1. The Role of Human Papillomavirus Genotyping in Cervical Cancer Screening: A Large-Scale Evaluation of the cobas HPV Test
- Author
-
Hormuzd A. Katki, Robert D. Burk, Mark Schiffman, Nicolas Wentzensen, Thanh Tam, Julia C. Gage, Tina Raine-Bennett, Henry A. Erlich, Carrie Aldrich, Sean Boyle, Janet Kornegay, Raymond J. Apple, Philip E. Castle, and Brian Befano
- Subjects
Adult ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Genotyping Techniques ,Epidemiology ,Uterine Cervical Neoplasms ,Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia ,Cohort Studies ,Young Adult ,Risk Factors ,Atypical Squamous Cells of the Cervix ,medicine ,Humans ,Cervix ,Genotyping ,Early Detection of Cancer ,Aged ,Aged, 80 and over ,Colposcopy ,Gynecology ,Cervical cancer ,Human papillomavirus 16 ,Human papillomavirus 18 ,medicine.diagnostic_test ,business.industry ,Middle Aged ,Uterine Cervical Dysplasia ,medicine.disease ,female genital diseases and pregnancy complications ,Confidence interval ,medicine.anatomical_structure ,Oncology ,Linear Array HPV Genotyping Test ,Female ,business ,Cohort study - Abstract
Background: The cobas HPV Test (“cobas”; Roche Molecular Systems) detects HPV16 and HPV18 individually, and a pool of 12 other high-risk (HR) HPV types. The test is approved for (i) atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) triage to determine need for colposcopy, (ii) combined screening with cytology (“cotesting”), and (iii) primary HPV screening. Methods: To assess the possible value of HPV16/18 typing, >17,000 specimens from a longitudinal cohort study of initially HPV-positive women (HC2, Qiagen) were retested with cobas. To study accuracy, cobas genotyping results were compared with those of an established method, the Linear Array HPV Genotyping Test (LA, Roche Molecular Systems). Clinical value of the typing strategy was evaluated by linking the cobas results (supplemented by other available typing results) to 3-year cumulative risks of CIN3+. Results: Grouped hierarchically (HPV16, else HPV18, else other HR types, else negative), the κ statistic for agreement between cobas and LA was 0.86 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.86–0.87]. In all three scenarios, HPV16-positive women were at much higher 3-year risk of CIN3+ than HPV16-negative women: women ages 21 and older with ASC-US (14.5%; 95% CI, 13.5%–15.5% vs. 3.5%; 95% CI, 3.3–3.6); women ages 30 years and older that were HPV-positive cytology-negative (10.3%; 95% CI, 9.6–11.1 vs. 2.3%; 95% CI, 2.2–2.4); and all women 25 years and older that were HPV-positive (18.5%; 95% CI, 17.8–19.2 vs. 4.3%; 95% CI, 4.2–4.4). Conclusion: The cobas and LA results show excellent agreement. The data support HPV16 typing. Impact: HPV16 typing is useful in the management of HPV-positive/cytology-negative women in cotesting, of all HPV-positive women in primary HPV testing, and perhaps in the management of HPV-positive women with ASC-US. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 24(9); 1304–10. ©2015 AACR. See related commentary by Del Mistro, p. 1302
- Published
- 2015
- Full Text
- View/download PDF