colposcopy referrals, p16INK4a screening demonstrated promising utility for risk stratification and yielded a better balance between sensitivity and specificity compared with HPV and LBC primary screening. Moreover, with accuracy and efficiency similar to what is achieved using mainstream cotest algorithms, p16 may simplify the screening practice. More evidence will be required before clinical recommendation. This evaluation of a novel p16INK4a test demonstrates that p16INK4a may be a promising alternative to cytology for primary screening. Moreover, with screening efficacy similar to that of mainstream human papillomavirus‐cytology cotest algorithms, p16INK4a screening has great potential to simplify screening practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Improvement in managing HPV‐positive women is urgently needed. Based on a population‐based study which included 2112 women aged 49 to 69 from Shanxi, China, we aimed to evaluate the clinical performance of multiple triage strategies based on liquid‐based cytology (LBC), p16INK4a, viral load and partial genotyping, as a single or combined strategy for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2/3 or higher (CIN2+/CIN3+) in women who tested positive by Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2). Among 452 HC2‐positive women, the test positivity of LBC (ASC‐US+), p16INK4a, HPV16/18 and HPV16/18/31/33/45 were 39.6%, 38.5%, 18.0% and 40.0%, respectively. Compared to LBC (ASC‐US+) triage, a single triage strategies using p16INK4a or extended genotyping (SureX HPV16/18/31/33/45) achieved comparable sensitivity (relative sensitivity: 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.93‐1.26 and 0.96, 95% CI: 0.76‐1.22) and specificity (relative specificity: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.96‐1.14 and 1.02, 95% CI: 0.92‐1.14) for CIN3+. Viral load triage using a ≥50 RLU/CO cut‐point also yielded similar results with LBC (ASC‐US+). Among combined triage strategies, HPV16/18 genotyping with reflex p16INK4a showed higher sensitivity and slightly lower specificity than LBC (ASC‐US+) for CIN3+ detection, however, the differences were not statistically significant. Of note, after a negative result by p16INK4a or LBC among HPV16/18 negative women, the posttest probability of CIN3+ was lower than 1%. Our study suggested that p16INK4a, extended genotyping and increased viral load cut‐point could be promising alternatives to cytology triage. Combined triage algorithms of HPV16/18 with reflex p16INK4a or cytology, if negative, are associated with the substantial low posttest risk sufficient to release women to next screening round. What's new? Cytology triage is widely used to manage the care of women with positive human papillomavirus (HPV) results following HPV‐based screening. Challenges with cytology in low‐resource settings, however, has fueled the development of other triage strategies. Whether these strategies are superior to cytology remains unclear. In this population‐based evaluation, promising alternatives to cytology triage were identified, including p16INK4a biomarker testing, extended genotyping, and viral load with increased cut‐point. These methods were especially suitable for settings that lack trained cytologists. Combined HPV16/18 with reflex p16INK4a or cytology provided optimal risk stratification, enabling double‐negative cases to be released to routine screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human papillomavirus (HPV) test, self‐sampling and thermal ablation for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) have been developed separately to increase screening coverage and treatment compliance of cervical cancer screening programmes. A large‐scale study in rural China screened 9,526 women with their combinations to explore the optimal cervical cancer‐screening cascade in the real‐world. Participants received careHPV and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) HPV tests on self‐collected samples. Women positive on either HPV test underwent colposcopy, biopsy and thermal ablation in a single visit. Samples positive on either HPV test were retested for genotyping. Absolute and relative performance of HPV tests, triage strategies, 'colposcopy and thermal ablation' approach were statistically evaluated. PCR HPV test detected 33.3% more CIN grade two or worse (CIN2+) at a cost of 28.1% more colposcopies compared to careHPV. Sensitivities of PCR HPV and careHPV tests to detect CIN2+ were 96.7 and 72.5%. Specificities for the same disease outcome were 82.1 and 86.0%. Triaging HPV‐positive women with HPV16/18 genotyping considerably improved the positive predictive value for CIN2+ (4.8–5.0 to 18.2–19.2%). Ninety‐six women positive on HPV and having abnormal colposcopy were eligible for thermal ablation and all accepted same‐day treatment, contributing to 64.6% being treated appropriately (CIN1+ on histopathology), which reached up to 84.8% among women positive on HPV 16/18 triage. No serious side‐effects/complications were reported. The combination of PCR HPV test followed by HPV 16/18 triaging on self‐collected samples and colposcopy of triage positive women followed by immediate thermal ablation might be the appropriate screening cascade for rural China. What's new? To be effective, cervical cancer screening programs must be tailored to the needs of the target population. In rural China, screening coverage is low, and women may not return for separate diagnosis and treatment visits. Here, the authors evaluated various screening protocols under real world conditions. They found that self‐sampling, PCR HPV test and triage based on HPV16/18 genotyping, followed by colposcopy and immediate thermal ablation in a single visit, could be the most efficient screening cascade for this rural population. This plan reduced costs while increasing compliance for follow up care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The management of HPV‐positive women becomes particularly crucial in cervical cancer screening. Here we assessed whether detection of E6 or E7 oncoproteins targeting eight most prevalent HPV types could serve as a promising triage option. Women (N = 1,416) aged 50–60 from Shanxi, China underwent screening with HPV testing and liquid‐based cytology (LBC), with any positive results referring to colposcopy and biopsy if necessary. Women with HPV‐positive results received further tests using DNA‐based genotyping, E6 or E7 oncoprotein detection targeting HPV16/18 (for short: E6 (16/18) Test) or HPV16/18/31/33/35/45/52/58 (for short: E6/E7 (8 types) Test), respectively. Among HPV‐positive women, E6/E7 (8 types) oncoproteins had lower positivity (17.37%) compared to DNA‐based genotyping for same eight types (58.30%) and LBC with ASC‐US threshold (50.97%); HPV16 was the genotype showing the highest frequency (8.49%) for oncoprotein detection followed by HPV52 (3.47%), 58 (2.32%), 33 (1.54%), 18 (1.16%), 45 (0.77%), 35 (0.39%) and 31 (0%). For detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia Grade 3 or higher (CIN3+), E6/E7 (8 types) Test had similar sensitivity (100.00%) and superior specificity (85.94%) as well as positive predictive value (PPV, 22.22%) compared to both LBC and DNA‐based genotyping (8 types); For detection of CIN2+, E6/E7 (8 types) Test was less sensitive (67.74%) but still more specific (89.47%) and risk predictive with PPV of 46.67%. Notably, E6/E7 (8 types) Test remarkably decreased the number of colposcopies needed to detect one CIN2+ and CIN3+ (2.14 and 4.50). E6/E7 oncoprotein detection showed a good "trade‐off" between sensitivity and specificity with more efficient colposcopy referrals, which is of great importance to maximize the benefits of HPV‐based screening program, especially applicable for the areas with high HPV prevalence and low‐resources. What's new? DNA‐based testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) is a sensitive method to detect HPV infection, but leads to considerable over referral and even overtreatment of HPV‐associated lesions. Here the authors expanded on a previously established DNA test specific for the E6 oncoprotein and showed better performance including higher predictive value of E6/E7 oncoprotein detection with inclusion of eight prevalent HPV types. Improved triage of HPV‐infected women is important especially in resource‐limited areas, helping to make HPV‐based screening programs economically feasible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The detection of human papillomavirus (HPV) E6/E7 mRNA indicates a risk of further deterioration in cervical lesions. We explored the clinical value of HPV E6/E7 mRNA detection in cervical cancer screening in women positive for HPV or with abnormal thin-prep cytology test (TCT) results in the Xinjiang region of China. Methods: A total of 6,800 women were screened in our hospital for cervical cancer by both TCT and HPV DNA testing from August 2013 to June 2015. Of these, 197 had abnormal cytological or HPV test results and subsequently underwent HPV E6/E7 mRNA detection and histopathological examination, while 101 underwent an HPV DNA typing test. Using pathological results as the gold standard, we compared the accuracies of HPV E6/E7 mRNA detection or HPV DNA type testing alone, in parallel, and in series for diagnosing high-grade cervical lesions. Results: Pathological examination revealed 80 cases of chronic cervicitis, 16 cases of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)-I, 50 cases of CIN-II-III, and 51 cases of cervical cancer. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) for diagnosing high-grade cervical lesions by HPV E6/E7 mRNA detection was 74.95% (sensitivity, 85.15%; specificity, 66.67%; Youden index, 0.139; positive predictive value, 72.9%; negative predictive value, 81.0%; positive likelihood ratio, 2.555; negative likelihood ratio, 0.222; and post-test probability, 72.9%). Conclusions: HPV E6/E7 mRNA detection is superior to HPV DNA type testing for diagnosing high-grade cervical lesions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The associations between sexual dysfunction (SD) and sleep disorders, sleep quality, and sleep duration remain unclear. Aim To assess the relationship between sleep and SD through a literature review and meta-analysis. Methods The PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched from inception to November 10, 2022. Outcomes Pooled relative risks and 95% CIs were used to examine the association of sleep disorders with SD in longitudinal studies. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were used to examine the associations between SD and sleep disorders, sleep quality, and sleep duration in cross-sectional studies. Results Forty-three articles, including 11 longitudinal studies and 32 cross-sectional studies, were included in the quantitative analysis. The pooled relative risk of SD in patients with sleep disorders was 1.97 in longitudinal studies (95% CI, 1.46-2.67, P <.001; heterogeneity: I 2 = 95.0%, P <.001), while the pooled OR of SD in patients with sleep disorders was 2.05 in cross-sectional studies (95% CI, 1.76-2.39, P <.001; heterogeneity: I 2 = 91.4%, P <.001). When compared with controls, subjects with poor sleep quality had a 1.49-fold increased risk of SD (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.31-1.71, P <.001; heterogeneity: I 2 = 73.4%, P <.001). In addition, short sleep duration was associated with the risk of SD (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.06-1.22, P <.001; heterogeneity: I 2 = 0.0%, P  = .849). Clinical Implications The risk of SD is significantly increased in patients with sleep disorders and poor sleep quality, indicating that clinicians should monitor sleep among patients with SD. Strengths and Limitations This study is the most comprehensive meta-analysis of the association between sleep and SD to date. However, different sleep disorders may have varying associations with sleep duration and sleep quality; thus, we could not identify the independent effects across the studies. Conclusion Our systematic review and meta-analysis results suggest that sleep disorders, especially obstructive sleep apnea, increase the risk of SD in men and women. Poor sleep quality is significantly associated with SD. Short sleep duration is associated with an increased risk of SD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

More evidence from population-based cohort studies is required to confirm the application of methylation-based biomarkers in real-world settings. The cross-sectional and 24-month cumulative triage performance of a novel methylation assay targeting the host gene EPB41LE and HPV16/18 DNA L1/L2 regions among hrHPV-positive women was evaluated based on a population-based cohort study from China. Overall methylation positivity was 12.4% among hrHPV-positive women. Methylation-positive women had significantly higher risks of hrHPV persistence at 12M and 24M follow-up (RR 12M = 1.9, 95%CI: 1.5-2.6 and RR 24M = 1.7, 95%CI: 1.2-2.5). For CIN2+, cross-sectional triage sensitivity of methylation was similar to HPV16/18 (70.6% vs. 64.7%, p exact = 1.000), but was lower than cytology (94.1%), although not significantly (p exact = 0.213). The specificity (91.2%) of methylation was significantly higher than other triage methods ( p < 0.001 for all). The longitudinal sensitivity of methylation over 24M follow-up was 56.0%, lower (but not significantly so) than HPV16/18 (64.0%, p exact = 0.688) and cytology (76.0%, p exact = 0.125). Methylation testing showed high positive predictive values for CIN2+ (41.4% at baseline, 50.0% at 24-month), while the CIN2+ risk of methylation negative women (cNPV) remained considerable (2.5% at baseline, 6.9% at 24-month). Study findings indicate that methylation has better specificity and predictive values for the presence or development of cervical precancer and might therefore be considered for the strategy of HPV screening and methylation triage followed by immediate treatment of triage-positive women and delayed follow-up of hrHPV-positive/methylation-negative women.

Introduction: This cross-sectional study evaluated the involvement of patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) in treatment decision-making, assessed the treatment efficacy according to their self-reports, and investigated the influencing factors., Methods: Patients with advanced CRC were recruited from 19 hospitals from March 2020 to March 2021 by a multi-stage multi-level sampling method. A self-designed questionnaire was used to collect demographic and clinical characteristics, involvement of CRC patients in treatment decision-making, treatment methods, and self-reported efficacy. Univariate and unordered multinomial logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the factors affecting the involvement in treatment decision-making and self-reported efficacy., Results: We enrolled 4533 patients with advanced CRC. The average age at diagnosis was 58.7 ± 11.8 years. For the treatment method, 32.4% of patients received surgery combined with chemotherapy, 13.1% of patients underwent surgery combined with chemotherapy and targeted therapy, and 9.7% of patients were treated with surgery alone. For treatment decision-making, 7.0% of patients were solely responsible for decision-making, 47.0% of patients shared treatment decision-making with family members, 19.0% of patients had family members solely responsible for treatment decision-making, and 27.0% of patients had their physicians solely responsible for treatment decision-making. Gender, age, education level, family income, marital status, treatment cost, hospital type, and treatment method were significantly associated with the involvement of patients in treatment decision-making. A total of 3824 patients submitted self-reported efficacy evaluations during treatment. The percentage of patients with good self-reported efficacy was 76.5% (for patients treated for the first time), 61.7% (for patients treated for the second time), and 43.2% (for patients treated after recurrence and metastasis), respectively. Occupation, education level, average annual family income, place of residence, time since cancer diagnosis, hospital type, clinical stage, targeted therapy, and involvement in treatment decision-making were the main influencing factors of self-reported efficacy of treatment., Discussion: Conclusively, CRC patients are not highly dominant in treatment decision-making and more likely to make treatment decisions with their family and doctors. Timely and effective communication between doctors and patients can bolster patient involvement in treatment decision-making., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Gu, Xu, Liu, Li, Yu, Zhang, Wang, Wang, Du, Duan, Cao, Zhao, Liu, Huang, Cao, Fan, Feng, Lian, Du, Rezhake, Ma and Qiao.)

Introduction: Well-trained colposcopists are in huge shortage worldwide, especially in low-resource areas. Here, we aimed to evaluate the Colposcopic Artificial Intelligence Auxiliary Diagnostic System (CAIADS) to detect abnormalities based on digital colposcopy images, especially focusing on its role in assisting junior colposcopist to correctly identify the lesion areas where biopsy should be performed., Materials and Methods: This is a hospital-based retrospective study, which recruited the women who visited colposcopy clinics between September 2021 to January 2022. A total of 366 of 1,146 women with complete medical information recorded by a senior colposcopist and valid histology results were included. Anonymized colposcopy images were reviewed by CAIADS and a junior colposcopist separately, and the junior colposcopist reviewed the colposcopy images with CAIADS results (named CAIADS-Junior). The diagnostic accuracy and biopsy efficiency of CAIADS and CAIADS-Junior were assessed in detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+), CIN3+, and cancer in comparison with the senior and junior colposcipists. The factors influencing the accuracy of CAIADS were explored., Results: For CIN2 + and CIN3 + detection, CAIADS showed a sensitivity at ~80%, which was not significantly lower than the sensitivity achieved by the senior colposcopist (for CIN2 +: 80.6 vs. 91.3%, p  = 0.061 and for CIN3 +: 80.0 vs. 90.0%, p  = 0.189). The sensitivity of the junior colposcopist was increased significantly with the assistance of CAIADS (for CIN2 +: 95.1 vs. 79.6%, p  = 0.002 and for CIN3 +: 97.1 vs. 85.7%, p  = 0.039) and was comparable to those of the senior colposcopists (for CIN2 +: 95.1 vs. 91.3%, p  = 0.388 and for CIN3 +: 97.1 vs. 90.0%, p  = 0.125). In detecting cervical cancer, CAIADS achieved the highest sensitivity at 100%. For all endpoints, CAIADS showed the highest specificity (55-64%) and positive predictive values compared to both senior and junior colposcopists. When CIN grades became higher, the average biopsy numbers decreased for the subspecialists and CAIADS required a minimum number of biopsies to detect per case (2.2-2.6 cut-points). Meanwhile, the biopsy sensitivity of the junior colposcopist was the lowest, but the CAIADS-assisted junior colposcopist achieved a higher biopsy sensitivity., Conclusion: Colposcopic Artificial Intelligence Auxiliary Diagnostic System could assist junior colposcopists to improve diagnostic accuracy and biopsy efficiency, which might be a promising solution to improve the quality of cervical cancer screening in low-resource settings., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wu, Xue, Abulizi, Tuerxun, Rezhake and Qiao.)

Background: Cervical cancer screening with cytology suffers from low sensitivity, whereas the efficiency of human papillomavirus (HPV)-based screening is limited by low specificity. The authors evaluated a novel p16 INK4a immunocytology approach in cervical cancer screening compared with HPV-based and cytology-based screening., Methods: In total, 2112 women aged 49 to 69 years from Shanxi, China were screened from March to July 2019. HPV testing, liquid-based cytology (LBC), and p16 INK4a immunocytology were performed on samples from all women. Any positive result triggered a referral to colposcopy with biopsy, if indicated. Screening performance for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 and 3 or worse (CIN2+/CIN3+) was evaluated using multiple algorithms., Results: p16 INK4a had a lower positive rate (10.0%) than LBC abnormality (vs 12.1%; P = .004) and a high-risk HPV positivity (21.4%; P < .001). For the detection of CIN3+, the relative sensitivity of p16 INK4a compared with HPV and LBC was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.82-1.07) and 1.12 (95% CI, 0.95-1.32), respectively. The specificity of p16 INK4a was significantly higher than that for HPV and LBC, with a relative specificity of 1.13 (95% CI, 1.11-1.16) and 1.02 (95% CI, 1.01-1.04), respectively. In addition, p16 INK4a alone yielded a clinical performance very similar to that of the current mainstream strategy of using HPV16/18 with reflex cytology (ASC-US+, atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse). The immediate risk of CIN3+ was 14.6% if p16 INK4a results were positive and 0.2% if p16 INK4a results were negative., Conclusions: With minimal colposcopy referrals, p16 INK4a screening demonstrated promising utility for risk stratification and yielded a better balance between sensitivity and specificity compared with HPV and LBC primary screening. Moreover, with accuracy and efficiency similar to what is achieved using mainstream cotest algorithms, p16 may simplify the screening practice. More evidence will be required before clinical recommendation., (© 2021 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Cervical cancer remains a major public health issue for the Uyghur women and other women living mainly in rural areas of Xinjiang. This study aims to investigate the distribution of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and cervical cancer in rural areas of Xinjiang, China., Methods: Cervical cancer screening was performed on rural women aged 35 to 64 years from Xinjiang, China in 2017 through gynecological examination, vaginal discharge smear microscopy, cytology, and HPV testing. If necessary, colposcopy and biopsy were performed on women with suspicious or abnormal screening results., Results: Of the 216,754 women screened, 15,518 received HPV testing. The HPV-positive rate was 6.75% (1047/15,518). Compared with the age 35-44 years group, the odds ratios (ORs) of HPV positivity in the age 45-54 years and 55-64 years groups were 1.18 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.37) and 1.84 (95% CI: 1.53-2.21), respectively. Compared with women with primary or lower education level, the ORs for HPV infection rates of women with high school and college education or above were 1.37 (95% CI: 1.09-1.72) and 1.62 (95% CI: 1.23-2.12), respectively. Uyghur women were less likely to have HPV infection than Han women, with an OR (95% CI) of 0.78 (0.61-0.99). The most prevalent HPV types among Xinjiang women were HPV 16 (24.00%), HPV 33 (12.70%), and HPV 52 (11.80%). The detection rate of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)2+ was 0.14% and the early diagnosis rate of cervical cancer was 85.91%. The detection rates of vaginitis and cervicitis were 19.28% and 21.32%, respectively., Conclusions: The HPV infection rate in Xinjiang is low, but the detection rate of cervical cancer and precancerous lesions is higher than the national average level. Cervical cancer is a prominent public health problem in Xinjiang, especially in southern Xinjiang., (Copyright © 2021 The Chinese Medical Association, produced by Wolters Kluwer, Inc. under the CC-BY-NC-ND license.)

Women are anticipated to go through more than two rounds of cervical screening in their lifetime. Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is increasingly used as the primary cervical cancer screening test. However, triage strategies for HPV-positive women were usually evaluated at baseline screening. We assessed the effect of sequential rounds of cervical screening on several algorithms for HPV triage. A total of 1,997 women ages 35-45 years were enrolled in 1999 in Shanxi, P.R. China and followed up three times at approximately 5-year intervals. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) prevalence by prior HPV results and performance of 12 triage algorithms with cytology, genotyping, and prior HPV were examined among 229 HPV-positive women at the fourth round. CIN2+ prevalence varied from 56.5% (95% confidence interval, 36.8%-74.4%) following 15 years HPV persistence to 3.5% (1.2%-9.9%) with an incident HPV within 15 years. Triage with cytology (with threshold of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance) yielded positive predictive value (PPV) of 21.4% (13.8%-29.0%), entailing immediate colposcopic referral, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 97.4% (94.6%-100%), permitting retesting at short intervals. Triage with genotyping (16/18/31/33/45/52/58) or prior HPV results showed comparable performance with cytology. Among 11 triage algorithms with similar NPV to cytology, triage with prior HPV results and reflex genotyping (16/18) achieved highest PPV of 28.9% (18.8%-39.1%) and lowest colposcopy referral of 33.2% (27.4%-39.5%). HPV persistence across rounds is an effective risk stratifier in HPV-positive women. Mainstream cytology and genotyping, with or without consideration of prior HPV results, remain effective for HPV triage at fourth round. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: The study highlights the sustained effectiveness of mainstream HPV triage methods, such as cytology and genotyping, after sequential rounds of cervical screening. It also suggests that use of HPV persistence across rounds can improve management of HPV-positive women in cervical cancer screening., (©2020 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: The detection of human papillomavirus (HPV) E6/E7 mRNA indicates a risk of further deterioration in cervical lesions. We explored the clinical value of HPV E6/E7 mRNA detection in cervical cancer screening in women positive for HPV or with abnormal thin-prep cytology test (TCT) results in the Xinjiang region of China., Methods: A total of 6,800 women were screened in our hospital for cervical cancer by both TCT and HPV DNA testing from August 2013 to June 2015. Of these, 197 had abnormal cytological or HPV test results and subsequently underwent HPV E6/E7 mRNA detection and histopathological examination, while 101 underwent an HPV DNA typing test. Using pathological results as the gold standard, we compared the accuracies of HPV E6/E7 mRNA detection or HPV DNA type testing alone, in parallel, and in series for diagnosing high-grade cervical lesions., Results: Pathological examination revealed 80 cases of chronic cervicitis, 16 cases of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)-I, 50 cases of CIN-II-III, and 51 cases of cervical cancer. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) for diagnosing high-grade cervical lesions by HPV E6/E7 mRNA detection was 74.95% (sensitivity, 85.15%; specificity, 66.67%; Youden index, 0.139; positive predictive value, 72.9%; negative predictive value, 81.0%; positive likelihood ratio, 2.555; negative likelihood ratio, 0.222; and post-test probability, 72.9%)., Conclusions: HPV E6/E7 mRNA detection is superior to HPV DNA type testing for diagnosing high-grade cervical lesions.