Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2010 Sep 28;103(7):939-46.
doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605869. Epub 2010 Aug 31.

Comparison of Hybrid capture 2 testing at different thresholds with cytology as primary cervical screening test

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of Hybrid capture 2 testing at different thresholds with cytology as primary cervical screening test

D C Rijkaart et al. Br J Cancer. .

Abstract

Background: We evaluated the performance of primary high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing by hybrid capture 2 (HC2) with different thresholds for positivity, in comparison with conventional cytology.

Methods: We used data of 25,871 women (aged 30-60 years) from the intervention group of the VUSA-Screen study (VU University Medical Center and Saltro laboratory population-based cervical screening study), who were screened by cytology and hrHPV. Primary outcome measure was the number of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or higher (CIN3+), detected within 3 years. We compared baseline cytology testing with three possible hrHPV screening strategies at different relative light unit/cutoff (RLU/CO) thresholds.

Results: Compared with baseline cytology testing, hrHPV DNA testing as a sole primary screening instrument did not yield a superior sensitivity, as well as lower colposcopy referral rate and lower false positivity rate at any RLU/CO threshold. The hrHPV screening at 1 RLU/CO threshold with cytology triage at baseline and at 12 months revealed the highest sensitivity for CIN3+ (relative sensitivity of 1.32), although still displaying a lower colposcopy referral rate than cytology testing (relative colposcopy rate of 0.94). Higher thresholds (>1 RLU/CO) yielded lower colposcopy rates, but resulted in substantial loss in sensitivity.

Conclusions: The hrHPV testing at the commonly used threshold of 1 RLU/CO with cytology triage at baseline and at 12 months showed a much higher sensitivity with a lower colposcopy referral rate compared with cytology testing.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart of the study design. BMD, borderline or mild dyskaryosis; colpo, colposcopy; cyto, cytology; hrHPV, high-risk human papillomavirus; m, months.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Relative sensitivity vs relative false positivity rate for three strategies for hybrid capture 2 (HC2)-positive women at different relative light unit/cutoff (RLU/CO) thresholds compared with baseline cytology (cyto) testing, for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or higher (CIN3+). Relative sensitivity for detection of CIN3+ is plotted on the y-axis, against the relative false positivity rate on the x-axis. The used HC2 RLU/CO thresholds are indicated at the respective positions above each plot. I: quadrant with relative sensitivity and relative false positivity rate greater than cytology; II: panel with relative sensitivity greater than and relative false positivity rate lower than cytology; III: panel with relative sensitivity lower than and relative false positivity rate lower than cytology; IV: panel with relative sensitivity and relative false positivity rate lower than cytology. BMD, borderline or mild dyskaryosis.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Anderson MC (1995) Premalignant and malignant squamous lesions of the cervix. In Haines and Taylor's: Obsterical and gynaecological pathology, Fox H, Wells M (eds), 4th edn, Chruchill Livingstone: New York, pp 292–297
    1. Arbyn M, Sasieni P, Meijer CJ, Clavel C, Koliopoulos G, Dillner J (2006) Chapter 9: clinical applications of HPV testing: a summary of meta-analyses. Vaccine 24(Suppl 3): S78–S89 - PubMed
    1. Begg CB, Greenes RA (1983) Assessment of diagnostic tests when disease verification is subject to selection bias. Biometrics 39: 207–215 - PubMed
    1. Berkhof J, Coupe VM, Bogaards JA, van Kemenade FJ, Helmerhorst TJ, Snijders PJ, Meijer CJ (2010) The health and economic effects of HPV DNA screening in The Netherlands. Int J Cancer, published online: 28 January 2010 - PubMed
    1. Bosch FX, Lorincz A, Munoz N, Meijer CJ, Shah KV (2002) The causal relation between human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. J Clin Pathol 55: 244–265 - PMC - PubMed

Publication types