Search

In 2012, national recommendations for cervical cancer screening of women aged 30-64 years were quinquennial human papillomavirus and cytology cotesting or triennial cytology. Data from a statewide surveillance program in New Mexico demonstrated 65.2% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] = 64.6% to 65.7%) of women screened in 2019 had a negative cotest within the last 3 years. Percentages of women screened in 2013, 2016, and 2019 with a prior negative cotest more than 5 years and up to 7 years ago were 2.6% (95% CI = 2.2% to 2.9%), 2.1% (95% CI = 1.9% to 2.2%), and 6.5% (95% CI = 6.2% to 6.8%), respectively (2-sided Ptrend

Objective Despite widespread cervical screening, an estimated 13,800 women will be diagnosed with cervical cancer in the United States in 2020. To inform improvements, the screening histories of women diagnosed with cervical cancer in New Mexico were assessed. Methods Data were collected on all cervical screening, diagnostic tests and treatment procedures for all women diagnosed with cervical cancer aged 25-64 yrs. in New Mexico from 2006 to 2016. Women were categorized by their screening attendance in the 5–40 months (screening interval) and 1–4 months (peri-diagnostic interval) prior to cancer diagnosis. Results Of the 504 women diagnosed between May 2009–December 2016, 64% were not screened or had only inadequate screening tests in the 5–40 months prior to diagnosis, and 90 of 182 screened women (49%) had only negative screens in this period. Only 32% (N = 162) of cervical cancers were screen-detected. Women with adenocarcinomas were more likely to have had a recent negative screen (41/57 = 722%) than women with squamous cancers (50/112 = 45%). Both older women (aged 45–64 years) and women with more advanced cancers were less likely to have been screened, and if screened, were more likely to have a false-negative outcome. Only 9% of cancers were diagnosed in women who did not attend biopsy or treatment after positive tests requiring clinical management. Screening currently prevents 35% of cancers, whereas full screening coverage could prevent 61% of cervical cancers. Conclusion Improved screening coverage has the largest potential for reducing cervical cancer incidence, though there is also a role for improved recall procedures and screening sensitivity., Highlights • 64% of women diagnosed with cervical cancer aged 25-64y had not been screened in the 3-years prior to diagnosis. • Screening currently prevents 35% of cancers; full screening coverage could prevent 61% of cancers. • One-third of cervical cancers were screen-detected (i.e. diagnosed within 4 months of a positive screen). • 72% of the adenocarcinomas had a negative screen in a 3-yr period prior to diagnosis. • 9% of cancers were associated with a failure to receive recommended diagnostic biopsy or treatment (failsafe failure).

Context.—Lower Anogenital Squamous Terminology (LAST) standardization recommended p16INK4a immunohistochemistry (p16 IHC) for biopsies diagnosed morphologically as cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 (CIN2) to classify them as low-grade or high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSILs).Objective.—To describe the relationships of p16 IHC and other biomarkers associated with cervical cancer risk with biopsy diagnoses.Design.—A statewide, stratified sample of cervical biopsies diagnosed by community pathologists (CPs), including 1512 CIN2, underwent a consensus, expert pathologist panel (EP) review (without p16 IHC results), p16 IHC interpretation by a third pathology group, and human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping, results of which were grouped hierarchically according to cancer risk. Antecedent cytologic interpretations were also available.Results.—Biopsies were more likely to test p16 IHC positive with increasing severity of CP diagnoses, overall (Ptrend ≤ .001) and within each HPV risk group (Ptrend ≤ .001 except for low-risk HPV [Ptrend < .010]). All abnormal grades of CP-diagnosed biopsies were more likely to test p16 IHC positive with a higher HPV risk group (Ptrend < .001), and testing p16 IHC positive was associated with higher HPV risk group than testing p16 IHC negative for each grade of CP-diagnosed biopsies (P < .001). p16 IHC–positive, CP-diagnosed CIN2 biopsies were less likely than CP-diagnosed CIN3 biopsies to test HPV16 positive, have an antecedent HSIL+ cytology, or to be diagnosed as CIN3+ by the EP (P < .001 for all). p16 IHC–positive, CP-diagnosed CIN1 biopsies had lower HPV risk groups than p16 IHC–negative, CP-diagnosed CIN2 biopsies (P < .001).Conclusions.—p16 IHC–positive, CP-diagnosed CIN2 appears to be lower cancer risk than CP-diagnosed CIN3. LAST classification of “HSIL” diagnosis, which includes p16 IHC–positive CIN2, should annotate the morphologic diagnosis (CIN2 or CIN3) to inform all management decisions, which is especially important for young (

US guidelines recommend that most women older than 65 years cease cervical screening after two consecutive negative cotests (concurrent HPV and cytology tests) in the previous 10 years, with one in the last 5 years. However, this recommendation was based on expert opinion and modeling rather than empirical data on cancer risk. We therefore estimated the 5‐year risks of cervical precancer (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or adenocarcinoma in situ [CIN3]) after one, two and three negative cotests among 346,760 women aged 55–64 years undergoing routine cotesting at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (2003–2015). Women with a history of excisional treatment or CIN2+ were excluded. No woman with one or more negative cotests was diagnosed with cancer during follow‐up. Five‐year risks of CIN3 after one, two, and three consecutive negative cotests were 0.034% (95% CI: 0.023%–0.046%), 0.041% (95% CI: 0.007%–0.076%) and 0.016% (95% CI: 0.000%–0.052%), respectively (p trend < 0.001). These risks did not appreciably differ by a positive cotest result prior to the one, two or three negative cotest(s). Since CIN3 risks after one or more negative cotests were significantly below a proposed 0.12% CIN3+ risk threshold for a 5‐year screening interval, a longer screening interval in these women is justified. However, the choice of how many negative cotests provide sufficient safety against invasive cancer over a woman's remaining life represents a value judgment based on the harms versus benefits of continued screening. Ideally, this guideline should be informed by longer‐term follow‐up given that exiting is a long‐term decision., What's new? US guidelines recommend that women older than 65 years cease screening for cervical cancer following two consecutive negative cotests (HPV and cytology) in the previous ten years. However, these guidelines are based on modelling and expert opinion, rather than empirical data. In this large epidemiological study, the authors estimated the risks of cervical precancer following one, two, or three negative cotests among women aged 55‐64 years. They caution that the optimal time for women to exit screening represents a value judgment, based on the harms versus benefits of continued screening. Further data are needed.

Objectives Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical screening has been shown to increase the yield of precancerous disease and reduce the incidence of cervical cancer more than cytology alone. Here we document the state-wide uptake of co-testing with HPV and cytology in women aged 30–64 years as recommended by national and international bodies. Methods Registry-based study of all screening cytology and HPV tests in New Mexico from 2008 to 2019 among women aged 21–64 years, with a focus on cytology negative tests to distinguish co-testing from reflex HPV testing to triage equivocal or mildly abnormal cytology. Results A total of 1,704,055 cervical screening tests from 681,440 women aged 21–64 years in the state of New Mexico were identified. The proportion of screening tests which were co-tests rose from 5.6% in 2008 to 84.3% in 2019 among women aged 30–64 years with a marked change from the near exclusive use of the Hybrid Capture II HPV test, (a signal amplified test method) to the use of target amplified HPV tests. The largest increases were seen between 2013 and 2015, reflecting the introduction and adoption of new clinical guidelines. Increases in co-testing were also seen in younger women. Conclusions Co-testing is now well established in women aged 30–64 years, but smaller increases have also been seen at younger ages, although this is not currently recommended. The impact of co-testing on cervical disease outcomes and number of colposcopies and biopsies in routine population settings remain important, especially in young women.

Failure to follow-up women after abnormal cervical screening could lead to cervical cancers, yet little is known about adherence to recommended follow-up after abnormal co-testing [cytology and high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing]. We documented clinical management following cervical screening by co-testing in a diverse population-based setting. A statewide surveillance program for cervical screening, diagnosis, and treatment was used to investigate all cytology, hrHPV and biopsy reports in the state of New Mexico from January 2015 through August 2019. Guideline-adherent follow-up after co-testing required 1) biopsy within 6 months for low-grade cytology if positive for hrHPV, for high-grade cytology irrespective of hrHPV, and for HPV 16/18 positive results irrespective of cytology and; 2) repeat co-testing within 18 months if cytology was negative and hrHPV test was positive (excluding types 16/18). Screening co-tests (2015-2017) for 164,522 women were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Kaplan Meier curves, and pairwise comparisons between groups. Guideline adherence was highest when both cytology and hrHPV tests were abnormal, ranging from 61.7% to 80.3%. Guideline-adherent follow-up was lower for discordant results. Women with high-grade cytology were less likely to receive a timely biopsy when hrHPV-testing was negative (48.1%) versus positive (83.3%) (p < 0.001). Only 47.9% of women received biopsies following detection of HPV16/18 with normal cytology, and 30.8% received no follow-up within 18-months. Among women with hrHPV-positive normal cytology without evidence of HPV 16/18 infection, 51% received no follow-up within 18 months. Provider education and creation of robust recall systems may help ensure appropriate follow-up of abnormal screening results.

The majority of cervical cancers after Pap-test–positive, human papillomavirus test–negative co-tests are symptomatic or clinically apparent.

Background: HPV testing is replacing cytology for cervical cancer screening because of greater sensitivity and superior reassurance following negative tests for the dozen HPV genotypes that cause cervical cancer. Management of women testing positive is unresolved. The need for identification of individual HPV genotypes for clinical use is debated. Also, it is unclear how long to observe persistent infections when precancer is not initially found. Methods: In the longitudinal NCI-Kaiser Permanente Northern California Persistence and Progression (PaP) Study, we observed the clinical outcomes (clearance, progression to CIN3+, or persistence without progression) of 11,573 HPV-positive women aged 30–65 yielding 14,158 type-specific infections. Findings: Risks of CIN3+ progression differed substantially by type, with HPV16 conveying uniquely elevated risk (26% of infections with seven-year CIN3+ risk of 22%). The other carcinogenic HPV types fell into 3 distinct seven-year CIN3+ risk groups: HPV18, 45 (13% of infections, risks >5%, with known elevated cancer risk); HPV31, 33, 35, 52, 58 (39%, risks >5%); and HPV39, 51, 56, 59, 68 (23%, risks

Objective The 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology Risk-Based Management Consensus Guidelines for the management of cervical cancer screening abnormalities recommend 1 of 6 clinical actions (treatment, optional treatment or colposcopy/biopsy, colposcopy/biopsy, 1-year surveillance, 3-year surveillance, 5-year return to regular screening) based on the risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3, adenocarcinoma in situ, or cancer (CIN 3+) for the many different combinations of current and recent past screening results. This article supports the main guidelines presentation1 by presenting and explaining the risk estimates that supported the guidelines. Methods From 2003 to 2017 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC), 1.5 million individuals aged 25 to 65 years were screened with human papillomavirus (HPV) and cytology cotesting scheduled every 3 years. We estimated immediate and 5-year risks of CIN 3+ for combinations of current test results paired with history of screening test and colposcopy/biopsy results. Results Risk tables are presented for different clinical scenarios. Examples of important results are highlighted; for example, the risk posed by most current abnormalities is greatly reduced if the prior screening round was HPV-negative. The immediate and 5-year risks of CIN 3+ used to decide clinical management are shown. Conclusions The new risk-based guidelines present recommendations for the management of abnormal screening test and histology results; the key risk estimates supporting guidelines are presented in this article. Comprehensive risk estimates are freely available online at https://CervixCa.nlm.nih.gov/RiskTables.

Background With the advent of primary human papillomavirus testing followed by cytology for cervical cancer screening, visual interpretation of cytology slides remains the last subjective analysis step and suffers from low sensitivity and reproducibility. Methods We developed a cloud-based whole-slide imaging platform with a deep-learning classifier for p16/Ki-67 dual-stained (DS) slides trained on biopsy-based gold standards. We compared it with conventional Pap and manual DS in 3 epidemiological studies of cervical and anal precancers from Kaiser Permanente Northern California and the University of Oklahoma comprising 4253 patients. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results In independent validation at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, artificial intelligence (AI)-based DS had lower positivity than cytology (P Conclusions Automated DS evaluation removes the remaining subjective component from cervical cancer screening and delivers consistent quality for providers and patients. Moving from Pap to automated DS substantially reduces the number of colposcopies and also achieves excellent performance in a simulated fully vaccinated population. Through cloud-based implementation, this approach is globally accessible. Our results demonstrate that AI not only provides automation and objectivity but also delivers a substantial benefit for women by reduction of unnecessary colposcopies.

Although guidelines have recommended extended interval cervical screening using concurrent human papillomavirus (HPV) and cytology ("cotesting") for over a decade, little is known about its adoption into routine care. Using longitudinal medical record data (2003-2015) from Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC), which adopted triennial cotesting in 2003, we examined adherence to extended interval screening. We analyzed predictors of screening intervals among 491,588 women undergoing routine screening, categorizing interval length into early (

OBJECTIVE To inform impending postcolposcopy guidelines, this analysis examined the subsequent risk of CIN 3+ among women with a grade lower than CIN 2 (< CIN 2) colposcopy results, taking into account the referring results that brought them to colposcopy and cotest results postcolposcopy. METHODS We analyzed 107,005 women from 25 to 65 years old, recommended for colposcopy at Kaiser Permanente Northern California. We estimated absolute risks of CIN 3+ among women: (1) recommended for colposcopy (precolposcopy), (2) following colposcopy and with histology results < CIN 2 (postcolposcopy), and (3) with cotest results 12 months after a < CIN 2 colposcopy (return cotest). RESULTS After colposcopy showing < CIN 2 (n = 69,790; 87% of the women at colposcopy), the 1-year risk of CIN 3+ was 1.2%, compared with 6.3% at the time of colposcopy recommendation. Negative cotest results 1 year after colposcopy identified a large group (37.1%) of women whose risk of CIN 3+ (i.e.

Background The main goal of cervical screening programs is to detect and treat precancer before cancer develops. Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is more sensitive than cytology for detecting precancer. However, reports of rare HPV-negative, cytology-positive cancers are motivating continued use of both tests (cotesting) despite increased testing costs. Methods We quantified the detection of cervical precancer and cancer by cotesting compared with HPV testing alone at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC), where 1 208 710 women age 30 years and older have undergone triennial cervical cotesting since 2003. Screening histories preceding cervical cancers (n = 623) and precancers (n = 5369) were examined to assess the relative contribution of the cytology and HPV test components in identifying cases. The performances of HPV testing and cytology were compared using contingency table methods, general estimating equation models, and nonparametric statistics; all statistical tests were two-sided. Results HPV testing identified more women subsequently diagnosed with cancer (P < .001) and precancer (P < .001) than cytology. HPV testing was statistically significantly more likely to be positive for cancer at any time point (P < .001), except within 12 months (P = .10). HPV-negative/cytology-positive results preceded only small fractions of cases of precancer (3.5%) and cancer (5.9%); these cancers were more likely to be regional or distant stage with squamous histopathology than other cases. Given the rarity of cancers among screened women, the contribution of cytology to screening translated to earlier detection of at most five cases per million women per year. Two-thirds (67.9%) of women found to have cancer during 10 years of follow-up at KPNC were detected by the first cotest performed. Conclusions The added sensitivity of cotesting vs HPV alone for detection of treatable cancer affected extremely few women.

As a foundation for the next guidelines revision, we confirmed with additional precision the risk estimates previously reported for combinations of human papillomavirus and cytology screening., Objectives The next round of the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP)-sponsored cervical cancer screening and management guidelines will recommend clinical actions based on risk, rather than test-based algorithms. This article gives preliminary risk estimates for the screening setting, showing combinations of the 2 most important predictors, human papillomavirus (HPV) status and cytology result. Materials and Methods Among 1,262,713 women aged 25 to 77 years co-tested with HC2 (Qiagen) and cytology at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, we estimated 0–5-year cumulative risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2+, CIN 3+, and cancer for combinations of cytology (negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy [NILM], atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance [ASC-US], low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion [LSIL], atypical squamous cells cannot exclude HSIL [ASC-H], high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion [HSIL], atypical glandular cells [AGC]) and HPV status. Results Ninety percent of screened women had HPV-negative NILM and an extremely low risk of subsequent cancer. Five-year risks of CIN 3+ were lower after HPV negativity (0.12%) than after NILM (0.25%). Among HPV-negative women, 5-year risks for CIN 3+ were 0.10% for NILM, 0.44% for ASC-US, 1.8% for LSIL, 3.0% for ASC-H, 1.2% for AGC, and 29% for HSIL+ cytology (which was very rare). Among HPV-positive women, 5-year risks were 4.0% for NILM, 6.8% for ASC-US, 6.1% for LSIL, 28% for ASC-H, 30% for AGC, and 50% for HSIL+ cytology. Conclusions As a foundation for the next guidelines revision, we confirmed with additional precision the risk estimates previously reported for combinations of HPV and cytology. Future analyses will estimate risks for women being followed in colposcopy clinic and posttreatment and will consider the role of risk modifiers such as age, HPV vaccine status, HPV type, and screening and treatment history.

OBJECTIVE To compare the risks of histologic high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) or worse after different cervical cancer screening test results between two of the largest U.S. clinical practice research data sets. METHODS The New Mexico Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Pap Registry is a statewide registry representing a diverse population experiencing varied clinical practice delivery. Kaiser Permanente Northern California is a large integrated health care delivery system practicing routine HPV cotesting since 2003. In this retrospective cohort study, a logistic-Weibull survival model was used to estimate and compare the cumulative 3- and 5-year risks of histologic CIN 3 or worse among women aged 21-64 years screened in 2007-2011 in the New Mexico HPV Pap Registry and 2003-2013 in Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Results were stratified by age and baseline screening result: negative cytology, atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) (with or without HPV triage), low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion. RESULTS There were 453,618 women in the New Mexico HPV Pap Registry and 1,307,528 women at Kaiser Permanente Northern California. The 5-year CIN 3 or worse risks were similar within screening results across populations: cytology negative (0.52% and 0.30%, respectively, P

Many countries are transitioning to HPV testing for cervical cancer screening, despite a lack of long-term experience. To anticipate multi-round screening performance, we analyzed 15-year HPV testing results at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC). We evaluated HPV test result patterns among women aged 30–64 undergoing triennial HPV/cytology cotesting at KPNC during 2003–2018. We calculated incidence rates and proportion of CIN3+ diagnoses associated with the most frequent HPV testing patterns overall and stratified by age. From 2003 to 2018, a total of 1,361,581 women had a valid HPV test result, and 7,087 were diagnosed with CIN3+. Incidence rates of CIN3+ after HPV positivity were lowest when HPV detection was new and highest in women with prevalent infections (770 vs. 13,910/100,000 person-years). Repeat test negativity reduced subsequent incidence rates of CIN3+ to extremely low levels (18/100,000 person-years following four consecutive negative results). For mixed patterns of positivity/negativity, the recency and frequency of positive tests were associated with increased rates of CIN3+ diagnosis. Most CIN3+ cases (76%) were diagnosed in women who were positive at baseline (the first known positive HPV result); 16% were attributed to apparent newly detected infections and 3% to possible reappearing infections. These results corroborate previous findings that current HPV positivity, particularly when prevalent rather than new, is associated with the highest rates of CIN3+. In a screening program implementing HPV testing, most CIN3+ is detected at the first HPV positive test.

BACKGROUND The objective of cervical screening is to detect and treat precancer to prevent cervical cancer mortality and morbidity while minimizing overtreatment of benign human papillomavirus (HPV) infections and related minor abnormalities. HPV/cytology cotesting at extended 5-year intervals currently is a recommended screening strategy in the United States, but the interval extension is controversial. In the current study, the authors examined the impact of a decade of an alternative, 3-year cotesting, on rates of precancer and cancer at Kaiser Permanente Northern California. The effect on screening efficiency, defined as numbers of cotests/colposcopy visits needed to detect a precancer, also was considered. METHODS Two cohorts were defined. The “open cohort” included all women screened at least once during the study period; > 1 million cotests were performed. In a fixed “long-term screening cohort,” the authors considered the cumulative impact of repeated screening at 3-year intervals by restricting the cohort to women first cotested in 2003 through 2004 (ie, no women entering screening later were added to this group). RESULTS Detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3/adenocarcinoma in situ (CIN3/AIS) increased in the open cohort (2004-2006: 82.0/100,000 women screened; 2007-2009: 140.6/100,000 women screened; and 2010-2012: 126.0/100,000 women screened); cancer diagnoses were unchanged. In the long-term screening cohort, the detection of CIN3/AIS increased and then decreased to the original level (2004-2006: 80.5/100,000 women screened; 2007-2009: 118.6/100,000 women screened; and 2010-2012: 84.9./100,000 women screened). The number of cancer diagnoses was found to decrease. When viewed in terms of screening efficiency, the number of colposcopies performed to detect a single case of CIN3/AIS increased in the cohort with repeat screening. CONCLUSIONS Repeated cotesting at a 3-year interval eventually lowers population rates of precancer and cancer. However, a greater number of colposcopies are required to detect a single precancer. Cancer 2016. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Women previously vaccinated against human papillomavirus (HPV) type 16 and 18 are now reaching the age (21 years) at which cervical-cancer screening is recommended in the U.S. The impact of HPV vaccination on risks of cervical precancer following a positive and negative screen among women aged 21-24 years who just started routine cervical screening are not well described. Therefore, three-year absolute and relative (RR) cumulative risks of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe diagnoses (≥CIN2) and grade 3 or more severe diagnoses (≥CIN3) were estimated for women undergoing cervical screening at Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Risks were estimated in women aged 21-24 years (n = 75,008) undergoing cervical screening since late 2006, 6 months after HPV vaccination became available; women were categorized vaccinated at ages18, 18-20, and 21-24 years and compared to those who were unvaccinated. Three-year risks were estimated for normal, low-grade, and high-grade cytology results. Three-year risks of ≥CIN2 and ≥CIN3 for unvaccinated women following low-grade cytology were 10.89% for and 3.70%, respectively. By comparison, Three-year risks of ≥CIN2 and ≥CIN3 were 5.26% (RR = 0.48, 95%CI = 0.24-0.99) and 0.99% (RR = 0.27, 95%CI = 0.06-1.13), respectively, for women vaccinated under the age of 18 years. Three-year ≥CIN2 and ≥CIN3 risks were lower for those HPV vaccinated at younger age for any screening result (p

Background Cervical cancer is caused by persistent human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. US consensus management guidelines for a positive cervical screening result typically focus on the current screening result only. A negative testing history may alter risk of the following positive screening results, caused by a new HPV infection, and therefore its optimal management. Methods Women ages 30 years and older were screened with triennial HPV and cytology co-testing at Kaiser Permanente Northern California from 2003 to 2014. We estimated the subsequent 5-year risks of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or more severe diagnoses (CIN3+) in a cohort of 1 156 387 women following abnormal (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance [ASC-US] or worse) cytology and/or positive HPV testing, when the test result followed 0 (n = 990 013), 1 (n = 543 986), 2 (n = 245 974), or 3 (n = 79 946) consecutive negative co-test(s). All statistical tests were two-sided. Results Following 0–3 successive negative co-tests, 5-year CIN3+ risks following a positive HPV test decreased progressively from 7.2% (95% CI = 7.0% to 7.4%) to 1.5% (95% CI = 0.7% to 3.4%) (Ptrend Conclusions Following one or more sequential antecedent, documented negative co-tests or HPV tests, women with HPV-positive ASC-US or low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion might have sufficiently low CIN3+ risk that they do not need colposcopy referral and might instead undergo 6–12-month surveillance for evidence of higher risk before being referred to colposcopy.

Purpose Obesity has been inconsistently linked to increased cervical cancer incidence and mortality; however, the effect of obesity on cervical screening has not been explored. We investigated the hypothesis that increased body mass might decrease detection of cervical precancer and increase risk of cervical cancer even in women undergoing state-of-the-art screening. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 944,227 women age 30 to 64 years who underwent cytology and human papillomavirus DNA testing (ie, cotesting) at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (January 2003 to December 2015). Body mass index was categorized as normal/underweight (< 25 kg/m2), overweight (25 to < 30 kg/m2), or obese (≥ 30 kg/m2). We estimated 5-year cumulative risks of cervical precancer and cancer by category of body mass index using logistic Weibull survival models. Results We observed lower risk of cervical precancer (n = 4,489) and higher risk of cervical cancer (n = 490) with increasing body mass index. Specifically, obese women had the lowest 5-year risk of precancer (0.51%; 95% CI, 0.48% to 0.54% v 0.73%; 95% CI, 0.70% to 0.76% in normal/underweight women; P trend < .001). In contrast, obese women had the highest 5-year risk of cancer (0.083%; 95% CI, 0.072% to 0.096% v 0.056%; 95% CI, 0.048% to 0.066% in normal/underweight women; P trend < .001). Results were consistent in subgroups defined by age (30 to 49 v 50 to 64 years), human papillomavirus status (positive v negative), and histologic subtype (glandular v squamous). Approximately 20% of cervical cancers could be attributed to overweight or obesity in the women in our study who underwent routine cervical screening. Conclusion In this large, screened population, overweight and obese women had an increased risk of cervical cancer, likely because of underdiagnosis of cervical precancer. Improvements in equipment and/or technique to assure adequate sampling and visualization of women with elevated body mass might reduce cervical cancer incidence.

Current U.S. cervical cancer screening and management guidelines do not consider previous screening history, because data on multiple-round human papillomavirus (HPV) and cytology "co-testing" have been unavailable.To measure cervical cancer risk in routine practice after successive negative screening co-tests at 3-year intervals.Observational cohort study.Integrated health care system (Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California).990 013 women who had 1 or more co-tests from 2003 to 2014.3- and 5-year cumulative detection of (risk for) cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3, adenocarcinoma in situ, and cervical cancer (≥CIN3) in women with different numbers of negative co-tests, overall and within subgroups defined by previous co-test results or baseline age.Five-year ≥CIN3 risks decreased after each successive negative co-test screening round (0.098%, 0.052%, and 0.035%). Five-year ≥CIN3 risks for an HPV-negative co-test, regardless of the cytology result, nearly matched the performance (reassurance) of a negative co-test for each successive round of screening (0.114%, 0.061%, and 0.041%). By comparison, ≥CIN3 risks for the cytology-negative co-test, regardless of the HPV result, also decreased with each successive round, but 3-year risks were as high as 5-year risks after an HPV-negative co-test (0.199%, 0.065%, and 0.043%). No interval cervical cancer cases were diagnosed after the second negative co-test. Independently, ≥CIN3 risks decreased with age. Length of previous screening interval did not influence future ≥CIN3 risks.Interval-censored observational data.After 1 or more negative cervical co-tests (or HPV tests), longer screening intervals (every 5 years or more) might be feasible and safe.National Cancer Institute Intramural Research Program.

In the United States, high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is recommended for women with atypical squamous cells of unknown significance (ASC-US) cytology, and co-testing with cytology and HPV is a recommended option for screening women aged ≥ 30 years. No population-based data are available to examine utilization of HPV testing in the United States. Using the New Mexico HPV Pap Registry data resource, we describe population trends (2007-2012) in utilization and positivity rates for HPV testing as a routine co-testing screening procedure and for triage of ASC-US and other cytologic outcomes. For women aged 30-65 years co-testing increased from 5.2% in 2007 to 19.1% in 2012 (p < 0.001). Overall 82% of women with ASC-US cytology who did not receive co-testing also had an HPV test. HPV positivity was age and cytology result dependent but did not show time trends. For women with negative cytology, 64% received an additional screening test within 3 years if no co-test was done or if it was positive, but this was reduced to 47% with a negative co-test. Reflex HPV testing for ASC-US cytology is well established and occurs in most women. Evidence for reflex testing is also observed following other abnormal cytology outcomes. Co-testing in women aged 30-65 years has more than tripled from 2007 to 2012, but was still only used in 19.1% of women aged 30-65 years attending for screening in 2012. Women receiving co-testing had longer repeat screening intervals, but rescreening within 3 years is still very common even with co-testing.

Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) frequently regresses, is typically slow-growing, and rarely progresses to cancer. Some women forgo immediate treatment, opting for conservative management (heightened surveillance with cytology and colposcopy), to minimize overtreatment and increased risk of obstetric complications; however, there are limited data examining clinical outcomes in these women. We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of younger women diagnosed with initially untreated CIN1/2, CIN2 and CIN2/3 lesions at Kaiser Permanente Northern California between 2003 and 2015. Clinical outcomes were categorized into five mutually exclusive hierarchical groups: cancer, treated, returned to routine screening, persistent high-grade lesion, or persistent low-grade lesion. Median follow-up for the 2,417 women was 48 months. Six women were diagnosed with cancer (0.2%), all with history of high-grade cytology, and none after a negative cotest. Thirty percent of women were treated, and only 20% returned to routine screening; 50% remained in continued intensive follow-up, of which 86% had either low-grade cytology/histology or high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) positivity, but not necessarily persistence of a single HPV type. No cancers were detected after a single negative cotest in follow-up. Almost half of initially untreated women did not undergo treatment, but remained by protocol in colposcopy clinic for 2 or more years in the absence of persisting CIN2+. Their incomplete return to total negativity was possibly due to sequential new and unrelated low-grade abnormalities. The prolonged colposcopic surveillance currently required to return to routine screening in the absence of persisting CIN2+ might not be necessary after a negative cotest. Significance: Many younger women under conservative management following an initial CIN2 result remain in a clinical protocol of prolonged intensified surveillance without a subsequent diagnosis of CIN2 or more severe diagnoses. More research is needed to determine whether such prolonged management might be unnecessary following a negative cotest for those women with an initial CIN2 but otherwise only low-grade findings. Cancer Prev Res; 11(3); 165–70. ©2018 AACR.

The goal of cervical screening is to detect and treat precancers before some become cancer. We wanted to understand why, despite state-of-the-art methods, cervical cancers occured in relationship to programmatic performance at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC), where1,000,000 women aged ≥30years have undergone cervical cancer screening by triennial HPV and cytology cotesting since 2003.We reviewed clinical histories preceding cervical cancer diagnoses to assign "causes" of cancer. We calculated surrogate measures of programmatic effectiveness (precancers/(precancers and cancers)) and diagnostic yield (precancers and cancers per 1000 cotests), overall and by age at cotest (30-39, 40-49, and ≥50years).Cancer was rare and found mainly in a localized (treatable) stage. Of 623 cervical cancers with at least one preceding or concurrent cotest, 360 (57.8%) were judged to be prevalent (diagnosed at a localized stage within one year or regional/distant stage within two years of the first cotest). Non-compliance with recommended screening and management preceded 9.0% of all cancers. False-negative cotests/sampling errors (HPV and cytology negative), false-negative histologic diagnoses, and treatment failures preceded 11.2%, 9.0%, and 4.3%, respectively, of all cancers. There was significant heterogeneity in the causes of cancer by histologic category (p0.001 for all; p=0.002 excluding prevalent cases). Programmatic effectiveness (95.3%) and diagnostic yield were greater for squamous cell versus adenocarcinoma histology (p0.0001) and both decreased with older ages (pA state-of-the-art intensive screening program results in very few cervical cancers, most of which are detected early by screening. Screening may become less efficient at older ages.

It is unclear whether a woman's age influences her risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) upon detection of HPV. A large change in risk as women age would influence vaccination and screening policies. Among 972,029 women age 30-64 undergoing screening with Pap and HPV testing (Hybrid Capture 2, Qiagen, Germantown, MD) at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC), we calculated age-specific 5-year CIN3+ risks among women with HPV infections detected at enrollment, and among women with "newly detected" HPV infections at their second screening visit. Women (57,899, 6.0%) had an enrollment HPV infection. Among the women testing HPV negative at enrollment with a second screening visit, 16,724 (3.3%) had a newly detected HPV infection at their second visit. Both enrollment and newly detected HPV rates declined with age (p < 0.001). Women with enrollment versus newly detected HPV infection had higher 5-year CIN3+ risks: 8.5% versus 3.9%, (p < 0.0001). Risks did not increase with age but declined slightly from 30-34 years to 60-64 years: 9.4% versus 7.4% (p = 0.017) for enrollment HPV and 5.1% versus 3.5% (p = 0.014) for newly detected HPV. Among women age 30-64 in an established screening program, women with newly detected HPV infections were at lower risk than women with enrollment infections, suggesting reduced benefit vaccinating women at older ages. Although the rates of HPV infection declined dramatically with age, the subsequent CIN3+ risks associated with HPV infection declined only slightly. The CIN3+ risks among older women are sufficiently elevated to warrant continued screening through age 65.

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. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2014;122:914–920. © 2014 American Cancer Society.

BACKGROUND Different US practice guidelines have conflicting recommendations for when women should return after a screening result of human papillomavirus (HPV)-negative with an equivocal Papanicolaou (Pap) result of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) (ie, return in either 3 or 5 years). One way to determine management is to compare the risk of precancer/cancer after an HPV-negative/ASC-US result with the risks after other negative screening results. For example, if the risk after an HPV-negative/ASC-US result was similar to the risk after a negative Pap test, a 3-year return would be preferred because guidelines agree that women with negative Pap test results should return in 3 years. Alternatively, if the risk after an HPV-negative/ASC-US result is similar to that after a cotest-negative result (HPV negative/Pap test negative), a 5-year return would be preferred because guidelines agree that women testing cotest negative should return in 5 years. METHODS The authors compared risks of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 3 or higher (CIN3+) and cervical cancer among women aged 30 years to 64 years at Kaiser Permanente Northern California with the following test results from 2003 through 2012: 17,191 women testing HPV negative/ASC-US; 980,268 women testing Pap test negative (regardless of HPV result); and 892,882 women testing cotest negative. RESULTS The 5-year CIN3+ and cancer risks after an HPV-negative/ASC-US result were closer to the risks after a negative Pap test result (CIN3+: 0.48% vs 0.31% [P =.0019]; and cancer: 0.043% vs 0.031% [P =.4]) than after a negative cotest (CIN3+: 0.48% vs 0.11% [P

OBJECTIVE Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) introduced 3-year Pap and human papillomavirus DNA cotesting for cervical cancer screening in women 30 years or older in 2003 to 2004. Patient and provider willingness to extend screening intervals and the impact on annual cervical cancer incidence after interval extension are evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS Age-adjusted cervical cancer rates and screening intervals were calculated from KPNC Regional Laboratory databases and Northern California Cancer Registry from 2000 to 2009. RESULTS The median screening interval between negative cotests was 36 months compared to the 16 months after a negative Pap test alone before the implementation of cotesting. The age-adjusted invasive cancer rate was 6.5 per 100,000 women in 2000 and 6.3 in 2009; there was no difference in the rates of cervical cancer in women 30 years or older from 2000 to 2009 (p(trend) = .7). CONCLUSIONS Patients and providers were compliant with the extension of screening intervals with cotesting. Cervical cancer rates remained constant during the 10-year study period despite extending screening intervals after a negative cotest.

Key Points Question What are efficient approaches for triage of human papillomavirus–positive women in cervical cancer screening? Findings This cohort study of 3225 women found that p16/Ki-67 dual stain, alone or in combination with human papillomavirus 16/18 genotyping, provides better risk stratification than comparable cytologic-based strategies. Meaning Triage of human papillomavirus–positive women with dual stain may lead to lower referral to undergo colposcopy with similar detection of precancerous lesions compared with cytologic screening, making cervical cancer screening more efficient., Importance As cervical cancer screening transitions from Papanicolaou cytologic screening to primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing worldwide, effective triage tests are needed to decide who among the HPV-positive women should receive further diagnostic evaluation to avoid unnecessary colposcopies and biopsies. Objective To evaluate the performance of the p16/Ki-67 dual stain (DS) and HPV16/18 genotyping for the triage of HPV-positive women. Design, Setting, and Participants A prospective observational study was conducted within the cervical cancer screening program at Kaiser Permanente Northern California of 3225 HPV-positive women undergoing HPV and Papanicolaou cytologic testing with a valid DS result from September 16 to October 31, 2015, with follow-up through December 31, 2018. Exposures Human papillomavirus screening with partial genotyping and cytologic triage compared with DS triage. Main Outcomes and Measures Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or more severe (CIN3+) and grade 2 or more severe (CIN2+), diagnosed within 3 years after sample collection. Results A total of 3225 women (mean [SD] age, 37.9 [11.3] years) participated in the study. For triage of HPV-positive women with partial genotyping, DS showed better risk stratification for CIN3+ than did Papanicolaou cytologic testing, with women with positive DS results having a higher risk than women with positive Papanicolaou test results for CIN3+ (218 of 1818 [12.0%; 95% CI, 10.5%-13.5%] vs 219 of 2128 [10.3%; 95% CI, 9.0%-11.6%]; P = .005). Similarly, DS showed better risk stratification for CIN3+ compared with Papanicolaou cytologic testing in HPV-positive women, irrespective of genotyping. The greatest reassurance against CIN3+ was observed in HPV16/18-negative women with negative DS results, with a risk low enough to extend retesting intervals. Dual stain triage strategies required substantially fewer colposcopies per detection of CIN3+ compared with Papanicolaou cytologic testing, with a 32.1% (859 of 2677) reduction of colposcopies compared with the currently recommended triage strategy of HPV screening with Papanicolaou cytologic testing. Results for CIN2+ were very similar. Conclusions and Relevance Triage of HPV-positive women with DS was superior to Papanicolaou cytologic testing in this study, demonstrating equal immediate detection of precancerous lesions and substantially reduced referral to colposcopy. These findings suggest that DS can safely replace Papanicolaou cytologic testing as a triage strategy for primary HPV screening, and that retesting intervals in HPV16/18-negative women with negative DS results can be safely extended to 3 years., This cohort study evaluates the performance of the p16/Ki-67 dual stain and human papillomavirus (HPV) 16/18 genotyping for the triage of women with HPV infection.

Importance As cervical cancer screening transitions to primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, effective triage and management of HPV-positive women is critical to avoid unnecessary colposcopy referral and associated harms while maintaining high sensitivity for cervical precancer. Triage with p16/Ki-67 dual-stain (DS) testing has shown high sensitivity and specificity for detection of cervical precancers; however, longitudinal studies are needed to determine the long-term risk of precancer following a negative DS result. Objective To evaluate the longitudinal performance of p16/Ki-67 DS triage for detection of cervical precancer in HPV-positive women over 5 years of follow-up in the context of clinical management thresholds. Design, Setting, and Participants Prospective cohort study of HPV-positive women 30 years or older undergoing routine cervical cancer screening in 2012 with HPV and Papanicolaou (hereinafter “cytology”) co-testing within the Kaiser Permanente Northern California health care system. Follow-up of medical records was conducted through 2017. Exposures All p16/Ki-67 DS testing was performed on residual SurePath material, and slides were evaluated for p16/Ki-67 positivity. Main Outcomes and Measures Histological end points were ascertained from the clinical database through 2017. We estimated 5-year cumulative risks of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grades of 2 or worse (≥CIN2) or grades 3 or worse (≥CIN3) by baseline DS and cytology at yearly intervals using Logistic Weibull models. Risks were compared with clinical management thresholds for colposcopy referral and a 1-year return interval. Results Among the 1549 HPV-positive women in this study, the mean age at enrollment was 42.2 years, and the median follow-up time was 3.7 years (range, 0.2-5.4 years). Positive DS results were associated with significantly higher cumulative 5-year risks of ≥CIN2 compared with abnormal cytology (31.0%; 95% CI, 27.2%-35.3% vs 25.0%; 95% CI, 21.7%-28.7%;P = .03). Women with DS-negative findings had significantly lower 5-year risks of ≥CIN2 compared with women with normal cytology (8.5%; 95% CI, 6.5%-11.1% vs 12.3%; 95% CI, 9.8%-15.4%;P = .04). In DS-negative women, the risks of both ≥CIN2 and ≥CIN3 remained below the colposcopy referral threshold for all 5 years, crossing the 1-year return threshold at 3 years. Conclusions and Relevance Triage with p16/Ki-67 DS provides better long-term risk stratification than cytology over 5 years. The low risk of cervical precancer in p16/Ki-67 DS–negative women permits safe extension of follow-up intervals for 3 years.

Infection with human papillomavirus (HPV) is recognized as one of the major causes of infection-related cancer worldwide, as well as the causal factor in other diseases. Strong evidence for a causal etiology with HPV has been stated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer for cancers of the cervix uteri, penis, vulva, vagina, anus and oropharynx (including base of the tongue and tonsils). Of the estimated 12.7 million new cancers occurring in 2008 worldwide, 4.8% were attributable to HPV infection, with substantially higher incidence and mortality rates seen in developing versus developed countries. In recent years, we have gained tremendous knowledge about HPVs and their interactions with host cells, tissues and the immune system; have validated and implemented strategies for safe and efficacious prophylactic vaccination against HPV infections; have developed increasingly sensitive and specific molecular diagnostic tools for HPV detection for use in cervical cancer screening; and have substantially increased global awareness of HPV and its many associated diseases in women, men, and children. While these achievements exemplify the success of biomedical research in generating important public health interventions, they also generate new and daunting challenges: costs of HPV prevention and medical care, the implementation of what is technically possible, socio-political resistance to prevention opportunities, and the very wide ranges of national economic capabilities and health care systems. Gains and challenges faced in the quest for comprehensive control of HPV infection and HPV-related cancers and other disease are summarized in this review. The information presented may be viewed in terms of a reframed paradigm of prevention of cervical cancer and other HPV-related diseases that will include strategic combinations of at least four major components: 1) routine introduction of HPV vaccines to women in all countries, 2) extension and simplification of existing screening programs using HPV-based technology, 3) extension of adapted screening programs to developing populations, and 4) consideration of the broader spectrum of cancers and other diseases preventable by HPV vaccination in women, as well as in men. Despite the huge advances already achieved, there must be ongoing efforts including international advocacy to achieve widespread-optimally universal-implementation of HPV prevention strategies in both developed and developing countries. This article summarizes information from the chapters presented in a special ICO Monograph 'Comprehensive Control of HPV Infections and Related Diseases' Vaccine Volume 30, Supplement 5, 2012. Additional details on each subtopic and full information regarding the supporting literature references may be found in the original chapters. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Prophylactic human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines and new HPV screening tests, combined with traditional Pap test screening, provide an unprecedented opportunity to greatly reduce cervical cancer in the USA. Despite these advances, thousands of women continue to be diagnosed with and die of this highly preventable disease each year. This paper describes the initiatives and recommendations of national cervical cancer experts toward preventing and possibly eliminating this disease.In May 2011, Cervical Cancer-Free America, a national initiative, convened a cervical cancer summit in Washington, DC. Over 120 experts from the public and private sector met to develop a national agenda for reducing cervical cancer morbidity and mortality in the USA.Summit participants evaluated four broad challenges to reducing cervical cancer: (1) low use of HPV vaccines, (2) low use of cervical cancer screening, (3) screening errors, and (4) lack of continuity of care for women diagnosed with cervical cancer. The summit offered 12 concrete recommendations to guide future national and local efforts toward this goal.Cervical cancer incidence and mortality can be greatly reduced by better deploying existing methods and systems. The challenge lies in ensuring that the array of available prevention options are accessible and utilized by all age-appropriate women-particularly minority and underserved women who are disproportionately affected by this disease. The consensus was that cervical cancer can be greatly reduced and that prevention efforts can lead the way towards a dramatic reduction in this preventable disease in our country.

New screening guidelines recommend that human papillomavirus (HPV)-negative/atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) results be considered as equivalent to HPV-negative/Pap-negative results, leading to rescreening in 5 years. However, despite ample data, the routine clinical performance of HPV testing of women with ASC-US has not been adequately documented.We estimated 5-year risks of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 3+ and of cancer among 2 groups of women between 2003 and 2010 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California: 27,050 aged 30 to 64 years who underwent HPV and Pap cotesting and had an ASC-US Pap result and 12,209 aged 25 to 29 years who underwent HPV triage of ASC-US.Five-year risks of CIN 3+ and of cancer among women aged 30 to 64 years testing HPV-negative/ASC-US and among 923,152 women testing Pap-negative alone were similar although statistically distinguishable (CIN 3+, 0.43% vs 0.26%, p = .001; cancer, 0.050% vs 0.025%, p = .1). The increased risk of cancer after HPV-negative/ASC-US versus Pap-negative alone was confined to women aged 60 to 64 years (0.26% vs 0.035%, p = .3). Five-year risks of CIN 3+ and cancer among women with HPV-negative/ASC-US results were substantially higher than those among women testing HPV-negative/Pap-negative (CIN 3+, 0.43% vs 0.08%, p.0001; cancer, 0.050% vs 0.011%, p = .003). For women aged 30 to 64 years testing HPV-positive/ASC-US, 5-year risks of CIN 3+ and cancer were slightly higher than those among 9,374 women with low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) (CIN 3+, 6.8% vs 5.2%, p = .0007; cancer, 0.41% vs 0.16%, p = .04). Similar patterns were seen for women aged 25 to 29 years.Women with HPV-negative/ASC-US had a similar risk as women testing Pap-negative alone but had a higher risk than women testing HPV-negative/Pap-negative. Based upon the principle of "equal management of equal risks," our findings support the equal management of women with HPV-negative/ASC-US and those with Pap-negative alone, except for exiting women from screening because cancer risks at ages 60 to 64 years may be higher for women testing HPV-negative/ASC-US. Our findings also support managing HPV-positive/ASC-US and LSIL similarly.

Current US guidelines for cotesting recommend that the large numbers of women who test Pap-negative, but human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive, return in 1 year, and those who remain HPV-positive or have low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) or worse Pap results be referred for colposcopy. However, the performance of these guidelines in routine clinical practice has not been evaluated.We estimated cumulative 5-year risks of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse (CIN 3+) among 32,374 women aged 30 to 64 years with HPV-positive/Pap-negative cotest results at Kaiser Permanente Northern California during 2003 to 2010.The 5-year CIN 3+ risk after an HPV-positive/Pap-negative cotest result, which was found in 3.6% of women, was 4.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 4.2%-4.8%). The 5-year cancer risk was 0.34% (95% CI = 0.26%-0.45%), and half of the cases were adenocarcinoma. Overall, 48% of the women remained HPV-positive on return (median = 418 days after baseline), a percentage that varied little over ages 30 to 64 years. At the return after a baseline HPV-positive/Pap-negative result, almost every repeat cotest result predicted greater subsequent 5-year CIN 3+ risk than the same cotest result had at baseline (HPV-positive/LSIL, 9.2% vs 6.1%, p = .01; HPV-positive/atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance [ASC-US], 7.9% vs 6.8%, p = .2; HPV-positive/Pap-negative, 7.4% vs 4.5%, p.0001; HPV-negative/LSIL,1.7% vs 2.0%, p = .8; HPV-negative/ASC-US, 2.9% vs 0.43%, p = .0005; HPV-negative/Pap-negative, 0.93% vs 0.08%, p.0001).Using the principle of "equal management of equal risks," women testing HPV-positive/Pap-negative had a subsequent CIN 3+ risk consistent with risk thresholds for a 1-year return. However, on returning in approximately 1 year, about one-half of women will be referred for colposcopy because of continued HPV positivity or Pap abnormality. Clinicians should keep in mind that cotest results at the return after a baseline HPV-positive/Pap-negative finding are riskier than the same baseline cotest results in the general population, supporting intensified clinical management at return testing.

OBJECTIVE Current US national guidelines recommend beginning screening at age 21 using Pap tests only, with cotesting starting at age 30. To inform the management of Pap test abnormalities among women aged 21 to 24 years, who have extremely low cancer risks, we compared risks of CIN 3+ among women aged 21 to 24 versus 25 to 29 years or 30 to 64 years. METHODS We estimated 5-year risks of CIN 3+ given different Pap test results, with human papillomavirus (HPV) triage of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US), among 133,947 women aged 21 to 24 years, compared with 135,382 women aged 25 to 29 years and 965,360 women aged 30 to 64 years, between 2003 and 2010 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California. RESULTS There were 3 cancers diagnosed during follow-up in women aged 21 to 24 years. After high-grade Pap results (0.6% of Pap results), the 5-year CIN 3+ risks among women aged 21 to 24 years were comparable to those aged 25 to 29 and 30 to 64 years (atypical glandular cells, 6.9% vs 14% vs 8.5%, p = .8; atypical squamous cells cannot rule out high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, 16% vs 24% vs 18%, p = .8; high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, 28% vs 28% vs 47%, p = .4). After low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, the 5-year CIN 3+ risk was lower among women aged 21 to 24 years (3.0%) than that among women aged 25 to 29 years (5.0%, p = .01) or aged 30 to 64 years (5.2%, p = .0002). Although the 5-year CIN 3+ risk after HPV-negative/ASC-US was similar across all 3 groups (0.57% vs 0.59% vs 0.43%, p = 1), risk after HPV-positive/ASC-US was lower among women aged 21 to 24 years (4.4%) than that among women aged 25 to 29 years (7.1%, p < .0001) or 30 to 64 years (6.8%, p < .0001). CONCLUSIONS Women aged 21 to 24 years had almost zero cancer risk, and positive Pap test results predicted low CIN 3+ risk except for the 0.6% of women with high-grade Pap results. The generally low risk supports conservative management of women aged 21 to 24 years.

Low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) Pap results do not typically lead to human papillomavirus (HPV) testing. HPV triage is not cost-effective because most cases are HPV-positive. However, under new national guidelines recommending cotesting for women aged 30 to 64 years, clinicians will increasingly receive the HPV test result with LSIL Pap results. Some authors have suggested that HPV triage might be effective at older ages, when the percentage of HPV positivity among women with LSIL declines.We estimated 5-year risks of CIN 2+ and CIN 3+ among 9,033 women aged 30 to 64 years who had both an HPV test and an LSIL Pap result.HPV positivity among women with LSIL decreased only slightly with age (30 to 34 vs 60 to 64 years, 88% vs 72%, p.0001). The 5-year risks of CIN 2+ and CIN 3+ of women aged 30 to 64 years testing HPV-positive/LSIL were larger than those among women testing HPV-negative/LSIL (CIN 2+, 19% vs 5.1%, p.0001; CIN 3+, 6.1% vs 2.0%, p.0001). The 5-year risk of CIN 3+ in HPV-negative/LSIL women was similar to that for women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) Pap test result without knowledge of HPV test results (2.0% vs 2.6%, p = .4).HPV-negative/LSIL posed lower risk than other Pap results that guidelines currently recommend for referral to immediate colposcopy. By the principle of "equal management of equal risks," women with HPV-negative/LSIL might reasonably be managed similarly to those with ASC-US Pap results without knowledge of HPV testing, that is, retesting at 6 to 12 months, rather than immediate colposcopy. Although the HPV test result for LSIL Pap results provides actionable information to clinicians who screen with cotesting, the high HPV positivity of LSIL at even the oldest ages suggests the lack of cost-effectiveness of HPV triage of LSIL for clinicians who do not use routine cotesting.

The discovery of the necessary cause of cervical cancer, human papillomavirus (HPV), has led to important technological advances, including the development of molecular tests for HPV to identify women with cervical precancerous lesions. HPV testing has proven to be more sensitive and more reliable, albeit less specific, for detection of cervical precancer than cytologic methods of detection. As the result, HPV testing can reduce the incidence of cervical cancer within 4-5 years and reduce the mortality due to cervical cancer within 8 years compared to cytology. Additionally, a negative HPV test provides greater reassurance against cervical cancer than a negative Pap test. HPV testing, because of its attributes, is useful for screening out low-risk women who do not need further intervention for 5 or more years. Thus, HPV testing can shift the emphasis of the use of Pap testing or any other more specific diagnostic test from frequent use in the entire population to the ~10% subset of women who tested positive for the causal factor, HPV. Here, we highlight the current and future status of the introduction of HPV testing into routine cervical cancer screening. This article forms part of a special supplement entitled "Comprehensive Control of HPV Infections and Related Diseases" Vaccine Volume 30, Supplement 5, 2012.

Author(s): Khan, Michelle J; Massad, L Stewart; Kinney, Walter; Gold, Michael A; Mayeaux, EJ; Darragh, Teresa M; Castle, Philip E; Chelmow, David; Lawson, Herschel W; Huh, Warner K | Abstract: ObjectiveVaginal cancer is an uncommon cancer of the lower genital tract, and standardized screening is not recommended. Risk factors for vaginal cancer include a history of other lower genital tract neoplasia or cancer, smoking, immunosuppression, and exposure to diethylstilbestrol in utero. Although cervical cancer screening after total hysterectomy for benign disease is not recommended, many women inappropriately undergo vaginal cytology and/or human papillomavirus (HPV) tests, and clinicians are faced with managing their abnormal results. Our objectives were to review the literature on vaginal cytology and high-risk HPV (hrHPV) testing and to develop guidance for the management of abnormal vaginal screening tests.Materials and methodsAn electronic search of the PubMed database through 2015 was performed. Articles describing vaginal cytology or vaginal hrHPV testing were reviewed, and diagnostic accuracy of these tests when available was noted.ResultsThe available literature was too limited to develop evidence-based recommendations for managing abnormal vaginal cytology and hrHPV screening tests. However, the data did show that (1) the risk of vaginal cancer in women after hysterectomy is extremely low, justifying the recommendation against routine screening, and (2) in women for whom surveillance is recommended, e.g., women posttreatment for cervical precancer or cancer, hrHPV testing may be useful in identification of vaginal cancer precursors.ConclusionsVaginal cancer is rare, and asymptomatic low-risk women should not be screened. An algorithm based on expert opinion is proposed for managing women with abnormal vaginal test results.

Although ultrasound has so far been found to be ineffective as a screening tool for ovarian cancer, it is commonly used as a means of evaluating or following ovarian or adnexal masses once they are detected. We review the use of serial ultrasound for the management of adnexal masses and propose an approach to monitoring based on an understanding of the overall risk of cancer among the population in question and an assessment of how the potential benefit of monitoring compares with potential risk. In our approach, masses that are symptomatic, large (>10cm), associated with an elevated CA 125 level or overt signs of malignancy, or that are determined to have a worrisome appearance by stringent ultrasound criteria should be evaluated surgically. Women with masses that have none of these characteristics should be offered monitoring. Short-term initial ultrasound monitoring carries significant potential benefit in terms of aiding detection of early malignancy and avoidance of unnecessary surgery. However, if a mass remains stable but persistent, the potential benefit of ongoing monitoring wanes with time, whereas the potential harms, in terms of patient anxiety, cost and the risk of incidental findings and unnecessary surgery increase. Therefore, monitoring of stable lesions should be limited in duration in order to limit potential harms from overtreatment and overdiagnosis.

Objective To characterize the antecedent screening of women 65years of age and older diagnosed with cervical cancer. Methods Screening histories of women 65years of age and older who were diagnosed with cervical cancer between 2003 and 2008 were examined utilizing the organization's databases and the regional Cancer Registry. Stopping screening was recommended at age 65 for members who had either 3 consecutive negative Paps or a single negative Pap plus HPV test ("cotest"). Results From 2003 through 2008 there were 56 Kaiser Permanente Northern California members 65years of age and older diagnosed with cervical cancer. During the same time period there were 1,323,100 woman-years of membership in women age 65 and older. The risk of invasive cancer among women age 65 and older was 4.2/100,000/year in 2003–2008. 33 of 56 (59%) had one or more Pap smears prior to diagnosis. Of the 33, 14 women (25%) had 3 consecutive negative Pap smears prior to diagnosis. Three of 46,401 women with 1 or more negative cotests at age 65 and older were subsequently diagnosed with invasive cancer during 132,639 women-years of follow-up (2.3/100,000/year). Conclusions Most cervical cancers diagnosed at age 65 and older occur in women who have not met our criteria for stopping screening. A few cancers will continue to occur at age 65 and older despite multiple negative tests, as is true in other age groups. We currently have no evidence that these cancers would be prevented with continued screening at ages 65 and older.

An update to the American Cancer Society (ACS) guideline regarding screening for the early detection of cervical precancerous lesions and cancer is presented. The guidelines are based on a systematic evidence review, contributions from 6 working groups, and a recent symposium cosponsored by the ACS, the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and the American Society for Clinical Pathology, which was attended by 25 organizations. The new screening recommendations address age-appropriate screening strategies, including the use of cytology and high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, follow-up (eg, the management of screen positives and screening intervals for screen negatives) of women after screening, the age at which to exit screening, future considerations regarding HPV testing alone as a primary screening approach, and screening strategies for women vaccinated against HPV16 and HPV18 infections. CA Cancer J Clin 2012;62:147-172. V C

The cobas human papillomavirus (HPV) test (cobas) was recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and identifies HPV16 and HPV18 separately as well as detecting a pool of 11 HR-HPV genotypes (HPV31, -33, -35, -39, -45, -51, -52, -56, -58, -59, -68) and also HPV66. We compared cobas, Linear Array (LA), and Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) assays for detection of carcinogenic HPV DNA, and cobas and LA for detection of HPV16 and HPV18 DNA, among the first 1,852 women enrolled in the HPV Persistence and Progression Cohort (PaP Cohort) study. Specimens were tested by all 3 assays 1 year after an HC2-positive result. In 1,824 specimens with cobas results, cobas had an 85.9% agreement with HC2 and 91.0% agreement with LA for carcinogenic HPV detection. When results between cobas and HC2 disagreed, cobas tended to call more women HPV positive ( P < 0.01). Categorizing cobas and LA results hierarchically according to cancer risk (HPV16, HPV18, other carcinogenic HPV genotypes, or carcinogen negative), there was a 90% agreement for all categories of HPV ( n = 1,824). We found good agreement between the two U.S. FDA-approved HPV tests, with discrepancies between the two assays due to specific characteristics of the individual assays. Additional studies are needed to compare HC2 and cobas for detecting and predicting CIN3 to understand the clinical implications of the discrepant test results between the two tests.

The primary goal for many providers in the United States has been to deliver the level of protection against cervical cancer afforded by annual cervical cytology while improving screening test performance. Adoption of recent screening recommendations has been inconsistent and has created considerable consternation and confusion. This editorial addresses the perspective of U.S. patients and providers and how their preferences may run counter to current screening recommendations.

The article by Kinney et al1 in the August 2010 issue of the Journal expressed concern about the approval by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the Cervista HPV HR (high-risk human papillomavirus) test (Third Wave Technologies, Madison, WI; now owned by Hologic, Bedford, MA) and questioned the safety of the device owing to the positivity rate seen in the study population for women 30 years and older with negative cytologic findings (NILM ≥30). The clinical cutoff for the Cervista HPV HR test was set in the same manner as for the only other FDA-approved HR-HPV test, Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2; Qiagen, Gaithersburg, MD), by evaluating clinical sensitivity and specificity in the population with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US). The rationale for this approach is that the ASC-US population, as a population with equivocal cytologic findings, provides an informative profile of how an HPV test performs in an intended-use population in which disease prevalence is sufficient for characterizing a clinical cutoff and disease end points can be readily assessed. A head-to-head comparison against the HC2 test was performed during review of the Cervista HPV HR device. This evaluation revealed equivalent clinical specificity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 or worse for the 2 tests in the Cervista ASC-US data set, and the Cervista HPV HR test detected 100% of cases of CIN 3 or worse. In determining whether an in vitro diagnostic device is safe and effective, the FDA must consider whether the probable benefits of using the device outweigh the probable risks when the device is used in accordance with its approved labeling. Per current screening guidelines,2 the predominant use of HPV testing in the NILM ≥30 population is to extend cervical cancer screening intervals in HPV– women. In a worst-case scenario in …

To characterize the cervical cancers diagnosed following a Pap-negative, high risk human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive (Pap-/HPV+) screen in routine clinical practice.Using data from Kaiser Permanente Northern California, we investigated the cases of cervical cancer diagnosed between January, 2003 and January, 2009 following Pap-/HPV+ screen. Two cervical specimens were routinely collected for cervical cancer screening, one for conventional cytology and the other for high risk HPV testing using Hybrid Capture 2 (Qiagen).Forty-four women (median age at diagnosis=44years) were diagnosed with primary invasive cervical cancer with a recent history of one or more Pap-/HPV+ screens. Twenty-six women had one Pap-/HPV+ screen preceding the diagnosis of cancer, 15 had two, and three had three. There were 16 squamous cancers, one small cell cancer, 24 adenocarcinomas, 2 adenosquamous carcinomas, and one case with separate invasive squamous and adenocarcinoma. FIGO Stage was IA in 11 women, IB in 31 women and IIA in 2 women. Treatment included a pelvic node dissection in 30, 2 (6.7%) of whom had positive nodes.HPV testing contributes to early cervical cancer diagnosis detection in women with negative Pap tests. Most women in this cohort have early stage, node negative, treatable and potentially curable disease. Adenocarcinoma predominated as might be expected because cytology misses these cancers and their precursors. The majority of cancers were diagnosed following a single Pap-/HPV+ screen, suggesting that effective triage to colposcopy of women with a Pap-/HPV+ screen would be preferable to retesting in one year as currently recommended.

Strong evidence now supports the adoption of cervical cancer prevention strategies that explicitly focus on persistent infection with the causal agent, human papillomavirus (HPV). To inform an evidence-based transition to a new public health approach for cervical cancer screening, we summarize the natural history and cervical carcinogenicity of HPV and discuss the promise and uncertainties of currently available screening methods. New HPV infections acquired at any age are virtually always benign, but persistent infections with one of approximately 12 carcinogenic HPV types explain virtually all cases of cervical cancer. In the absence of an overtly persistent HPV infection, the risk of cervical cancer is extremely low. Thus, HPV test results predict the risk of cervical cancer and its precursors (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3) better and longer than cytological or colposcopic abnormalities, which are signs of HPV infection. The logical and inevitable move to HPV-based cervical cancer prevention strategies will require longer screening intervals that will disrupt current gynecologic and cytology laboratory practices built on frequent screening. A major challenge will be implementing programs that do not overtreat HPV-positive women who do not have obvious long-term persistence of HPV or treatable lesions at the time of initial evaluation. The greatest potential for reduction in cervical cancer rates from HPV screening is in low-resource regions that can implement infrequent rounds of low-cost HPV testing and treatment.