Explore the vast range of titles available.

The incidence of anal cancer is increasing, especially in high-risk groups, such as PLWH. HPV 16, a high-risk (HR) HPV genotype, is the most common genotype in anal high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) in the general population. However, few studies have described the distribution of HR HPV genotypes other than HPV 16 in the anus of PLWH. HPV genotyping was performed by DNA amplification followed by dot-blot hybridization to identify the HR and low-risk (LR) genotypes in benign anal lesions (n = 34), HSIL (n = 30), and SCC (n = 51) of PLWH and HIV-negative individuals. HPV 16 was the most prominent HR HPV identified, but it was less common in HSIL and SCC from PLWH compared with HIV-negative individuals, and other non-HPV 16 HR HPV (non-16 HR HPV) types were more prevalent in samples from PLWH. A higher proportion of clinically normal tissues from PLWH were positive for one or more HPV genotypes. Multiple HPV infection was a hallmark feature for all tissues (benign, HSIL, SCC) of PLWH. These results indicate that the development of anal screening approaches based on HPV DNA testing need to include non-16 HR HPVs along with HPV 16, especially for PLWH. Along with anal cytology, these updated screening approaches may help to identify and prevent anal disease progression in PLWH.

The aim of this study was to assess the probability of low-grade squamous intra-epithelial lesion (LSIL) regression in young women, and to examine the factors associated with this regression. In a longitudinal study of human papilloma virus (HPV) infection, female adolescents aged 13–22 years were examined every 4 months by cytology, colposcopy, and HPV DNA status. Both prevalent and incident LSIL cases were included in the analysis, with regression defined as at least three consecutive normal Pap smears. Median follow-up time from baseline (defined as the time of first LSIL diagnosis) for the 187 women with LSIL was 61 months (IQR 34–80). Median time they had been sexually active at diagnosis was 3·2 years (2·6–6·5). Probability of regression for the entire cohort was 61% (95% CI 53–70) at 12 months and 91% (84–99) at 36 months of follow-up. No associations were found between LSIL regression and HPV status at baseline, sexual behaviour, contraceptive use, substance or cigarette use, incident sexually transmitted infection, or biopsy. Multivariate analysis showed that only HPV status at the current visit was associated with rate of regression, whether infection was caused by one or more viral types (relative hazard=0·3 [95% CI 0·21–0·42], and 0·14 [0·08–0·25], respectively). The high rate of regression recorded in this study lends support to observation by cytology in the management of LSIL in female adolescents. Negative HPV status was associated with regression, suggesting that HPV testing could be helpful in monitoring LSIL.

Background “REACH‐Bhutan” aimed to evaluate the feasibility and clinical performance of a community‐based screening program for cervical cancer in rural Bhutan using self‐collected samples for high‐risk human papillomavirus (HR‐HPV) testing. Methods In April/May 2016, 2590 women aged 30–60 years were screened across rural Bhutan by providing a self‐collected sample for careHPV testing. All careHPV‐positive women, plus a random sample of careHPV‐negative women, were recalled for colposcopy and biopsy. Self‐samples also underwent GP5+/6+ polymerase chain reaction (PCR)‐based HR‐HPV DNA detection and genotyping. Cross‐sectional screening indices were estimated against histological high‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or worse (hHSIL+), including imputation of hHSIL+ in women without colposcopy. Results HR‐HPV positivity was 10.2% by careHPV and 14.8% by GP5+/6+ PCR. Twenty‐two cases of hHSIL+ were histologically diagnosed, including one invasive cancer; an additional 7 hHSIL+ were imputed in women without colposcopy. HR‐HPV testing by GP5+/6+ showed higher sensitivity for hHSIL+ (89.7%, 95% CI 72.6–97.8) than careHPV (75.9%, 95% CI 56.5–89.7). Negative predictive value was also slightly higher for GP5+/6+ (99.9%, 95% CI 99.6–100) than careHPV (99.7%, 95% CI 99.4–99.9). Specificity, however, was lower for GP5+/6+ (86.1%, 95% CI 84.6–87.4) than careHPV (90.6%, 95% CI 89.4–91.7), as was positive predictive value (6.9%, 95% CI 4.5–9.9 vs. 8.5%, 95% CI 5.4–12.6). Of 377 HR‐HPV‐positive women by GP5+/6+, 173 (45.9%) were careHPV‐positive, including 54.7% HPV16‐positive and 30.2% HPV18‐positive women. Conclusions The final REACH‐Bhutan results show that screening for cervical cancer with self‐collection of samples and HR‐HPV testing, in addition to our previous report of achieving high participation, can also perform well to detect women with hHSIL+. The final results of REACH‐Bhutan study show that community‐based screening for cervical cancer with self‐collection of samples and HR‐HPV DNA testing can perform well as the initial step to detect and treat women with histologically proven high‐grade cervical lesions HSIL+, even in remote low‐resource settings.

Background A pilot screening campaign in Rwanda, based on careHPV-testing followed by visual inspection with acetic acid triage (careHPV+VIA triage), was evaluated against other WHO-recommended screening options, namely HPV screen-and-treat and VIA screen-and-treat. Methods 764 women aged 30-69 underwent at visit 1: i) VIA, and cervical cell collection for ii) careHPV in Rwanda, and iii) liquid-based cytology and GP5+/6+ HR-HPV PCR in The Netherlands. All 177 women positive by VIA, careHPV and/or PCR were recalled, of whom 84% attended. At visit 2, VIA was again used to triage screen-positive women for treatment and to obtain biopsies from all women either from visible lesions or at 12 o’clock of the squamocolumnar junction. Cross-sectional screening indices were estimated primarily against histological high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or worse (hHSIL+), after imputation of missing histology data, based on 1-visit or 2-visit approaches. Results In a 1-visit screen-and-treat approach, VIA had sensitivity and specificity of 41% and 96%, respectively, versus 71% and 88% for careHPV, and 88% and 86% for PCR. In a 2-visit approach (in which hHSIL+ imputed among women without visit 2 were considered untreated) careHPV sensitivity dropped to 59% due to loss of 13% of hHSIL+. For careHPV+VIA triage, sensitivity dropped further to 35%, as another 24% of hHSIL+ were triaged to no treatment. Conclusions CareHPV was not as sensitive as gold-standard PCR, but detected considerably more hHSIL+ than VIA. However, due to careHPV-positive hHSIL+ women being lost to follow-up and/or triaged to no treatment, 2-visit careHPV+VIA triage did not perform better than VIA screen-and-treat.

Abstract Objectives Histopathological diagnosis of colposcopically identified cervical lesions is a critical step for the recognition of cervical cancer precursors requiring treatment. Although there have been efforts to standardize the histologic diagnosis of cervical biopsy specimens, in terms of terminology and use of biomarkers, there is no uniform approach in the pathology community. Adjunctive p16 immunohistochemistry (IHC) can highlight precancer diagnoses, with use recommendations outlined by the Lower Anogenital Squamous Terminology project. Methods We assessed the diagnostic reproducibility of cervical histopathological biopsy specimens with and without p16 staining among 2 expert pathologists. Results Interpretation of p16 IHC as positive vs negative was highly reproducible (92.5% agreement, κ = 0.85); greater variation was seen in the choice of which biopsy specimens required adjunctive p16 staining (78.0% agreement, κ = 0.43). Adjunctive p16 IHC did not significantly increase diagnostic agreement under multitiered grading systems (benign vs cervical intraepithelial neoplasia [CIN] 1/low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion vs atypical squamous metaplasia vs CIN2/high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion [HSIL] vs CIN3/HSIL-CIN3 vs cancer) (65.5% agreement, κ = 0.56 without p16; 70.0% agreement, κ = 0.58 with p16). However, when dichotomizing diagnoses based on clinical management (less than HSIL vs HSIL+), diagnostic agreement increased with p16 IHC (90.5% agreement, κ = 0.79 without p16; 92.0% agreement, κ = 0.84 with p16). For biopsy specimens taken from women positive for human papillomavirus (HPV) type 16, agreement was similar with or without adjunctive p16 (κ = 0.80 without p16; κ = 0.78-0.80 with p16). In contrast, p16 IHC substantially improved diagnostic agreement for cervical biopsy specimens taken from women positive for other high-risk HPV strains, producing improvements in κ from 0.03 to 0.24. Conclusions Adjunctive p16 immunostaining provides useful information in the evaluation of cervical biopsies for precancer. In our study, we have demonstrated that it is highly reproducible between 2 pathologists, although the decision of which biopsies warrant its use is less so. Furthermore, although p16 IHC showed a limited increase in diagnostic reproducibility for all biopsies included in our study, it did demonstrate a more sizable gain in biopsies negative for HPV 16 but positive for other high-risk genotypes. Further studies are needed to clarify the role of p16 IHC and how it can be optimized for the detection of cervical precancer, particularly in HPV-vaccinated populations where types other than HPV 16 are relatively more important.

Human papillomavirus (HPV)-related biomarkers have shown good cross-sectional performance for anal precancer detection in human immunodeficiency virus-positive (HIV+) men who have sex with men (MSM). However, the long-term performance and risk stratification of these biomarkers are unknown. Here, we prospectively evaluated high-risk (HR) HPV DNA, HPV16/18 genotyping, HPV E6/E7 messenger RNA (mRNA), and p16/Ki-67 dual stain in a population of HIV+ MSM. We enrolled 363 HIV+ MSM between 2009-2010, with passive follow-up through 2015. All had anal cytology and a high-resolution anoscopy at baseline. For each biomarker, we calculated the baseline sensitivity and specificity for a combined endpoint of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) and anal intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe diagnoses (HSIL/AIN2+), and we estimated the 2- and 5-year cumulative risks of HSIL/AIN2+ using logistic and Cox regression models. There were 129 men diagnosed with HSIL/AIN2+ during the study. HR-HPV testing had the highest positivity and sensitivity of all assays, but the lowest specificity. HPV16/18 and HPV E6/E7 mRNA had high specificity, but lower sensitivity. The 2- and 5-year risks of HSIL/AIN2+ were highest for those testing HPV16/18- or HPV E6/E7 mRNA-positive, followed by those testing dual stain-positive. Those testing HR-HPV- or dual stain-negative had the lowest 2- and 5-year risks of HSIL/AIN2+. HPV-related biomarkers provide long-term risk stratification for anal precancers. HR-HPV- and dual stain-negativity indicate a low risk of HSIL/AIN2+ for at least 2 years, compared with negative anal cytology; however, the high positivity of HR-HPV in HIV+ MSM may limit its utility for surveillance and management in this population.

Cervical cancer is the most common cancer affecting sub-Saharan African women and is prevalent among HIV-positive (HIV + ) individuals. No comprehensive profiling of cancer genomes, transcriptomes or epigenomes has been performed in this population thus far. We characterized 118 tumors from Ugandan patients, of whom 72 were HIV + , and performed extended mutation analysis on an additional 89 tumors. We detected human papillomavirus (HPV)-clade-specific differences in tumor DNA methylation, promoter- and enhancer-associated histone marks, gene expression and pathway dysregulation. Changes in histone modification at HPV integration events were correlated with upregulation of nearby genes and endogenous retroviruses. Genomic analysis of 118 cervical tumors from Ugandan individuals identifies HPV-clade-specific differences in tumor DNA methylation, regulatory-region-associated histone marks, gene expression and pathway dysregulation.

The natural history of anal human papilloma virus (HPV) infection among human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected men is unknown. Annually, from 2004 to 2012, we examined baseline prevalence, incidence, and clearance of anal HPV infection at 48 months, and associated factors among HIV-infected men. We examined 403 men who have sex with men (MSM) and 96 men who have sex with women (MSW) (median age 42 years for both, 78% versus 81% prescribed cART, median CD4+ T-lymphocyte cell count 454 versus 379 cells/mm3, and 74% versus 75% had undetectable viral load, respectively). Type 16 prevalence among MSM and MSW was 38% versus 14% (P < .001), and incidence 24% versus 7% (P = .001). Type 18 prevalence was 24% versus 8% (P < .001), and incidence 13% versus 4% (P = .027). Among MSM and MSW, clearance of prevalent HPV 16 and HPV 18 was 31% and 60% (P = .392), and 47% and 25% (P = .297), respectively. Among MSM, receptive anal sex (with or without a condom) was associated with persistent HPV 16 (OR 2.24, P < .001). MSM had higher prevalence and incidence of HPV than MSW, but similar clearance. Receptive anal sex may predict cancer risk among HIV-infected MSM.

In women vaccinated against human papillomavirus (HPV), reductions in cervical disease and related procedures results in more women having intact transformation zones, potentially increasing the risk of cervical lesions caused by non-vaccine-preventable HPV types, a phenomenon termed clinical unmasking. We aimed to evaluate HPV vaccine efficacy against cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) attributed to non-preventable HPV types in the long-term follow-up phase of the Costa Rica HPV Vaccine Trial (CVT). CVT was a randomised, double-blind, community-based trial done in Costa Rica. Eligible participants were women aged 18–25 years who were in general good health. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive an HPV 16 and 18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine or control hepatitis A vaccine, using a blocked randomisation method (permuted block sizes of 14, 16, and 18). Vaccines in both groups were administered intramuscularly with 0·5 mL doses at 0, 1, and 6 months. Masking of vaccine allocation was maintained throughout the 4-year randomised trial phase, after which participants in the hepatitis A virus vaccine control group were provided the HPV vaccine and exited the study; a screening-only, unvaccinated control group was enrolled. The unvaccinated control group and HPV vaccine group were followed up for 7 years, during which treatment allocation was not masked. One of the prespecified primary endpoints for the long-term follow-up phase was precancers associated with HPV types not prevented by the vaccine, defined as histologically confirmed incident CIN2+ events or CIN3+ events attributed to any HPV type except HPV 16, 18, 31, 33, and 45. Our primary analytical period was years 7–11. Primary analyses were in all participants with at least one follow-up visit and excluded participants with a previous endpoint (ie, modified intention-to-treat cohort). Safety endpoints have been reported elsewhere. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00128661 and NCT00867464. The randomised, masked trial phase is completed; an unmasked subset of women in the HPV-vaccinated group is under active investigation. Between June 28, 2004, and Dec 21, 2005, 7466 participants were enrolled (HPV vaccine group n=3727 and hepatitis A virus vaccine control group n=3739). Between March 30, 2009, and July 5, 2012, 2836 women enrolled in the new unvaccinated control group. The primary analytical cohort (years 7 to 11) included 2767 participants in the HPV vaccine group and 2563 in the unvaccinated group for the CIN2+ events endpoint assessment and 2826 participants in the HPV vaccine group and 2592 in the unvaccinated control group for the CIN3+ events endpoint assessment. Median follow-up during years 7 to 11 for women included for the CIN2+ events analysis was 52·8 months (IQR 44·0 to 60·7) for the HPV vaccine group and 49·8 months (42·0 to 56·9) for the unvaccinated control group. During years 7 to 11, clinical unmasking was observed with a negative vaccine efficacy against CIN2+ events attributed to non-preventable HPV types (–71·2% [95% CI –164·0 to –12·5]), with 9·2 (95% CI 2·1 to 15·6) additional CIN2+ events attributed to non-preventable HPV types per 1000 HPV-vaccinated participants versus HPV-unvaccinated participants. 27·0 (95% CI 14·2 to 39·9) fewer CIN2+ events irrespective of HPV type per 1000 vaccinated participants were observed during 11 years of follow-up. Vaccine efficacy against CIN3+ events attributed to non-preventable HPV types during years 7 to 11 was –135·0% (95% CI –329·8 to –33·5), with 8·3 (3·0 to 12·8) additional CIN3+ events attributed to non-preventable HPV types per 1000 vaccinated participants versus unvaccinated participants. Higher rates of CIN2+ events and CIN3+ events due to non-preventable HPV types in vaccinated versus unvaccinated participants suggests clinical unmasking could attenuate long-term reductions in high-grade disease following successful implementation of HPV vaccination programmes in screened populations. Importantly, the net benefit of vaccination remains considerable; therefore, HPV vaccination should still be prioritised as primary prevention for cervical cancer. National Cancer Institute and National Institutes of Health Office of Research on Women's Health. For the Spanish translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Lower Anogenital Squamous Terminology (LAST) standardization recommended p16 immunohistochemistry (p16 IHC) for biopsies diagnosed morphologically as cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 (CIN2) to classify them as low-grade or high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSILs). To describe the relationships of p16 IHC and other biomarkers associated with cervical cancer risk with biopsy diagnoses. A statewide, stratified sample of cervical biopsies diagnosed by community pathologists (CPs), including 1512 CIN2, underwent a consensus, expert pathologist panel (EP) review (without p16 IHC results), p16 IHC interpretation by a third pathology group, and human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping, results of which were grouped hierarchically according to cancer risk. Antecedent cytologic interpretations were also available. Biopsies were more likely to test p16 IHC positive with increasing severity of CP diagnoses, overall ( ≤ .001) and within each HPV risk group ( ≤ .001 except for low-risk HPV [ < .010]). All abnormal grades of CP-diagnosed biopsies were more likely to test p16 IHC positive with a higher HPV risk group ( < .001), and testing p16 IHC positive was associated with higher HPV risk group than testing p16 IHC negative for each grade of CP-diagnosed biopsies ( < .001). p16 IHC-positive, CP-diagnosed CIN2 biopsies were less likely than CP-diagnosed CIN3 biopsies to test HPV16 positive, have an antecedent HSIL cytology, or to be diagnosed as CIN3 by the EP ( .001 for all). p16 IHC-positive, CP-diagnosed CIN1 biopsies had lower HPV risk groups than p16 IHC-negative, CP-diagnosed CIN2 biopsies ( < .001). p16 IHC-positive, CP-diagnosed CIN2 appears to be lower cancer risk than CP-diagnosed CIN3. LAST classification of \"HSIL\" diagnosis, which includes p16 IHC-positive CIN2, should annotate the morphologic diagnosis (CIN2 or CIN3) to inform all management decisions, which is especially important for young (<30 years) women diagnosed with CIN2 for whom surveillance rather than treatment is recommended.