High Risk Human Papillomavirus Testing: Guidelines for Use in Screening, Triage, and Follow-up for the Prevention and Early Detection of Cervical Cancer

Authors:
Kathleen N. MooreDivision of Gynecologic-Oncology, University of Oklahoma Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

Search for other papers by Kathleen N. Moore in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMedClose
 MD
and
Joan L. WalkerDivision of Gynecologic-Oncology, University of Oklahoma Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

Search for other papers by Joan L. Walker in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMedClose
 MD
Volume/Issue:
Volume 2: Issue 6
Online Publication Date:
Nov 2004
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2004.0049
Full access

The changes in cervical cytology characterization agreed on by the Bethesda committee meeting in 2001 created a category of atypical findings that has caused some management confusion. By description, the characterization of cervical cytology as only atypical implies a less worrisome prognosis. However, more than 40% of high-grade (CIN II or III or cancer) will be discovered within this category. The development and Food and Drug Administration approval of the Hybrid Capture 2 (HC-2; Digene Corporation, Gaithersburg, MD) for detecting high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) subtypes and the subsequent level I evidence supporting use of this test in the triage of women with atypical cytology has revolutionized the management of this cytology. With this success has come numerous additional uses for HR-HPV testing in the treatment and follow-up of women with a variety of cytologic abnormalities. This article reviews the literature on uses of HR-HPV testing in this population, with reference to currently accepted guidelines.

Correspondence: Joan L. Walker, MD, Section of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oklahoma University Health Sciences Center, P.O. Box 26901, Oklahoma City, OK 73190. E-mail: Joan-Walker@ouhsc.edu
  • Collapse
  • Expand
  • 1

    Smith H, Tiffany M, Qualls C. The rising incidence of adenocarcinoma relative to squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix in the United States: A 24-year population-based study. Gynecol Oncol 2000;78:97–105.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2

    Cancer statistics, 2004. CA Cancer J Clin 2004;54:8–29.

  • 3

    Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R et al.. The 2001 Bethesda System: Terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002;287:2114–2119.

  • 4

    Koss LG, Durfee GR. Unusual patterns of squamous epithelium of the uterine cervix: cytologic and pathologic study of koilocytotic atypia. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1956;63:1245–1261.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5

    Clavel C, Masure M, Bory JP et al.. Human papillomavirus testing in primary screening for the detection of high-grade cervical lesions: a study of 7932 women. Br J Cancer 2001;84:1616–1623.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Kulasingam SL, Hughes JP, Kiviat NB et al.. Evaluation of human papillomavirus testing in primary screening for cervical abnormalities: comparison of sensitivity, specificity, and frequency of referral. JAMA 2002;288:1749–1757.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    Schneider A, Hoyer H, Lotz B et al.. Screening for high-grade cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia and cancer by testing for high-risk HPV, routine cytology or colposcopy. Int J Cancer 2000;89:529–534.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Sherman ME, Lorincz AT, Scott DR et al.. Baseline cytology, human papillomavirus testing, and risk for cervical neoplasia: a 10-year cohort analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:46–52.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    Kinney WK, Manos MM, Hurley LB, Ransley JE. Where's the high-grade cervical neoplasia? The importance of minimally abnormal Papanicolaou diagnoses. Obstet Gynecol 1998;91:973–976.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    Lonky NM, Sadeghi M, Tsadik GW, Petitti D. The clinical significance of the poor correlation of cervical dysplasia and cervical malignancy with referral cytologic results. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;181:560–566.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Manos MM, Kinney WK, Hurley LB et al.. Identifying women with cervical neoplasia: Using human papillomavirus DNA testing for equivocal Papanicolaou results. JAMA 1999;281:1605–1610.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Cox JT, Lorincz AT, Schiffman MH et al.. Human papillomavirus testing by hybrid capture appears to be useful in triaging women with a cytologic diagnosis of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;172:946–954.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    Solomon D, Schiffman M, Tarone R. Comparison of three management strategies for patients with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: baseline results from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:293–299.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14

    The ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study (ALTS) Group. Results of a randomized trial on the management of cytology interpretations of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188:1383–1392.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Cox JT. The clinician's view role of human papillomavirus testing in the American Society for Colposcopy and cervical pathology guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cytology and cervical cancer precursors: Arch Pathol Lab Med 2003;127:950–957.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16

    Cox TJ, Lorincz AT, Schiffman MH et al.. Gynecology: Human papillomavirus testing by hybrid capture appears to be useful in triaging women with a cytologic diagnosis of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;172:946–954.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17

    Cox JT. Management of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion by human papillomavirus testing. Best Practice Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2001;15:715–741.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Wright TC Jr, Cox JT, Massad LS, for the 2001 ASCCP-sponsored Consensus Workshop. 2001 Consensus Guidelines for the management of women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;189:295–304.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19

    Rowe LR, Aldeen W, Bentz J. Prevalence and typing of HPV DNA by Hybrid Capture II in women with ASCUS, ASCH, LSIL, and AGC on ThinPrep Pap tests. Diag Cytopath 2004;30:426–432.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20

    Paraskevaidis E, Koliopoulos G, Alamanos Y et al.. Human papillomavirus testing and the outcome of treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Obstet Gynecol 2001;98:833–836.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21

    Bar-Am A, Gamzu R, Levin I et al.. Follow-up by combined cytology and human papillomavirus testing for patients post-cone biopsy: results of long term follow-up. Gynecol Oncol 2003;91:149–153.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22

    The ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study (ALTS) Group. A randomized trial on the management of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion cytology interpretations: Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188:1393–1400.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23

    Kennedy AW, Salmieri SS, Wirth SL et al.. Results of the clinical evaluation of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance (AGUS) detected on cervical cytology screening. Gynecol Oncol 1996;63:14–18.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24

    Zweizig S, Noller K, Reale F et al.. Neoplasia associated with atypical cells of undetermined significance on cervical cytology. Gynecol Oncol 1997;65:314–318.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25

    Ronnett BM, Manos MM, Ransley JE et al.. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance (AGUS): cytopathologic features, histopathologic results and human papillomavirus DNA detection. Hum Path 1999;30:816–825.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26

    Krane JF, Lee KR, Sun D et al.. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance: outcome predictions based on human papillomavirus testing. Anatomic Pathol 2004;121:87–92.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27

    Cox JT, Schiffman M, Solomon D, for the ALTS Group. Prospective follow-up suggests similar risk of subsequent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3 among women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 or negative colposcopy and directed biopsy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188:1406–1412.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28

    Guido R, Schiffman M, Solomon D, for the ALTS Group. Postcolposcopy management strategies for women referred with low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or human papillomavirus DNA-positive atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: a two-year prospective study: Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188:1401–1405.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29

    Wright TC, Lorincz AT, Ferris DG et al.. Reflex human papillomavirus deoxyribonucleic acid testing in women with abnormal pap smears. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998;178:962–966.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30

    Kaufman RH, Adam E, Icenogle J et al.. Relevance of human papillomavirus screening in management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997;176:87–92.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31

    Moscicki AB, Hills N, Shiboski S et al.. Risks of incident human papillomavirus infection and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion development in young females. JAMA 2001;285:2995–3002.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32

    Gray SH, Walzer TB. New strategies for cervical cancer screening in adolescents. Curr Opin Pediat 2004;16:344–349.

  • 33

    Jain S, Tseng C, Horng S et al.. Negative predictive value of human papillomavirus test following coneization of the cervix uteri. Gynecol Oncol 2001;82:177–180.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34

    Almong B, Gamzu R, Kuperminc M et al.. Human papilloma virus testing in patient follow-up post cone biopsy due to high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Gynecol Oncol 2003;88:345–350.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 35

    Nobbenhuis MA, Meijer CJ, van den Brule AJ et al.. Addition of high risk HPV testing improves the current guidelines on follow-up after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Br J Cancer 2001;84:796–801.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 36

    Chua KL, Hyerpe A. Human papillomavirus analysis as a prognostic marker following conization of the cervix uteri. Gynecol Oncol 1996;66:108–113.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37

    Cuzick J, Sqarewski A, Cubie H et al.. Management of women who test positive for high-risk types of human papillomavirus: the HART study. Lancet 2003;362:1871–1876.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 38

    Wright TC Jr, Schiffman M, Solomon D et al.. Interim guidance for the use of human papillomavirus DNA testing as an adjunct to cervical cytology for screening. Obstet Gynecol 2004;103:304–309.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
Copyright:
Copyright © 2004 by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network 2004
Page Numbers:
8
Article Category:
Research Article
Received:
03 Aug 2004
Accepted:
30 Sep 2004
Print Publication Date:
01 Nov 2004
Online Publication Date:
Nov 2004
Keywords:
Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance; atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance; human papilloma virus; hybrid capture
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 322 69 4
PDF Downloads 143 16 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0