Dataset Information

Xpert human papillomavirus test is a promising cervical cancer screening test for HIV-seropositive women.

ABSTRACT: This study investigated the performance of Cepheid Xpert human papillomavirus (HPV) assay in South African human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected women and compared its performance with that of hybrid capture-2 (hc2).Stored cervical specimens from HIV-infected women that had previously been tested using hc2 were tested using Xpert.The overall HR-HPV prevalence was found to be 62.0% (720/1161) by Xpert and 61.2% (711/1161) by hc2. 13.6% (158/1161) were HPV16 positive, 18.8% (218/1161) were HPV18/45, 37.3% (434/1161) were HPV31/33/35/52/58, 12.7% (147/1161) were HPV51/59 and 23.3% (270/1161) were HPV39/68/56/66. Overall agreement with hc2 was 90%; Cohen's kappa was 0.78 (95% CI 0.74-0.82) indicating substantial agreement. Detection of HPV16, HPV18/45, and HPV31/33/35/52/58 were independently associated with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)-2+ (P<0.0001 for each); while HPV51/59 and HPV39/68/56/66 were not. Women infected with HPV16, HPV18/45 or HPV31/33/35/52/58 were found to have significantly higher amounts of HPV DNA detected for those with CIN2+ compared to those without CIN2+, P<0.0001 for each. Xpert and hc2 were similarly sensitive (88.3% and 91.5%, respectively) and specific (48.4% and 51.0%) for CIN2+ and CIN3 (sensitivity: 95.8% and 97.9%; specificity: 41.4% and 42.8%).Xpert is a promising screening test in HIV-infected women that performs similarly to hc2.

SUBMITTER: Mbulawa ZZA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5886871 | biostudies-other | 2016 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Xpert human papillomavirus test is a promising cervical cancer screening test for HIV-seropositive women.

Mbulawa Zizipho Z A ZZA Wilkin Timothy J TJ Goeieman Bridgette B Swarts Avril A Williams Sophie S Levin Simon S Faesen Mark M Smith Jennifer S JS Chibwesha Carla J CJ Williamson Anna-Lise AL Firnhaber Cynthia C

Papillomavirus research (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 20160303

This study investigated the performance of Cepheid Xpert human papillomavirus (HPV) assay in South African human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected women and compared its performance with that of hybrid capture-2 (hc2).<h4>Methods</h4>Stored cervical specimens from HIV-infected women that had previously been tested using hc2 were tested using Xpert.<h4>Results</h4>The overall HR-HPV prevalence was found to be 62.0% (720/1161) by Xpert and 61.2% (711/1161) by hc2. 13.6% (158/1161) were HPV16 p ...[more]

PMID: 29074186

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere is scanty or inconclusive evidence on which cervical cancer screening tool is effective and suitable for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-seropositive women. The aim of this review was to assess, synthesise and document published evidence relating to the available cervical cancer screening modalities for HIV-seropositive women in developing countries. This paper did not review the issue of human papillomavirus (HPV) prophylactic vaccine on HIV-seropositive women.MethodsFive electronic databases were systematically searched from inception to January 2018 for relevant published original research examining cervical cancer prevention modalities for HPV infection, abnormal cytology and direct visualisation of the cervix amongst HIV-seropositive women in developing countries. Extra studies were identified through reference list and citation tracking.ResultsDue to methodological and clinical heterogeneity, a narrative synthesis was presented. Of the 2559 articles, 149 underwent full-text screening and 25 were included in the review. Included studies were of moderate quality, and no exclusions were made based on quality or bias. There is no standard cervical cancer screening test or programme for HIV-seropositive women and countries screening according to available resources and expertise. The screening methods used for HIV-seropositive women are the same for HIV-negative women, with varying clinical performance and accuracy. The main cervical cancer screening methods described for HIV-seropositive women are HPV deoxyribonucleic acid/messenger RNA (DNA/mRNA) testing (n = 16, 64.0%), visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) (n = 13, 52.0%) and Pap smear (n = 11, 44.0%). HPV testing has a better accuracy/efficiency than other methods with a sensitivity of 80.0-97.0% and specificity of 51.0-78.0%. Sequential screening using VIA or visual inspection with Lugol's iodine (VILI) and HPV testing has shown better clinical performance in screening HIV-seropositive women.ConclusionAlthough cervical cancer screening exists in almost all developing countries, what is missing is both opportunistic and systematic organised population-based screenings. Cervical cancer screening programmes need to be integrated into already existing HIV services to enable early detection and treatment. There is a need to offer opportunistic and coordinated screening programmes that are provider-initiated to promote early identification of cervical precancerous lesions.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42018095702.

Project description:Current US cervical cancer screening guidelines do not differentiate recommendations based on a woman's human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination status. Changes to cervical cancer screening policies in HPV-vaccinated women should be evaluated. We utilized an individual-based mathematical model of HPV and cervical cancer in US women to project the health benefits, costs, and harms associated with screening strategies in women vaccinated with the bivalent, quadrivalent, or nonavalent vaccine. Strategies varied by the primary screening test, including cytology, HPV, and combined cytology and HPV "cotesting"; age of screening initiation and/or switching to a new test; and interval between routine screens. Cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from the societal perspective to identify screening strategies that would be considered good value for money according to thresholds of $50 000 to $200 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Among women fully vaccinated with the bivalent or quadrivalent vaccine, optimal screening strategies involved either cytology or HPV testing alone every five years starting at age 25 or 30 years, with cost-effectiveness ratios ranging from $34 680 to $138 560 per QALY gained. Screening earlier or more frequently was either not cost-effective or associated with exceedingly high cost-effectiveness ratios. In women vaccinated with the nonavalent vaccine, only primary HPV testing was efficient, involving decreased frequency (ie, every 10 years) starting at either age 35 years ($40 210 per QALY) or age 30 years ($127 010 per QALY); with lower nonavalent vaccine efficacy, 10-year HPV testing starting at earlier ages of 25 or 30 years was optimal. Importantly, current US guidelines for screening were inefficient in HPV-vaccinated women. This model-based analysis suggests screening can be modified to start at later ages, occur at decreased frequency, and involve primary HPV testing in HPV-vaccinated women, providing more health benefit at lower harms and costs than current screening guidelines.

Project description:BackgroundDetermining cervical precancer risk among human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected women who despite a normal Pap test are positive for oncogenic human papillomavirus (oncHPV) types is important for setting screening practices.MethodsA total of 2791 HIV-infected and 975 HIV-uninfected women in the Women's Interagency HIV Study were followed semiannually with Pap tests and colposcopy. Cumulative risks of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or greater (CIN-2+; threshold used for CIN treatment) and grade 3 or greater (CIN-3+; threshold to set screening practices) were measured in HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected women with normal Pap tests, stratified by baseline HPV results, and also in HIV-infected women with a low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL; benchmark indication for colposcopy).ResultsAt baseline, 1021 HIV-infected and 518 HIV-uninfected women had normal Pap tests, of whom 154 (15%) and 27 (5%), respectively, tested oncHPV positive. The 5-year CIN-2+ cumulative risk in the HIV-infected oncHPV-positive women was 22% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9%-34%), 12% (95% CI, 0%-22%), and 14% (95% CI, 2%-25%) among those with CD4 counts <350, 350-499, and ≥500 cells/µL, respectively, whereas it was 10% (95% CI, 0%-21%) in those without HIV. For CIN-3+, the cumulative risk averaged 4% (95% CI, 1%-8%) in HIV-infected oncHPV-positive women, and 10% (95% CI, 0%-23%) among those positive for HPV type 16. In HIV-infected women with LSIL, CIN-3+ risk was 7% (95% CI, 3%-11%). In multivariate analysis, HIV-infected HPV16-positive women had 13-fold (P = .001) greater CIN-3+ risk than oncHPV-negative women (referent), and HIV-infected women with LSIL had 9-fold (P < .0001) greater risk.ConclusionsHIV-infected women with a normal Pap result who test HPV16 positive have high precancer risk (similar to those with LSIL), possibly warranting immediate colposcopy. Repeat screening in 1 year may be appropriate if non-16 oncHPV is detected.

Dataset Information

Xpert human papillomavirus test is a promising cervical cancer screening test for HIV-seropositive women.

Publications

Xpert human papillomavirus test is a promising cervical cancer screening test for HIV-seropositive women.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets