An analysis of human papillomavirus testing and endocervical component on pap tests: A pilot study using the Roche Cobas® assay. Issue 4 (23rd January 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Pierce, Kirsten J.; Currens, Heather S.; Tafe, Laura J.; Tsongalis, Gregory J.; Padmanabhan, Vijayalakshmi
• Is Part Of: Diagnostic cytopathology. Volume 44:Issue 4(2016)
• Page Start: 280
• Page End: 282
• Publication Date: 2016-01-23
• Subjects: HPV -- endocervical -- Pap test -- Roche Cobas -- cervical cancer; Cytodiagnosis -- Periodicals; Pathology, Cellular -- Periodicals; Cytology -- Periodicals; 616.07582
• DOI: 10.1002/dc.23436
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 8755-1039

Abstract

Abstract : Introduction: HPV is known to have a predilection for infecting the transformation zone (TZ). Endocervical cells (EC) on a Pap test (PT) indicate that the cervical TZ has been sampled. Earlier repeat testing of women lacking EC is of little value in further detecting disease, thus a sample without EC is not necessarily inadequate. Both HPV testing and PT can be performed using a single sample; however, few studies have investigated the relationship between HPV results and TZ sampling. Materials and Methods: Specimens were collected following the ThinPrep ® liquid‐based PT protocol. The Roche Cobas ® HPV test was performed on post‐aliquot samples. Data was collected retrospectively on 500 patients: 250 consecutive cases of EC− and 250 of EC+ on PT. To maintain uniformity, we included only cases diagnosed as negative (NILM). We compared HPV test results within each category. As a positive control, five consecutive cases each of LSIL and HSIL were also reviewed. Results: Of NILM cases, 11 of 250 EC+ cases and 14 of 250 EC− cases were positive for hrHPV. HPV 16 was present in 5 of 11 EC + cases and in 1 of 14 EC− cases. Of LSIL cases, 1 of 5 EC+ cases was positive for hrHPV, and 2 of 5 EC− cases were positive for hrHPV. Of HSIL cases, 5 of 5 EC+ cases were hrHPV+. In the time period studied, only one case of EC− HSIL was found, which was positive for hrHPV. Discussion: Although our study did not prove a significant correlation between HPV testing results and EC on PT, more EC+ PTs were positive for HPV16 compared to EC− PTs. The absence of EC on PT does not appear to warrant re‐testing for HPV infection, though larger studies are required to determine the significance of low HPV 16 in PT without EC. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2016;44:280–282. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.