4.6 Article

How to triage HPV positive cases: Results of four million females

Journal

GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY
Volume 158, Issue 1, Pages 105-111

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.04.698

Keywords

Turkey; Cervical cancer; HPV DNA; Screening; Triage; Genotyping; Extended genotyping; HPV 31; 33; 35; 45

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective. To evaluate the Turkey's nationwide HPV DNA screening program on the basis of first 4 million screened women. Methods. Women over age 30 were invited for screening via HPV DNA and conventional cytology. Single visit screen strategy was used to collect for both screening and triage (extended genotyping and conventional papsmear). Results. A total of 4,099,230 patients had attended to HPV DNA cancer screening. 4.39% were found to be HPV DNA positive. The most common HPV type was 16, followed by 51, 31, 52, 56 and 18 at all age intervals and geographic regions. Cytology results were reported as normal in (69.2%), inadequate sampling in (16.6%) and as abnormal (>= ASC-US) in the remaining. Current Turkish screening with HPV DNA (referral to colposcopy with HPV 16 or 18 or any smear abnormality >= ASC-US) gives overall PPV of 24.3% for >= CIN2. Only Pap-Smear triage revealed PPV of 26.4% for >= ASC-US thresholds. Comparison of different triage methods for >= CIN2+ according to different HPV genotype revealed a PPV of 32,6% for HPV 16; 15,3% for HPV 18. This figure was 34.4%, 19.3%, 15.3% and 14.0% for HPV 33, 31, 45 and 35; respectively. Conclusion. This study involves the largest series in the world summarizing a real-world experience with primary HPV DNA screening and triage with a single visit. The results show the feasibility and applicability of such screening method in developing countries with acceptable colposcopy referral rates. Among triage tests, only pap-smear seems to be effective without a need for extended genotyping. (C) 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available