Comparison of urine samples and penile swabs for detection of human papillomavirus in HIV-negative Dutch men

Objectives Penile swab sampling is the method of choice when testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) in men. Urine sampling is already used in routine sexually transmitted infections (STI) diagnostics and could provide a less invasive sampling method in men to detect HPV. Therefore we compared detection of HPV types in urine samples and penile swabs by the highly sensitive SPF10-LiPA25 system. Methods First void urine and self-obtained penile swab samples were collected from 120 men, with a mean age of 29.4 years, visiting a STI clinic in South Limburg, the Netherlands. In total 111 of 120 men were included in the analysis. Broad-spectrum HPV DNA amplification and mucosal HPV genotyping were performed using the SPF10 DEIA-LiPA25 system (SPF10 HPV LiPA, V.1). Results In total 75 (68%) men were positive for HPV in the combined analysis. Sixty-six (59%) paired samples were concordant in being positive or negative. In 39% of the men HPV DNA was detected only in the penile swab. In 2% of the men HPV DNA was detected only in the urine sample. Considering penile swabs as the gold standard, a sensitivity of 41% (95% CI 30% to 53%) and a specificity of 95% (95% CI 81% to 99%) was found. In 6 (5%) urines high risk types were repeatedly found that were not detected in the matching swab. Conclusions Urine samples are not comparable to penile swabs in the detection of HPV in men. However, the addition of urine samples to penile swabs could be of use in epidemiological or clearance studies.

[1]  M. Nygård,et al.  Monitoring human papillomavirus prevalence in urine samples: a review , 2013, Clinical epidemiology.

[2]  K. Anastos,et al.  Cervicovaginal human papillomavirus (HPV)‐infection before and after hysterectomy: evidence of different tissue tropism for oncogenic and nononcogenic HPV types in a cohort of HIV‐positive and HIV‐negative women , 2012, International journal of cancer.

[3]  H. Cubie,et al.  Urine testing as a surveillance tool to monitor the impact of HPV immunization programs , 2011, Journal of medical virology.

[4]  J. Berkhof,et al.  Comparison of GP5+/6+-PCR and SPF10-Line Blot Assays for Detection of High-Risk Human Papillomavirus in Samples from Women with Normal Cytology Results Who Develop Grade 3 Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia , 2008, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[5]  A. Giuliano,et al.  The optimal anatomic sites for sampling heterosexual men for human papillomavirus (HPV) detection: the HPV detection in men study. , 2007, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[6]  F. Lunel,et al.  Human Papillomavirus Quantification in Urine and Cervical Samples by Using the Mx4000 and LightCycler General Real-Time PCR Systems , 2007, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[7]  W. Melchers,et al.  Evaluation of the SPF10-INNO LiPA Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Genotyping Test and the Roche Linear Array HPV Genotyping Test , 2006, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[8]  W. Quint,et al.  Detection of persistent high risk human papillomavirus infections with hybrid capture II and SPF10/LiPA. , 2005, Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology.

[9]  K. Holmes,et al.  Evaluation of genital sites and sampling techniques for detection of human papillomavirus DNA in men. , 2004, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[10]  Wim Quint,et al.  Development and Clinical Evaluation of a Highly Sensitive PCR-Reverse Hybridization Line Probe Assay for Detection and Identification of Anogenital Human Papillomavirus , 1999, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[11]  B. Hansson,et al.  Human papillomavirus DNA in urine samples compared with that in simultaneously collected urethra and cervix samples , 1993, Journal of clinical microbiology.