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
. 2012 Feb 8;104(3):178-88.
doi: 10.1093/jnci/djr532. Epub 2012 Jan 23.

Pooled analysis of a self-sampling HPV DNA Test as a cervical cancer primary screening method

Affiliations

Pooled analysis of a self-sampling HPV DNA Test as a cervical cancer primary screening method

Fang-Hui Zhao et al. J Natl Cancer Inst. .

Abstract

Background: Worldwide, one-seventh of cervical cancers occur in China, which lacks a national screening program. By evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of self-collected cervicovaginal specimens tested for human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA (Self-HPV testing) in China, we sought to determine whether Self-HPV testing may serve as a primary cervical cancer screening method in low-resource settings.

Methods: We compiled individual patient data from five population-based cervical cancer-screening studies in China. Participants (n = 13 140) received Self-HPV testing, physician-collected cervical specimens for HPV testing (Physician-HPV testing), liquid-based cytology (LBC), and visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA). Screen-positive women underwent colposcopy and confirmatory biopsy. We analyzed the accuracies of pooled Self-HPV testing, Physician-HPV testing, VIA, and LBC to detect biopsy-confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe (CIN2+) and CIN3+. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Results: Of 13 004 women included in the analysis, 507 (3.9%) were diagnosed as CIN2+, 273 (2.1%) as CIN3+, and 37 (0.3%) with cervical cancer. Self-HPV testing had 86.2% sensitivity and 80.7% specificity for detecting CIN2+ and 86.1% sensitivity and 79.5% specificity for detecting CIN3+. VIA had statistically significantly lower sensitivity for detecting CIN2+ (50.3%) and CIN3+ (55.7%) and higher specificity for detecting CIN2+ (87.4%) and CIN3+ (86.9%) (all P values < .001) than Self-HPV testing, LBC had lower sensitivity for detecting CIN2+ (80.7%, P = .015), similar sensitivity for detecting CIN3+ (89.0%, P = .341), and higher specificity for detecting CIN2+ (94.0%, P < .001) and CIN3+ (92.8%, P < .001) than Self-HPV testing. Physician-HPV testing was more sensitive for detecting CIN2+ (97.0%) and CIN3+ (97.8%) but similarly specific for detecting CIN2+ (82.7%) and CIN3+ (81.3%) (all P values <.001) than Self-HPV testing.

Conclusions: The sensitivity of Self-HPV testing compared favorably with that of LBC and was superior to the sensitivity of VIA. Self-HPV testing may complement current screening programs by increasing population coverage in settings that do not have easy access to comprehensive cytology-based screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study sample. ASC-US = atypical squamous cell of undetermined significance; LBC = liquid-based cytology; LSIL+ = low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or more severe; HPV = human papillomavirus; Physician-HPV, physician-collected cervical specimens for HPV testing; Self-HPV = self-collected cervicovaginal specimens tested by HPV DNA testing; VIA = visual inspection with acetic acid.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Forest plots of pooled and individual study sensitivities and specificities of self-collected cervicovaginal specimens tested by HPV DNA testing (Self-HPV) for the detection of CIN2+ (A) and CIN3+ (B) (HPV DNA positivity: RLU/CO ≥ 1 pg/mL). The point estimate of each study was represented by a square, whose size corresponded to the weight of the study in the pooled analysis. A horizontal line represents the 95% confidence interval. The overall estimate was presented at the bottom of the forest plots, represented as a diamond. Two vertical lines around the diamond represent the confidence interval of the overall estimate. CI = confidence interval; CIN2+ = cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe; CIN3+ = cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or more severe; HPV = human papillomavirus; RLU/CO = relative light units per cutoff; SPOCCS = Shanxi Province Cervical Cancer Screening Study.
Figure 3
Figure 3
ROC curves of self-collected cervicovaginal specimens tested by HPV DNA testing (Self-HPV) for the detection of CIN2+ and CIN3+. Solid lines represent detection of CIN2+; dotted lines represent detection of CIN3+. CIN2+ = cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe; CIN3+ = cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or more severe; HPV = human papillomavirus; ROC = receiver operating characteristic.

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer. 2010;127(12):2893–2917. - PubMed
    1. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) IARC Handbooks of Cancer Prevention: Cervix Cancer Screening, Chapter 2. Lyon, France: IARC Press; 2005.
    1. Belinson J, Qiao YL, Pretorius R, et al. Shanxi Province Cervical Cancer Screening Study: a cross-sectional comparative trial of multiple techniques to detect cervical neoplasia. Gynecol Oncol. 2001;83(2):439–444. - PubMed
    1. The Lancet. Women's health in rural China. Lancet. 2009;374(9687):358. - PubMed
    1. Cuzick J, Clavel C, Petry KU, et al. Overview of the European and North American studies on HPV testing in primary cervical cancer screening. Int J Cancer. 2006;119(5):1095–1101. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms