Epidemiologic studies supported by molecular technology have provided sufficient evidence of the causal role of some human papillomavirus (HPV) infections in the development of cervical cancer. The finding is consistent universally, and HPV has been proposed as the first identified necessary cause of cervical cancer. Such recognition translates into the concept that cervical cancer does not develop without persistent presence of HPV DNA. In the developed parts of the world, cytologic screening programs could benefit from the addition of HPV testing to their protocols. Controlled studies and one randomized trial have shown that HPV testing is helpful in solving the ambiguous cases generated by cytology reading. In populations where cytology programs are not functional or efficient, HPV testing is being evaluated as an alternative means of primary screening. Prevention of exposure to high-risk HPV types, either by prophylactic vaccination or by combined prophylactic and therapeutic immunologic intervention, may prove to be the most efficient and logistically feasible option for the prevention of cervical cancer in developing populations.
KeywordsCervical Cancer Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Natl Cancer Inst Cervical Cancer Screening Invasive Cervical Cancer
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References and Recommended Reading
- 2.Walboomers JM, Jacobs MV, Manos MM, et al.: Human papillomavirus is a necessary cause of invasive cervical cancer worldwide. J Pathol 1999, 189:12–9. Along with Bosch et al. , this paper reports on an exhaustive investigation of the presence of viral DNA in over 1000 cervical cancer cases from 22 countries. The final reported prevalence of 99.7% generated the claim that HPV is in fact a necessary cause of cervical cancer.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Josefsson AM, Agnetha M, Magnusson PKE, et al.: Viral load of human papilloma virus 16 as a determinant for development of cervical carcinoma in situ: a nested case-control study. Lancet 2000, 355:2189–2193. This paper represents an evaluation of HPV viral load as an additional test to predict progression in screening specimens at stages in which cytology is uninformative. It is one of the first studies to include quantitative PCR to generate estimates of the viral load.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Thomas DB, Ray RM, Koetsawang A, et al.: Human papillomaviruses and cervical cancer in Bangkok. I. Risk factors for invasive cervical carcinomas with human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 DNA. Am J Epidemiol 2001, 153:723–731. This is the most recent report on a large case-control study on HPV and cervical cancer. It confirms the key findings of the previous studies by Bosch et al.  and Herrero et al.  on the extremely high relative risk estimates for the presence of HPV DNA as a determinant of invasive cervical cancer or preinvasive cervical neoplasm.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Parkin DM, Whelan SL, Ferlay J, et al.: Cancer Incidence in Five Continents, vol 7. Lyon: IARC Scientific Publications; 1997.Google Scholar
- 22.Nobbenhuis MA, Meijer CJ, van den Brule AJ, et al.: Addition of high-risk HPV testing improves the current guidelines on follow-up after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Br J Cancer 2001, 84:796–801. Description of the ability of the HPV tests after conization to predict CiN2 or 3 at 24 months following treatment. The sensitivity at 6 months of an HPV test was 90%, compared with cytology at 62%. The negative predictive value of an HPV result was 99%. The study was based on 184 women with a 24-month follow-up and 29 CiN2 or 3 events.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Shah KV, Howley PM: Papillomaviruses. In Field’s Virology. Edited by Knipe DM, Howley PM. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1996:2077–2109.Google Scholar
- 29.Schiller JT, Lowy DR: Papillomavirus-like particle vaccines. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2000, 28:50–54.Google Scholar
- 30.Nanda K, McCrory DC, Myers ER, et al.: Accuracy of the Papanicolau test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytologic abnormalities: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2000, 132:810–819. This is an updated meta-analysis of the relative value of cytology as a screening test. The authors report sensitivity of close to 50% and specificity of 98%.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 35.Solomon D, Schiffman M, Tarone R: Comparison of three management strategies for patients with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: baseline results from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001, 93:293–299. With the report from the ALTS group , this paper represents the first large randomized trial to evaluate clinical management of cytology results diagnosed as ASCUS or LSIL. The authors confirm the value of HPV testing over repeated cytology in clarifying the prognosis of an ambiguous expert cytology, classified according to the Bethesda system.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 40.Ratnam S, Franco EL, Ferenczy A: Human papillomavirus testing for primary screening of cervical cancer precursors. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prevent 2000, 9:945–951.Google Scholar
- 46.Solomon D: The 1988 Bethesda system for reporting cervical/ vaginal cytologic diagnoses. Developed and approved at the National Cancer Institute Workshop, Bethesda, Maryland, USA, December, 12–13, 1988. J Clin Cytol Cytopathol 1989, 33:567–574.Google Scholar
- 47.The Atypical Squamous Cell of Undetermined Significance/ Low-grade squamous Intraepithelial Lesions Triage Study (ALTS) Group: Human papillomavirus testing for triage of women with cytologic evidence of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions: baseline data from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000, 92:397–402. With Solomon et al. , this report finds an HPV prevalence in LSIL of 83%, suggesting that, under these diagnostic conditions, HPV testing would not be of value as a triage for coloscopy criteria.CrossRefGoogle Scholar