Evaluation of any or type-specific persistence of high-risk human papillomavirus for detecting cervical precancer

Morgan A. Marks, Philip E. Castle, Mark Schiffman, Patti E. Gravitt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

High-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing is increasingly important. We therefore examined the impact on accuracy of repeated versus one-time testing, type-specific versus pooled detection, and assay analytic sensitivity. By using a nested casecontrol design from the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study, we selected women with incident cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or grade 3 (CIN2/3; n = 325) and a random sample of women with <CIN2 as controls (n = 401). HPV DNA status was assessed using hybrid capture 2 (HC2), a pooled test for 13 HR-HPV types, and the linear array (LA) and the line blot assay (LBA), two PCR-based HPV genotyping assays, at enrollment and the 6-month follow-up visit. The relative sensitivity and specificity for different permutations of multiple measurements were compared to a single measurement using marginal regression models. We found that repeat detection of any HR-HPV (by HC2, LA, or LBA) and of type-specific persistence (by LA or LBA) were significantly more specific but less sensitive than use of a single time point measurement of any HR-HPV. Sensitivity decreased and specificity increased further when testing intervals were increased from 12 to 24 months. Including detection of borderline carcinogenic/noncarcinogenic HPV types with HR-HPV types decreased specificity for repeat measures of HPV with no impact on sensitivity. Similar patterns were observed when we used a CIN3 end point. We conclude that assay performance for detecting incident CIN2/3 was affected by which types were included, the analytic sensitivity of the assay, and the testing interval. These trade-offs need to be considered when assessing the potential overall clinical utility of repeated testing for HR-HPV DNA to identify women at risk for CIN2/3.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)300-306
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Clinical Microbiology
Volume50
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Sensitivity and Specificity
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia
Triage
DNA
Polymerase Chain Reaction
Atypical Squamous Cells of the Cervix

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Microbiology (medical)

Cite this

Evaluation of any or type-specific persistence of high-risk human papillomavirus for detecting cervical precancer. / Marks, Morgan A.; Castle, Philip E.; Schiffman, Mark; Gravitt, Patti E.

In: Journal of Clinical Microbiology, Vol. 50, No. 2, 02.2012, p. 300-306.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{8099380208ce40e1b1bff2da34076895,
title = "Evaluation of any or type-specific persistence of high-risk human papillomavirus for detecting cervical precancer",
abstract = "High-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing is increasingly important. We therefore examined the impact on accuracy of repeated versus one-time testing, type-specific versus pooled detection, and assay analytic sensitivity. By using a nested casecontrol design from the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study, we selected women with incident cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or grade 3 (CIN2/3; n = 325) and a random sample of women with <CIN2 as controls (n = 401). HPV DNA status was assessed using hybrid capture 2 (HC2), a pooled test for 13 HR-HPV types, and the linear array (LA) and the line blot assay (LBA), two PCR-based HPV genotyping assays, at enrollment and the 6-month follow-up visit. The relative sensitivity and specificity for different permutations of multiple measurements were compared to a single measurement using marginal regression models. We found that repeat detection of any HR-HPV (by HC2, LA, or LBA) and of type-specific persistence (by LA or LBA) were significantly more specific but less sensitive than use of a single time point measurement of any HR-HPV. Sensitivity decreased and specificity increased further when testing intervals were increased from 12 to 24 months. Including detection of borderline carcinogenic/noncarcinogenic HPV types with HR-HPV types decreased specificity for repeat measures of HPV with no impact on sensitivity. Similar patterns were observed when we used a CIN3 end point. We conclude that assay performance for detecting incident CIN2/3 was affected by which types were included, the analytic sensitivity of the assay, and the testing interval. These trade-offs need to be considered when assessing the potential overall clinical utility of repeated testing for HR-HPV DNA to identify women at risk for CIN2/3.",
author = "Marks, {Morgan A.} and Castle, {Philip E.} and Mark Schiffman and Gravitt, {Patti E.}",
year = "2012",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1128/JCM.05979-11",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "50",
pages = "300--306",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Microbiology",
issn = "0095-1137",
publisher = "American Society for Microbiology",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of any or type-specific persistence of high-risk human papillomavirus for detecting cervical precancer

AU - Marks, Morgan A.

AU - Castle, Philip E.

AU - Schiffman, Mark

AU - Gravitt, Patti E.

PY - 2012/2

Y1 - 2012/2

N2 - High-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing is increasingly important. We therefore examined the impact on accuracy of repeated versus one-time testing, type-specific versus pooled detection, and assay analytic sensitivity. By using a nested casecontrol design from the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study, we selected women with incident cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or grade 3 (CIN2/3; n = 325) and a random sample of women with <CIN2 as controls (n = 401). HPV DNA status was assessed using hybrid capture 2 (HC2), a pooled test for 13 HR-HPV types, and the linear array (LA) and the line blot assay (LBA), two PCR-based HPV genotyping assays, at enrollment and the 6-month follow-up visit. The relative sensitivity and specificity for different permutations of multiple measurements were compared to a single measurement using marginal regression models. We found that repeat detection of any HR-HPV (by HC2, LA, or LBA) and of type-specific persistence (by LA or LBA) were significantly more specific but less sensitive than use of a single time point measurement of any HR-HPV. Sensitivity decreased and specificity increased further when testing intervals were increased from 12 to 24 months. Including detection of borderline carcinogenic/noncarcinogenic HPV types with HR-HPV types decreased specificity for repeat measures of HPV with no impact on sensitivity. Similar patterns were observed when we used a CIN3 end point. We conclude that assay performance for detecting incident CIN2/3 was affected by which types were included, the analytic sensitivity of the assay, and the testing interval. These trade-offs need to be considered when assessing the potential overall clinical utility of repeated testing for HR-HPV DNA to identify women at risk for CIN2/3.

AB - High-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing is increasingly important. We therefore examined the impact on accuracy of repeated versus one-time testing, type-specific versus pooled detection, and assay analytic sensitivity. By using a nested casecontrol design from the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study, we selected women with incident cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or grade 3 (CIN2/3; n = 325) and a random sample of women with <CIN2 as controls (n = 401). HPV DNA status was assessed using hybrid capture 2 (HC2), a pooled test for 13 HR-HPV types, and the linear array (LA) and the line blot assay (LBA), two PCR-based HPV genotyping assays, at enrollment and the 6-month follow-up visit. The relative sensitivity and specificity for different permutations of multiple measurements were compared to a single measurement using marginal regression models. We found that repeat detection of any HR-HPV (by HC2, LA, or LBA) and of type-specific persistence (by LA or LBA) were significantly more specific but less sensitive than use of a single time point measurement of any HR-HPV. Sensitivity decreased and specificity increased further when testing intervals were increased from 12 to 24 months. Including detection of borderline carcinogenic/noncarcinogenic HPV types with HR-HPV types decreased specificity for repeat measures of HPV with no impact on sensitivity. Similar patterns were observed when we used a CIN3 end point. We conclude that assay performance for detecting incident CIN2/3 was affected by which types were included, the analytic sensitivity of the assay, and the testing interval. These trade-offs need to be considered when assessing the potential overall clinical utility of repeated testing for HR-HPV DNA to identify women at risk for CIN2/3.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84856160240&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84856160240&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1128/JCM.05979-11

DO - 10.1128/JCM.05979-11

M3 - Article

C2 - 22162556

AN - SCOPUS:84856160240

VL - 50

SP - 300

EP - 306

JO - Journal of Clinical Microbiology

JF - Journal of Clinical Microbiology

SN - 0095-1137

IS - 2

ER -