Brian Befano

A population-based prospective study of carcinogenic human papillomavirus variant lineages, viral persistence, and cervical neoplasia.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) types differ profoundly in cervical carcinogenicity. For the most carcinogenic type HPV16, variant lineages representing further evolutionary divergence also differ in cancer risk. Variants of the remaining 10 to 15 carcinogenic HPV types have not been well studied. In the first prospective, population-based study of HPV variants, we explored whether, on average, the oldest evolutionary branches within each carcinogenic type predicted different risks of >2-year viral persistence and/or precancer and cancer [cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3+ (CIN3+)]. We examined the natural history of HPV variants in the 7-year, 10,049-woman Guanacaste Cohort Study, using a nested case-control design. Infections were assigned to a variant lineage determined by phylogenetic parsimony methods based on URR/E6 sequences. We used the Fishers combination test to evaluate significance of the risk associations, cumulating evidence across types. Globally, for HPV types including HPV16, the P value was 0.01 for persistence and 0.07 for CIN3+. Excluding HPV16, the P values were 0.04 and 0.37, respectively. For HPV16, non-European viral variants were significantly more likely than European variants to cause persistence [odds ratio (OR), 2.6; P = 0.01] and CIN3+ (OR, 2.4; P = 0.004). HPV35 and HPV51 variant lineages also predicted CIN3+. HPV variants generally differ in risk of persistence. For some HPV types, especially HPV16, variant lineages differ in risk of CIN3+. The findings indicate that continued evolution of HPV types has led to even finer genetic discrimination linked to HPV natural history and cervical cancer risk. Larger viral genomic studies are warranted, especially to identify the genetic basis for HPV16s unique carcinogenicity.

Risk of miscarriage with bivalent vaccine against human papillomavirus (HPV) types 16 and 18: pooled analysis of two randomised controlled trials.

Objective To assess whether vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) increases the risk of miscarriage. Design Pooled analysis of two multicentre, phase three masked randomised controlled trials Setting Multicentre trials in several continents and in Costa Rica. Participants 26 130 women aged 15-25 at enrolment; 3599 pregnancies eligible for analysis. Interventions Participants were randomly assigned to receive three doses of bivalent HPV 16/18 VLP vaccine with AS04 adjuvant (n=13 075) or hepatitis A vaccine as control (n=13 055) over six months. Main outcome measures Miscarriage and other pregnancy outcomes. Results The estimated rate of miscarriage was 11.5% in pregnancies in women in the HPV arm and 10.2% in the control arm. The one sided P value for the primary analysis was 0.16; thus, overall, there was no significant increase in miscarriage among women assigned to the HPV vaccine arm. In secondary descriptive analyses, miscarriage rates were 14.7% in the HPV vaccine arm and 9.1% in the control arm in pregnancies that began within three months after nearest vaccination. Conclusion There is no evidence overall for an association between HPV vaccination and risk of miscarriage. Trial registration Clinical Trials NCT00128661 and NCT00122681.

A Study of Genotyping for Management of Human Papillomavirus-Positive, Cytology-Negative Cervical Screening Results

ABSTRACT The effective management of women with human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive, cytology-negative results is critical to the introduction of HPV testing into cervical screening. HPV typing has been recommended for colposcopy triage, but it is not clear which combinations of high-risk HPV types provide clinically useful information. This study included 18,810 women with Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2)-positive, cytology-negative results and who were age ≥30 years from Kaiser Permanente Northern California. The median follow-up was 475 days (interquartile range [IQR], 0 to 1,077 days; maximum, 2,217 days). The baseline specimens from 482 cases of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or cancer (CIN3+) and 3,517 random HC2-positive noncases were genotyped using 2 PCR-based methods. Using the case-control sampling fractions, the 3-year cumulative risks of CIN3+ were calculated for each individual high-risk HPV type. The 3-year cumulative risk of CIN3+ among all women with HC2-positive, cytology-negative results was 4.6%. HPV16 status conferred the greatest type-specific risk stratification; women with HC2-positive/HPV16-positive results had a 10.6% risk of CIN3+, while women with HC-2 positive/HPV16-negative results had a much lower risk of 2.4%. The next most informative HPV types and their risks in HPV-positive women were HPV33 (5.9%) and HPV18 (5.9%). With regard to the etiologic fraction, 20 of 71 cases of cervical adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) and adenocarcinoma in the cohort were positive for HPV18. HPV16 genotyping provides risk stratification useful for guiding clinical management; the risk among HPV16-positive women clearly exceeds the U.S. consensus risk threshold for immediate colposcopy referral. HPV18 is of particular interest because of its association with difficult-to-detect glandular lesions. There is a less clear clinical value of distinguishing the other high-risk HPV types.

The Role of Human Papillomavirus Genotyping in Cervical Cancer Screening: A Large-Scale Evaluation of the cobas HPV Test.

Background: The cobas HPV Test (“cobas”; Roche Molecular Systems) detects HPV16 and HPV18 individually, and a pool of 12 other high-risk (HR) HPV types. The test is approved for (i) atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) triage to determine need for colposcopy, (ii) combined screening with cytology (“cotesting”), and (iii) primary HPV screening. Methods: To assess the possible value of HPV16/18 typing, >17,000 specimens from a longitudinal cohort study of initially HPV-positive women (HC2, Qiagen) were retested with cobas. To study accuracy, cobas genotyping results were compared with those of an established method, the Linear Array HPV Genotyping Test (LA, Roche Molecular Systems). Clinical value of the typing strategy was evaluated by linking the cobas results (supplemented by other available typing results) to 3-year cumulative risks of CIN3+. Results: Grouped hierarchically (HPV16, else HPV18, else other HR types, else negative), the κ statistic for agreement between cobas and LA was 0.86 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.86–0.87]. In all three scenarios, HPV16-positive women were at much higher 3-year risk of CIN3+ than HPV16-negative women: women ages 21 and older with ASC-US (14.5%; 95% CI, 13.5%–15.5% vs. 3.5%; 95% CI, 3.3–3.6); women ages 30 years and older that were HPV-positive cytology-negative (10.3%; 95% CI, 9.6–11.1 vs. 2.3%; 95% CI, 2.2–2.4); and all women 25 years and older that were HPV-positive (18.5%; 95% CI, 17.8–19.2 vs. 4.3%; 95% CI, 4.2–4.4). Conclusion: The cobas and LA results show excellent agreement. The data support HPV16 typing. Impact: HPV16 typing is useful in the management of HPV-positive/cytology-negative women in cotesting, of all HPV-positive women in primary HPV testing, and perhaps in the management of HPV-positive women with ASC-US. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 24(9); 1304–10. ©2015 AACR. See related commentary by Del Mistro, p. 1302

Effect of bivalent human papillomavirus vaccination on pregnancy outcomes: long term observational follow-up in the Costa Rica HPV Vaccine Trial

Objective To examine the effect of the bivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine on miscarriage. Design Observational long term follow-up of a randomized, double blinded trial combined with an independent unvaccinated population based cohort. Setting Single center study in Costa Rica. Participants 7466 women in the trial and 2836 women in the unvaccinated cohort enrolled at the end of the randomized trial and in parallel with the observational trial component. Intervention Women in the trial were assigned to receive three doses of bivalent HPV vaccine (n=3727) or the control hepatitis A vaccine (n=3739). Crossover bivalent HPV vaccination occurred in the hepatitis A vaccine arm at the end of the trial. Women in the unvaccinated cohort received (n=2836) no vaccination. Main outcome measure Risk of miscarriage, defined by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as fetal loss within 20 weeks of gestation, in pregnancies exposed to bivalent HPV vaccination in less than 90 days and any time from vaccination compared with pregnancies exposed to hepatitis A vaccine and pregnancies in the unvaccinated cohort. Results Of 3394 pregnancies conceived at any time since bivalent HPV vaccination, 381 pregnancies were conceived less than 90 days from vaccination. Unexposed pregnancies comprised 2507 pregnancies conceived after hepatitis A vaccination and 720 conceived in the unvaccinated cohort. Miscarriages occurred in 451 (13.3%) of all exposed pregnancies, in 50 (13.1%) of the pregnancies conceived less than 90 days from bivalent HPV vaccination, and in 414 (12.8%) of the unexposed pregnancies, of which 316 (12.6%) were in the hepatitis A vaccine group and 98 (13.6%) in the unvaccinated cohort. The relative risk of miscarriage for pregnancies conceived less than 90 days from vaccination compared with all unexposed pregnancies was 1.02 (95% confidence interval 0.78 to 1.34, one sided P=0.436) in unadjusted analyses. Results were similar after adjusting for age at vaccination (relative risk 1.15, one sided P=0.17), age at conception (1.03, P=0.422), and calendar year (1.06, P=0.358), and in stratified analyses. Among pregnancies conceived at any time from bivalent HPV vaccination, exposure was not associated with an increased risk of miscarriage overall or in subgroups, except for miscarriages at weeks 13-20 of gestation (relative risk 1.35, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.77, one sided P=0.017). Conclusions There is no evidence that bivalent HPV vaccination affects the risk of miscarriage for pregnancies conceived less than 90 days from vaccination. The increased risk estimate for miscarriages in a subgroup of pregnancies conceived any time after vaccination may be an artifact of a thorough set of sensitivity analyses, but since a genuine association cannot totally be ruled out, this signal should nevertheless be explored further in existing and future studies. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00128661 and NCT01086709.

A cohort study of cervical screening using partial HPV typing and cytology triage

HPV testing is more sensitive than cytology for cervical screening. However, to incorporate HPV tests into screening, risk‐stratification (“triage”) of HPV‐positive women is needed to avoid excessive colposcopy and overtreatment. We prospectively evaluated combinations of partial HPV typing (Onclarity, BD) and cytology triage, and explored whether management could be simplified, based on grouping combinations yielding similar 3‐year or 18‐month CIN3+ risks. We typed ∼9,000 archived specimens, taken at enrollment (2007–2011) into the NCI‐Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) HPV Persistence and Progression (PaP) cohort. Stratified sampling, with reweighting in the statistical analysis, permitted risk estimation of HPV/cytology combinations for the 700,000+‐woman KPNC screening population. Based on 3‐year CIN3+ risks, Onclarity results could be combined into five groups (HPV16, else HPV18/45, else HPV31/33/58/52, else HPV51/35/39/68/56/66/68, else HPV negative); cytology results fell into three risk groups (“high‐grade,” ASC‐US/LSIL, NILM). For the resultant 15 HPV group‐cytology combinations, 3‐year CIN3+ risks ranged 1,000‐fold from 60.6% to 0.06%. To guide management, we compared the risks to established “benchmark” risk/management thresholds in this same population (e.g., LSIL predicted 3‐year CIN3+ risk of 5.8% in the screening population, providing the benchmark for colposcopic referral). By benchmarking to 3‐year risk thresholds (supplemented by 18‐month estimates), the widely varying risk strata could be condensed into four action bands (very high risk of CIN3+ mandating consideration of cone biopsy if colposcopy did not find precancer; moderate risk justifying colposcopy; low risk managed by intensified follow‐up to permit HPV “clearance”; and very low risk permitting routine screening.) Overall, the results support primary HPV testing, with management of HPV‐positive women using partial HPV typing and cytology.

Relative Performance of HPV and Cytology Components of Cotesting in Cervical Screening

Background The main goal of cervical screening programs is to detect and treat precancer before cancer develops. Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is more sensitive than cytology for detecting precancer. However, reports of rare HPV-negative, cytology-positive cancers are motivating continued use of both tests (cotesting) despite increased testing costs. Methods We quantified the detection of cervical precancer and cancer by cotesting compared with HPV testing alone at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC), where 1 208 710 women age 30 years and older have undergone triennial cervical cotesting since 2003. Screening histories preceding cervical cancers (n = 623) and precancers (n = 5369) were examined to assess the relative contribution of the cytology and HPV test components in identifying cases. The performances of HPV testing and cytology were compared using contingency table methods, general estimating equation models, and nonparametric statistics; all statistical tests were two-sided. Results HPV testing identified more women subsequently diagnosed with cancer (P < .001) and precancer (P < .001) than cytology. HPV testing was statistically significantly more likely to be positive for cancer at any time point (P < .001), except within 12 months (P = .10). HPV-negative/cytology-positive results preceded only small fractions of cases of precancer (3.5%) and cancer (5.9%); these cancers were more likely to be regional or distant stage with squamous histopathology than other cases. Given the rarity of cancers among screened women, the contribution of cytology to screening translated to earlier detection of at most five cases per million women per year. Two-thirds (67.9%) of women found to have cancer during 10 years of follow-up at KPNC were detected by the first cotest performed. Conclusions The added sensitivity of cotesting vs HPV alone for detection of treatable cancer affected extremely few women.

Cross-protection of the Bivalent Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine Against Variants of Genetically Related High-Risk HPV Infections

BACKGROUND Results from the Costa Rica Vaccine Trial (CVT) demonstrated partial cross-protection by the bivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, which targets HPV-16 and HPV-18, against HPV-31, -33, and -45 infection and an increased incidence of HPV-51 infection. METHODS A study nested within the CVT intention-to-treat cohort was designed to assess high-risk HPV variant lineage-specific vaccine efficacy (VE). The 2 main end points were (1) long-term incident infections persisting for ≥2 years and/or progression to high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (ie, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2/3 [CIN 2/3]) and (2) incident transient infections lasting for <2 years. For efficiency, incident infections due to HPV-16, -18, -31, -33, -35, -45, and -51 resulting in persistent infection and/or CIN 2/3 were matched (ratio, 1:2) to the more-frequent transient viral infections, by HPV type. Variant lineages were determined by sequencing the upstream regulatory region and/or E6 region. RESULTS VEs against persistent or transient infections with HPV-16, -18, -33, -35, -45, and -51 did not differ significantly by variant lineage. As the possible exception, VEs against persistent infection and/or CIN 2/3 due to HPV-31 A/B and HPV-31C variants were -7.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], -33.9% to 0%) and 86.4% (95% CI, 65.1%-97.1%), respectively (P = .02 for test of equal VE). No difference in VE was observed by variant among transient HPV-31 infections (P = .68). CONCLUSIONS Overall, sequence variation at the variant level does not appear to explain partial cross-protection by the bivalent HPV vaccine.

Rationale and design of a long term follow-up study of women who did and did not receive HPV 16/18 vaccination in Guanacaste, Costa Rica

The Costa Rica Vaccine Trial (CVT) was a randomized clinical trial conducted between 2004 and 2010, which randomized 7466 women aged 18 to 25 to receive the bivalent HPV-16/18 vaccine or control Hepatitis-A vaccine. Participants were followed for 4 years with cross-over vaccination at the study end. In 2010 the long term follow-up (LTFU) study was initiated to evaluate the 10-year impact of HPV-16/18 vaccination, determinants of the immune response, and HPV natural history in a vaccinated population. Herein, the rationale, design and methods of the LTFU study are described, which actively follows CVT participants in the HPV-arm 6 additional years at biennial intervals (3 additional study visits for 10 years of total follow-up), or more often if clinically indicated. According to the initial commitment, women in the Hepatitis-A arm were offered HPV vaccination at cross-over; they were followed 2 additional years and exited from the study. 92% of eligible CVT women accepted participation in LTFU. To provide underlying rates of HPV acquisition and cervical disease among unvaccinated women to compare with the HPV-arm during LTFU, a new unvaccinated control group (UCG) of women who are beyond the age generally recommended for routine vaccination was enrolled, and will be followed by cervical cancer screening over 6 years. To form the UCG, 5000 women were selected from a local census, of whom 2836 women (61% of eligible women) agreed to participate. Over 90% of participants complied with an interview, blood and cervical specimen collection. Evaluation of comparability between the original (Hepatitis-A arm of CVT) and new (UCG) control groups showed that womens characteristics, as well as their predicted future risk for cervical HPV acquisition, were similar, thus validating use of the UCG. LTFU is poised to comprehensively address many important questions related to long-term effects of prophylactic HPV vaccines.

Risks of CIN 2+, CIN 3+, and Cancer by Cytology and Human Papillomavirus Status: The Foundation of Risk-Based Cervical Screening Guidelines

Objectives The next round of the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP)-sponsored cervical cancer screening and management guidelines will recommend clinical actions based on risk, rather than test-based algorithms. This article gives preliminary risk estimates for the screening setting, showing combinations of the 2 most important predictors, human papillomavirus (HPV) status and cytology result. Materials and Methods Among 1,262,713 women aged 25 to 77 years co-tested with HC2 (Qiagen) and cytology at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, we estimated 0–5-year cumulative risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2+, CIN 3+, and cancer for combinations of cytology (negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy [NILM], atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance [ASC-US], low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion [LSIL], atypical squamous cells cannot exclude HSIL [ASC-H], high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion [HSIL], atypical glandular cells [AGC]) and HPV status. Results Ninety percent of screened women had HPV-negative NILM and an extremely low risk of subsequent cancer. Five-year risks of CIN 3+ were lower after HPV negativity (0.12%) than after NILM (0.25%). Among HPV-negative women, 5-year risks for CIN 3+ were 0.10% for NILM, 0.44% for ASC-US, 1.8% for LSIL, 3.0% for ASC-H, 1.2% for AGC, and 29% for HSIL+ cytology (which was very rare). Among HPV-positive women, 5-year risks were 4.0% for NILM, 6.8% for ASC-US, 6.1% for LSIL, 28% for ASC-H, 30% for AGC, and 50% for HSIL+ cytology. Conclusions As a foundation for the next guidelines revision, we confirmed with additional precision the risk estimates previously reported for combinations of HPV and cytology. Future analyses will estimate risks for women being followed in colposcopy clinic and posttreatment and will consider the role of risk modifiers such as age, HPV vaccine status, HPV type, and screening and treatment history.