Isabel Rodrigues

Risk factors for oral human papillomavirus in adults infected and not infected with human immunodeficiency virus

Background and Objectives: To investigate in a cross‐sectional study the determinants of oral human papillomavirus infection in 287 individuals who are sexually active. Goal: To assess prevalence as well as risk factors for oral human papillomavirus infection. Study Design: One hundred seventy‐eight human immunodeficiency virus‐seropositive (158 men and 20 women) and 109 human immunodeficiency virus‐negative (73 men and 36 women) individuals were recruited consecutively from sexually transmitted disease‐human immunodeficiency virus clinics and gastrointestinal endoscopy clinics. Oral brushings were tested with the L1 consensus polymerase chain reaction assay for human papillomavirus detection. Results: Human papillomavirus DNA was detected in 32 (11.2%) of 287 individuals. Associated with oral human papillomavirus infection on univariate analyses were human immunodeficiency virus infection (odds ratio, 6.9; 95% confidence interval, 2.0–23.2), homosexuality (odds ratio, 3.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.5–9.4), unprotected oral sex (odds ratio, 5.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.6–18.4), syphilis (odds ratio, 2.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.1–6.3), gonorrhea (odds ratio, 4.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.9–9.1), Chlamydia trachomatis (odds ratio, 4.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.8–10.6), and genital herpes (odds ratio, 2.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.3–6.5). Human immunodeficiency virus infection and C. trachomatis were independently predictive of human papillomavirus infection in multivariate stepwise logistic regression. Conclusions: This study suggests that sexual activity plays an important role in the transmission of human papillomavirus in the oral cavity.

Randomized controlled trial of human papillomavirus testing versus Pap cytology in the primary screening for cervical cancer precursors: Design, methods and preliminary accrual results of the Canadian cervical cancer screening trial (CCCaST)

Since infection with oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) has been considered a necessary cause of cervical cancer, tests for oncogenic HPV types have been proposed as adjuncts or replacements to Pap cytology. We designed the Canadian Cervical Cancer Screening Trial (CCCaST) to compare the relative efficacy of HPV DNA testing and Pap cytology in primary screening for cervical cancer and its high‐grade precursors. CCCaST randomized women aged 30–69 years in Montreal (Quebec) and in St. Johns (Newfoundland) to 1 of 2 screening groups: focus on Pap (conventional) or focus on HPV testing (Hybrid Capture 2). Women in both arms received both tests, but were randomized as to their order, the first test being the index test. Women with an abnormal Pap test or a positive HPV test underwent colposcopy and biopsy, as did a random sample of women with a negative index test. CCCaST enrolled 9,667 women between October 2002 and October 2004. At enrolment, 2.8% had an abnormal Pap test, 6.1% had a positive HPV test and 1.1% were abnormal in both tests. ASC‐US was the most frequent cytological abnormality, representing 64% of abnormal Pap results. The frequency of abnormal Pap and HPV results decreased with increasing age and the proportion of HPV‐positive results increased with the severity of Pap abnormality. Efficacy analysis will determine if the extra referrals with HPV DNA testing will translate into a relevant increase in high‐grade cervical cancer precursor detection. Because of its design, CCCaST will provide sound evidence for formulating cervical cancer screening strategies.

The morning-after pill — How long after?

Postcoital contraception has been prescribed for more than two decades. The current regimen is given within 72 hours of unprotected intercourse. After this period, not many choices remain; either the woman may wait until her next menses hoping she is not pregnant or she may have a postcoital intrauterine contraceptive device inserted. Since these alternatives are not always acceptable, we reviewed the literature looking for evidence supporting the current maximum time limit for treatment. Our conclusion is that the limit could theoretically be extended; therefore we think it is time to challenge the time period of current treatment by conducting clinical trials.

Why and According to What Consultation Profiles Do Female Sex Workers Consult Health Care Professionals? A Study Conducted in Laval, Québec

We carried out a study to understand help-seeking behavior among female sex workers in order to bring adequate health care and services to this population at risk for sexually transmitted infection (STI) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmissions. Data were collected by means of questionnaires, focus groups, and in-depth individual interviews. Analysis reveals that the respondents are familiar with and have access to the health care system. Over 80% claimed to have consulted a health professional during the preceding 12 months. Gynecological, psychosocial, respiratory, digestive, and drug addiction problems were the most frequent. Only a third of the respondents received care and services related to STIs. Data are displayed as three consultation profiles, one of which only tends to foster continuity and comprehensive health care, including screening and treatment of STIs.

Human papillomavirus testing versus cytology in primary cervical cancer screening: End-of-study and extended follow-up results from the Canadian cervical cancer screening trial

The Canadian Cervical Cancer Screening Trial was a randomized controlled trial comparing the performance of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing and Papanicolaou cytology to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grades 2 or worse (CIN2+) among women aged 30–69 years attending routine cervical cancer screening in Montreal and St. Johns, Canada (n = 10,154). We examined screening and prognostic values of enrollment cytologic and HPV testing results. Extended follow‐up data were available for St. Johns participants (n = 5,754; 501,682.6 person‐months). HPV testing detected more CIN2+ than cytology during protocol‐defined (82.9 vs. 44.4%) and extended (54.2 vs. 19.3%) follow‐up periods, respectively. Three‐year risks ranged from 0.87% (95% CI: 0.37–2.05) for HPV‐/Pap‐ women to 35.77% (95% CI: 25.88–48.04) for HPV+/Pap+ women. Genotype‐specific risks ranged from 0.90% (95% CI: 0.40–2.01) to 43.84% (95% CI: 32.42–57.24) among HPV− and HPV16+ women, respectively, exceeding those associated with Pap+ or HPV+ results taken individually or jointly. Ten‐year risks ranged from 1.15% (95% CI: 0.60–2.19) for HPV−/Pap− women to 26.05% (95% CI: 15.34–42.13) for HPV+/Pap+ women and genotype‐specific risks ranged from 1.13% (95% CI: 0.59–2.14) to 32.78% (95% CI: 21.15–48.51) among women testing HPV− and HPV16+, respectively. Abnormal cytology stratified risks most meaningfully for HPV+ women. Primary HPV testing every 3 years provided a similar or greater level of reassurance against disease risks as currently recommended screening strategies. HPV‐based cervical screening may allow for greater disease detection than cytology‐based screening and permit safe extensions of screening intervals; genotype‐specific testing could provide further improvement in the positive predictive value of such screening.

COMPARISON OF TRIAGE STRATEGIES FOR HPV POSITIVE WOMEN: CANADIAN CERVICAL CANCER SCREENING TRIAL RESULTS.

Background: High-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing has become a preferred cervical cancer screening strategy in some countries due to its superior sensitivity over cytology-based methods for identifying cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+). Improved sensitivity has been accompanied by reductions in specificity and concerns regarding overscreening and overtreatment of women with transient or nonprogressing HR-HPV infections. Triage of HR-HPV+ women to colposcopy is, thus, warranted for appropriate management and treatment. Methods: Using data from the Canadian Cervical Cancer Screening Trial (CCCaST), we compared the performance of cytology and HR-HPV strategies to detect CIN2+ among HR-HPV+ women (age, 30–69 years). Colposcopy referral rates and performance gains from adding other HR-HPV genotypes to HPV16/18+ triage were also evaluated. Results: A strategy referring all women HPV16/18+ and HPV16/18−, but with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse cytology (ASC-US+) had the highest sensitivity [82.5%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 70.9%–91.0%] but yielded the highest colposcopy referral rate. HPV16/18+ triage was the next most sensitive strategy (64.1%; 95% CI, 51.1%–75.7%). Low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or worse cytology (LSIL+) triage yielded a low sensitivity (32.8%; 95% CI, 21.9%–45.4%) but had the most favorable specificity (93.6%; 95% CI, 91.0%–95.6%), positive predictive value (41.5%; 95% CI, 28.1%–55.9%), and colposcopy referral rate of strategies examined. HPV viral load triage strategies did not perform optimally overall. Inclusion of HR-HPV genotypes 31 and 52 to HPV16/18+ triage provided the highest sensitivities. Conclusion: Concerns surrounding HPV-based screening can be effectively mitigated via triage. Impact: Balancing the benefits of HPV-based primary cervical screening with informed management recommendations for HR-HPV+ women may decide the success of its widening utilization. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(6); 923–9. ©2017 AACR.