Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Stratifying HPV-positive women for CIN3+ risk after one and two rounds of HPV-based screening.

A main challenge of human papilloma (HPV)-based screening for cervical cancer is to adequately identify HPV-positive women at highest risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse, CIN3+. The prognostic value of currently used adjunct markers (HPV16/18 genotyping and reflex cytology) may change after multiple rounds of HPV-based screening because of a change in the proportion of HPV-positive women with incident infections. To this end, we re-analyzed results from the POBASCAM trial (Population Based Screening Study Amsterdam). Women were randomized to HPV/cytology cotesting (intervention group) or to cytology-only (HPV blinded; control group) at enrolment. Our analytical population consisted of women with an HPV-positive result at the second round, 5 years after enrolment (n = 381 intervention, n = 392 control). Nine-year CIN3+ risks were estimated by Kaplan-Meier. HPV-positive women were stratified by risk markers: HPV16/18 genotyping, reflex cytology and preceding HPV results. When comparing one to two rounds of HPV-based screening, the prognostic value of an abnormal cytology result did not change (40.0% vs. 42.3%, p = 0.5617), but diminished for an HPV16/18 positive result (25.4% vs. 38.0%, p = 0.0132). HPV16/18 genotyping was nondiscriminative in women with incident HPV infections (HPV16/18 positive 10.0% vs. negative 12.1%, p = 0.3193). Women from the intervention group were more likely to have incident infections compared to women from the control group (incident screen-positive results 75.6% vs. 64.6%, p = 0.001) Our results indicate that at a second round of HPV-based screening, risk differentiation by cytology remained strong, but was diminished for HPV 16/18 genotyping because of a larger proportion of incident infections.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app