Evaluation of the validity of the HPV viral load compared to conventional techniques for the detection of high-grade anal intraepithelial lesions in men with HIV who have sex with men.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of high-grade anal intraepithelial lesions (HSILs) has increased in recent years among men who have sex with men with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). This work evaluated the validity of the human papilloma virus viral load (HPV-VL) versus cytological and qualitative HPV results to detect HSILs.

METHODS: From May 2017 to January 2020, 93 men who have sex with men and HIV were included in an anal cancer screening program from the Infectious Diseases Unit at a tertiary-care hospital in Alicante (Spain). The gold-standard for the screening of anal HSILs is the anal biopsy using high-resolution anoscopy. The diagnostic methods compared against gold-standard were HPV-16-VL, HPV-18-VL, and HPV-16-18-VL co-testing, anal cytology, and qualitative HPV detection. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and cut-off points for HPV-VL were calculated. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and Cohen's Kappa coefficient ( κ ) were also calculated.

RESULTS: The mean patient age was 44.6 ± 9.5 years. All of them received antiretroviral treatment, 96.8% had an HIV viral load of <50 copies/mL and 17.2% had a previous diagnosis of AIDS. The diagnosis of the anal biopsies were: 19.4% ( n  = 18) HSIL, 29.1% ( n  = 27) LSIL, and 51.6% ( n  = 48) negative. An HPV-16-VL >6.2 copies/cell was detected in the HSIL biopsy samples ( p  = 0.007), showing a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 46.2%. HPV-18-VL and HPV16-18-VL co-testing showed a sensitivity of 75% and 76.9% and a specificity of 72.7% and 61.3%, respectively. The highest PPV was 50% obtained with the cytology and HPV-18-VL. The HPV-16-VL showed a NPV of 100%, followed by 88.9% in the HPV-18-VL and 87% in the abnormal cytology. Cohen's Kappa coefficient were: HPV-18-VL ( κ  = 0.412), abnormal cytology ( κ  = 0.353) and HPV-16-VL ( κ  = 0.338).

CONCLUSIONS: HPV-VL testing improved the detection sensitivity but not the specificity for HSIL biopsies compared to anal cytology and the qualitative detection of HPV. In men who have sex with men and HIV the HPV-VL could be an useful tool for diagnosis of HSILs in anal cancer screening programs. Further studies will be needed to evaluate the clinical implications of HPV-VL in these programs.