Restricted cross-reactivity of hybrid capture 2 with nononcogenic human papillomavirus types.

Hybrid Capture 2 Test using probe B (HC2-B) is a clinical test for the detection of 13 human papillomavirus (HPV) types associated with cervical cancer (oncogenic types), but the potential clinical significance of HC2-B cross-reactivity with untargeted (nononcogenic) HPV types has not been fully evaluated. Thus, HC2-B test results on 954 clinical cervical specimens from a population-based natural history study of HPV in Costa Rica were compared with the data from testing of the same specimens twice by HPV type-specific MY09/MY11 L1 consensus primer PCR. Specimens positive by PCR for single HPV types not targeted by HC2-B were used for determining type-specific cross-reactivity. Effects of cross-reactivity on clinical performance were estimated by calculating sensitivity and specificity with and without cross-reactivity for the detection of high-grade cervical lesions. HC2-B tested positive for single infections by untargeted (cross-reactive) types 11, 53, 61, 66, 67, 70, 71, and 81. Cross-reactivity was strongly associated with PCR signal strength (P(Trend) = 0.0001) and cervical abnormalities (P = 0.0002, Pearson chi(2)). We estimated that HC2-B cross-reactivity resulted in minor changes in screening performance. Clinical sensitivity increased from 84.3% to 87.9%, clinical specificity decreased from 89.6% to 88.1%, and referral rates increased from 11.7% to 13.2% for detection of >or=cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2. The clinical effect of cross-reactivity varied by cytologic interpretation. Among women with normal cytologic interpretations, cross-reactivity significantly improved the accuracy of identifying cytologically nonevident histology of >or=cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 because of increased sensitivity with maintained specificity. However, among women with equivocal or mildly abnormal cytologic interpretations, cross-reactivity decreased the accuracy of HPV testing because of substantial decreases in specificity. In summary, cross-reactivity with nononcogenic HPV types had little effect on the overall clinical performance of HC2-B as a general screening test, but reduction of cross-reactivity might improve the performance of HPV testing for triage of equivocal or mildly abnormal cytologic interpretations.

[1]  L. Mango,et al.  Design and methods of a population-based natural history study of cervical neoplasia in a rural province of Costa Rica: the Guanacaste Project. , 1997, Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health.

[2]  W. Youden,et al.  Systematic versus random error in laboratory surveys. , 1970, American Journal of Clinical Pathology.

[3]  S Wacholder,et al.  HPV DNA testing in cervical cancer screening: results from women in a high-risk province of Costa Rica. , 2000, JAMA.

[4]  R. Burk,et al.  PCR detection of human papillomavirus: comparison between MY09/MY11 and GP5+/GP6+ primer systems , 1997, Journal of clinical microbiology.

[5]  V. Moreno,et al.  Prevalence of human papillomavirus in cervical cancer: a worldwide perspective. International biological study on cervical cancer (IBSCC) Study Group. , 1995, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[6]  Thomas C Wright,et al.  Consensus Guidelines for the Management of Women With Cervical Cytological Abnormalities , 2002 .

[7]  M. Schiffman,et al.  Comparison of three management strategies for patients with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: baseline results from a randomized trial. , 2001, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[8]  Julian Peto,et al.  Prevalence of Human Papillomavirus in Cervical Cancer: a Worldwide Perspective , 1995 .

[9]  C. Peyton,et al.  Comparison of PCR- and Hybrid Capture-Based Human Papillomavirus Detection Systems Using Multiple Cervical Specimen Collection Strategies , 1998, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[10]  J. Peto,et al.  Human papillomavirus is a necessary cause of invasive cervical cancer worldwide , 1999, The Journal of pathology.

[11]  Thomas C Wright,et al.  2001 Consensus Guidelines for the Management of Women with Cervical Cytological Abnormalities. , 2002, Journal of lower genital tract disease.

[12]  L Beardsley,et al.  Sexual behavior and partner characteristics are the predominant risk factors for genital human papillomavirus infection in young women. , 1996, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[13]  M. Schiffman,et al.  Persistence of type-specific human papillomavirus infection among cytologically normal women. , 1994, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[14]  M. Sherman,et al.  Comparisons of HPV DNA detection by MY09/11 PCR methods , 2002, Journal of medical virology.

[15]  N. Muñoz,et al.  Human papillomavirus and cancer: the epidemiological evidence. , 2000, Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology.

[16]  M. Plummer,et al.  Population-based study of human papillomavirus infection and cervical neoplasia in rural Costa Rica. , 2000, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[17]  Jack Cuzick,et al.  Detection of high‐risk HPV types by the hybrid capture 2 test , 2001, Journal of medical virology.