Evaluating the performance of three different cervical cancer screening modalities in a large prospective population-based cohort

Background: This study aimed to evaluate three different patterns of cervical cancer screening strategies for detection of cervical diseases. Methods: In total, 10,186 women aged 21–70 years attending cervical screening program were recruited and cotested by human papillomavirus (HPV) assays and cyt...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Fangbin Song, Hui Du, Aimin Xiao, Chun Wang, Xia Huang, Zhihong Liu, Meifang Zhao, Hongjian Men, Ruifang Wu
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2020-11-01
Series:Journal of Infection and Public Health
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876034120306298
id doaj-7e5dedc65ae94cbc96cdc165f46c06fe
record_format Article
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Fangbin Song
Hui Du
Aimin Xiao
Chun Wang
Xia Huang
Zhihong Liu
Meifang Zhao
Hongjian Men
Ruifang Wu
spellingShingle Fangbin Song
Hui Du
Aimin Xiao
Chun Wang
Xia Huang
Zhihong Liu
Meifang Zhao
Hongjian Men
Ruifang Wu
Evaluating the performance of three different cervical cancer screening modalities in a large prospective population-based cohort
Journal of Infection and Public Health
Human papillomavirus
Cervical cancer
Screening
Triage
author_facet Fangbin Song
Hui Du
Aimin Xiao
Chun Wang
Xia Huang
Zhihong Liu
Meifang Zhao
Hongjian Men
Ruifang Wu
author_sort Fangbin Song
title Evaluating the performance of three different cervical cancer screening modalities in a large prospective population-based cohort
title_short Evaluating the performance of three different cervical cancer screening modalities in a large prospective population-based cohort
title_full Evaluating the performance of three different cervical cancer screening modalities in a large prospective population-based cohort
title_fullStr Evaluating the performance of three different cervical cancer screening modalities in a large prospective population-based cohort
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating the performance of three different cervical cancer screening modalities in a large prospective population-based cohort
title_sort evaluating the performance of three different cervical cancer screening modalities in a large prospective population-based cohort
publisher Elsevier
series Journal of Infection and Public Health
issn 1876-0341
publishDate 2020-11-01
description Background: This study aimed to evaluate three different patterns of cervical cancer screening strategies for detection of cervical diseases. Methods: In total, 10,186 women aged 21–70 years attending cervical screening program were recruited and cotested by human papillomavirus (HPV) assays and cytology. Three-year histological follow-up data was recorded on women with abnormal screening results, and six clinically common screening algorithms were evaluated. Results: Significantly better protection against cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse (CIN2+) at three-year follow-up was associated with a negative HPV result than by normal cytology at baseline. HPV screening was more sensitive and less specific than cytology screening. Moreover, HPV screening with HPV16/18 and reflex cytology (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance [ASCUS] threshold) showed a similar sensitivity (94.6% vs. 98.2%, p = 0.125) and a superior specificity as compared to cotesting reflex HPV16/18 and cytology (ASCUS threshold) for CIN2+ (95.8% vs. 95.1%, p < 0.0001), achieving a colposcopy referral rate of 5.4%, and consuming 4.8 colposcopies and 4.4 cytology tests to find one CIN2+. Conclusions: HPV screening with triage of HPV-positive women by HPV16/18 genotyping and cytology provided a good equilibrium between screening effectiveness, the number of cytology tests required, and referral rates; HPV testing was similar in sensitivity to cotesting and safer than cytology, thus especially suitable for large population-based screening programs.
topic Human papillomavirus
Cervical cancer
Screening
Triage
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876034120306298
work_keys_str_mv AT fangbinsong evaluatingtheperformanceofthreedifferentcervicalcancerscreeningmodalitiesinalargeprospectivepopulationbasedcohort
AT huidu evaluatingtheperformanceofthreedifferentcervicalcancerscreeningmodalitiesinalargeprospectivepopulationbasedcohort
AT aiminxiao evaluatingtheperformanceofthreedifferentcervicalcancerscreeningmodalitiesinalargeprospectivepopulationbasedcohort
AT chunwang evaluatingtheperformanceofthreedifferentcervicalcancerscreeningmodalitiesinalargeprospectivepopulationbasedcohort
AT xiahuang evaluatingtheperformanceofthreedifferentcervicalcancerscreeningmodalitiesinalargeprospectivepopulationbasedcohort
AT zhihongliu evaluatingtheperformanceofthreedifferentcervicalcancerscreeningmodalitiesinalargeprospectivepopulationbasedcohort
AT meifangzhao evaluatingtheperformanceofthreedifferentcervicalcancerscreeningmodalitiesinalargeprospectivepopulationbasedcohort
AT hongjianmen evaluatingtheperformanceofthreedifferentcervicalcancerscreeningmodalitiesinalargeprospectivepopulationbasedcohort
AT ruifangwu evaluatingtheperformanceofthreedifferentcervicalcancerscreeningmodalitiesinalargeprospectivepopulationbasedcohort
_version_ 1724455829087715328
spelling doaj-7e5dedc65ae94cbc96cdc165f46c06fe2020-11-25T03:59:03ZengElsevierJournal of Infection and Public Health1876-03412020-11-01131117801786Evaluating the performance of three different cervical cancer screening modalities in a large prospective population-based cohortFangbin Song0Hui Du1Aimin Xiao2Chun Wang3Xia Huang4Zhihong Liu5Meifang Zhao6Hongjian Men7Ruifang Wu8Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen 518036, Guangdong, PR China; Shenzhen Key Laboratory on Technology for Early Diagnosis of Major Gynecological Diseases, Shenzhen 518036, Guangdong, PR ChinaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen 518036, Guangdong, PR China; Shenzhen Key Laboratory on Technology for Early Diagnosis of Major Gynecological Diseases, Shenzhen 518036, Guangdong, PR China; Corresponding authors at: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, No. 1120 Lianhua Road, 518036 Shenzhen, Guangdong, PR China.Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen 518036, Guangdong, PR China; Shenzhen Key Laboratory on Technology for Early Diagnosis of Major Gynecological Diseases, Shenzhen 518036, Guangdong, PR ChinaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen 518036, Guangdong, PR China; Shenzhen Key Laboratory on Technology for Early Diagnosis of Major Gynecological Diseases, Shenzhen 518036, Guangdong, PR ChinaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen 518036, Guangdong, PR China; Shenzhen Key Laboratory on Technology for Early Diagnosis of Major Gynecological Diseases, Shenzhen 518036, Guangdong, PR ChinaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen 518036, Guangdong, PR China; Shenzhen Key Laboratory on Technology for Early Diagnosis of Major Gynecological Diseases, Shenzhen 518036, Guangdong, PR ChinaBuji Street Family Planning Service Center, Buji Street, Longgang District, Shenzhen 518129, PR ChinaBuji Street Family Planning Service Center, Buji Street, Longgang District, Shenzhen 518129, PR ChinaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen 518036, Guangdong, PR China; Shenzhen Key Laboratory on Technology for Early Diagnosis of Major Gynecological Diseases, Shenzhen 518036, Guangdong, PR China; Corresponding authors at: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, No. 1120 Lianhua Road, 518036 Shenzhen, Guangdong, PR China.Background: This study aimed to evaluate three different patterns of cervical cancer screening strategies for detection of cervical diseases. Methods: In total, 10,186 women aged 21–70 years attending cervical screening program were recruited and cotested by human papillomavirus (HPV) assays and cytology. Three-year histological follow-up data was recorded on women with abnormal screening results, and six clinically common screening algorithms were evaluated. Results: Significantly better protection against cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse (CIN2+) at three-year follow-up was associated with a negative HPV result than by normal cytology at baseline. HPV screening was more sensitive and less specific than cytology screening. Moreover, HPV screening with HPV16/18 and reflex cytology (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance [ASCUS] threshold) showed a similar sensitivity (94.6% vs. 98.2%, p = 0.125) and a superior specificity as compared to cotesting reflex HPV16/18 and cytology (ASCUS threshold) for CIN2+ (95.8% vs. 95.1%, p < 0.0001), achieving a colposcopy referral rate of 5.4%, and consuming 4.8 colposcopies and 4.4 cytology tests to find one CIN2+. Conclusions: HPV screening with triage of HPV-positive women by HPV16/18 genotyping and cytology provided a good equilibrium between screening effectiveness, the number of cytology tests required, and referral rates; HPV testing was similar in sensitivity to cotesting and safer than cytology, thus especially suitable for large population-based screening programs.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876034120306298Human papillomavirusCervical cancerScreeningTriage