Human papillomavirus testing following loop electrosurgical excision procedure identifies women at risk for posttreatment cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3 disease

Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006 May;15(5):908-14. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0845.

Abstract

Background: Loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) is the predominant treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3 (CIN2+) in the United States, yet following treatment approximately 10% of women are diagnosed again with CIN2+, necessitating close follow-up of such patients.

Methods: Surveillance strategies using cytology and/or human papillomavirus (HPV) testing were compared among women who underwent LEEP (n = 610) in the Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance (ASCUS) Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion (LSIL) Triage Study. Cervical specimens, collected at 6-month visits for 2 years, were used for cytology, Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) detection of carcinogenic HPVs, and PCR for genotyping of carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic HPV types. At exit, women had colposcopy for safety and disease ascertainment.

Results: At the visit post-LEEP (median time: 4.5 months after LEEP), 36.9% [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 32.7-41.1%] of women were positive for carcinogenic HPV by PCR and 33.7% (95% CI, 29.7-37.9) had ASCUS or more severe (ASCUS+) cytology. The overall 2-year cumulative incidence of histologically confirmed posttreatment CIN2+ was 7.0%; this could be further stratified by the HPV risk category detected at the 6-month visit after LEEP. The 2-year risk associated with HPV16 positivity was 37.0%, significantly higher than for other carcinogenic HPV types (10.8%, P < 0.001), noncarcinogenic types (1.5%, P < 0.001), or testing HPV negative (0%). Post-LEEP cytology (using a positive threshold of ASCUS+) was 78.1% (95% CI, 60.0-90.7%) sensitive for detection of posttreatment CIN2+. By comparison, PCR for carcinogenic HPV and combination testing (using a positive result from carcinogenic HPV testing or cytology as the test threshold with HPV-negative ASCUS not referred) were significantly more sensitive (96.9% for each, P = 0.03); HC2 alone was nonsignificantly more sensitive (90.6%, P = 0.3). Specificity was similar for ASCUS+ cytology (69.1%, 95% CI, 64.6-73.3%) and PCR for carcinogenic HPV (67.1%, P = 0.5), yet was lower for HC2 (63.8%, P = 0.048) and combination testing (62.9%, P = 0.02).

Conclusion: Women who tested positive after LEEP for carcinogenic HPV types, especially HPV16, had high risk of subsequent CIN2+. HPV-based detection methods, alone or in combination with cytology, may be useful to incorporate in post-LEEP management strategies.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Multicenter Study
  • Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Chi-Square Distribution
  • Female
  • Genotype
  • Humans
  • Incidence
  • Papillomaviridae* / genetics
  • Papillomavirus Infections / complications*
  • Papillomavirus Infections / epidemiology
  • Papillomavirus Infections / genetics
  • Papillomavirus Infections / pathology
  • Papillomavirus Infections / surgery*
  • Precancerous Conditions / epidemiology
  • Precancerous Conditions / genetics
  • Precancerous Conditions / pathology
  • Precancerous Conditions / surgery*
  • Precancerous Conditions / virology*
  • Predictive Value of Tests
  • Risk Factors
  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Uterine Cervical Dysplasia / epidemiology
  • Uterine Cervical Dysplasia / genetics
  • Uterine Cervical Dysplasia / pathology
  • Uterine Cervical Dysplasia / surgery*
  • Uterine Cervical Dysplasia / virology*