The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol.
Sec. Clinical Infectious Diseases
Volume 14 - 2024 |
doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2024.1428071
This article is part of the Research Topic Microbiota in Tumors: Is it a New Hope for Treatment? View all 3 articles
Age-specific performance of human papillomavirus E6/E7 mRNA assay versus cytology for primary cervical cancer screening and triage: Community-based screening in China
Provisionally accepted- 1 Department of Gynecology, Liaoning Cancer Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, China
- 2 Cancer Center, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan
- 3 Department of Neurosurgery, Liaoning Cancer Hospital and Institute, Cancer Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning Province, China
Background: In the general population, primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is advocated for cervical cancer (CC) screening. HPV E6/E7 mRNA (Aptima HPV, AHPV) assays have garnered considerable traction due to their higher specificity when compared with HPV DNA assays. Here, we investigated age-specific primary AHPV screening assays and different triage strategies versus cytology to identify the best approach. Methods: Between April 2018 and December 2021, we recruited female participants from 34 communities across Liaoning province and Qingdao City, China. Our primary outcomes were the identification of age-specific detection rates, colposcopy referral rates, and sensitivity and specificity values for high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or worse (HSIL+). AHPV and different triage strategy performances were also examined across different age cohorts. Results: Our investigation included 9911 eligible females. Age-specific abnormal cytology rates were in the 6.1%–8.0% range, and were highest in 45–54-year olds. When compared with 35–44-or 45–54-year olds, HPV prevalence was highest in 55–64-year olds (12.2% or 11.6% vs.14.1%, P = 0.048 and P = 0.002, respectively). In 35–44-year olds, AHPV sensitivity for detecting HSIL+ was 96.6 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 89.7–100) - significantly higher than LBC sensitivity (65.5 [95% CI: 48.3–82.8], P < 0.001). When compared with LBC, HSIL+ detection rates by AHPV-GT using reflex LBC triage increased by 31.5% (9.6‰ vs. 7.3‰), and colposcopy referral rates decreased by 16.4% (5.1% vs. 6.1%). In 45–54-year olds, HSIL+ detection rates for AHPV-GT using reflex LBC triage were lower than LBC rates (6.2‰ vs. 6.6‰). In 55–64-year olds, AHPV sensitivity (97.2 [95% CI: 91.7–100.0]) was higher than LBC sensitivity (66.7 [95% CI: 50.0–80.6], P = 0.003). The area under the curve (AUC) value was not significantly different between AHPV-GT with reflex LBC triage and LBC (0.845 [95% CI: 0.771–0.920] vs. 0.812 [95% CI: 0.734–0.891], P = 0.236). Conclusions: Primary AHPV screening using different triage strategies were different across different age cohorts. Thus, AHPV may be an appropriate primary screening method for 35–44 and 55–64 year old females, while AHPV-GT with reflex LBC triage may be more apt for 35–44 year old females.
Keywords: Age group, cervical screening, cytology, HPV E6/E7 mRNA, Triage
Received: 05 May 2024; Accepted: 12 Aug 2024.
Copyright: © 2024 Zhang, Liu, Yang, Cui, Wang, Wang and Piao. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Chunyan Wang, Department of Gynecology, Liaoning Cancer Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, China
Danbo Wang, Department of Gynecology, Liaoning Cancer Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, China
Haozhe Piao, Department of Neurosurgery, Liaoning Cancer Hospital and Institute, Cancer Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning Province, China
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.