Subscribe to RSS

DOI: 10.1055/a-1886-3311
Two Years of Cytology and HPV Co-Testing in Germany: Initial Experience
Article in several languages: English | deutsch
Abstract
Introduction On 1 January 2020 the screening programme for the prevention of cervical cancer in women from the age of 35 years of the Statutory Health Insurance (GKV) in Germany changed from an annual cytology examination to cytological and HPV co-testing carried out every three years. A large standard diagnostics laboratory has been using liquid-based cytology (LBC) with computer-assisted screening (CAS) since 1 January 2020 to assess the samples.
Patients and Methods The cytological and HPV results for all cases examined with co-testing from 01.01.2020 to 31.12.2021 (n = 395759) are reported and the cytology results obtained using co-testing are compared with the results obtained using only conventional primary cytology screening from the two previous years (n = 588192). Cytology tests were carried out using LBC and computer-assisted screening. A DNA PCR test which can identify 14 types of HPV was used for HPV testing. The cytology results are reported using the Munich Nomenclature III, which is mandatory in Germany, and converted to The Bethesda System (TBS). Problems occurring during the implementation phase are described here.
Results A total of 983951 cases who had primary screening between 01.01.2018 and 31.12.2021 were analysed. The HR HPV-positive rate with co-testing for all age groups was 6.41%. Of this group, 16.31% were positive for HPV-16, 4.43% for HPV-18, and 71.40% had one or more of the other 12 HR HPV types. Several different HPV types were identified in 7.86% of cases. The HPV-positive rate for cases with unremarkable cytological findings was 4.03%. 0.46% of tests were technically invalid. The results of primary cytology screening for 2020/21 (LBC) were: Pap 0 (TBS: unsatisfactory) 0.09%, Pap I and Pap II-a (NILM) 96.82%, Pap II-p/g (~ASC-US/AGC) 1.23%, Pap III-p/g (~ASC-H/AGC) 0.19%, Pap III D1 (LSIL) 1.08%, Pap III D2 (HSIL) 0.31%, Pap IVa/b-p/g (HSIL/AIS) 0.18%, and Pap V-p/g (carcinoma) 0.01%. The rates for 2018/19 (conventional cytology without routine testing for HPV) were significantly higher for Pap II-p/g (1.64%) and significantly lower for Pap III-p/g (0.13%), Pap III D1 (0.45%), Pap III D2 (0.10%) and Pap IVa/b-p/g (0.05%).
Conclusion Evaluation of the data for the two first years of cytology and HPV co-testing from a standard diagnostics laboratory found low HR HPV-positive rates. As regards the cytology tests, the Pap II-p/g rate was significantly lower and the ≥ Pap III rate was significantly higher compared to the two previous years. This points to a probable higher sensitivity and specificity of the new method.
Publication History
Received: 15 February 2022
Accepted after revision: 23 June 2022
Article published online:
16 August 2022
© 2022. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
-
References/Literatur
- 1 Schneider V. Gynäkologische Krebsvorsorge in Deutschland. Pathologe 2012; 33: 286-292
- 2 Wentzensen N, Arbyn M. HPV-based cervical cancer screening- facts, fiction and misperceptions. Prev Med 2017; 98: 33-35
- 3 Kerek-Bodden H, Altenhofen L, Brenner G. Inanspruchnahme der Früherkennung auf Zervixkarzinom in den Jahren 2002–2004. (Zentralinstitut für die kassenärztliche Versorgung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland Wissenschaftliche Reihe; ). 62. Köln: Deutscher Ärzte-Verlag; 2010
- 4 Bundesministerium für Gesundheit. Nationaler Krebsplan. Accessed August 17, 2021 at: https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/fileadmin/Dateien/5_Publikationen/Praevention/Broschueren/Broschuere_Nationaler_Krebsplan.pdf
- 5 [Anonym]. Gesetz zur Weiterentwicklung der Krebsfrüherkennung und zur Qualitätssicherung durch klinische Krebsregister (Krebsfrüherkennungs- und -registergesetz – KFRG). Accessed August 17, 2021 at: https://www.bgbl.de/xaver/bgbl/start.xav?start=//*%5B@attr_id=%27bgbl113s0617.pdf%27%5D#__bgbl__%2F%2F*%5B%40attr_id%3D%27bgbl113s0617.pdf%27%5D__1629198905885
- 6 IQWiG. Rapid Report S13–03. HPV-Test im Primärscreening des Zervixkarzinoms. Accessed August 17, 2021 at: https://www.iqwig.de/download/s13–03_rapid-report_kurzfassung_hpv-test-im-primaerscreening-des-zervixkarzinoms.pdf
- 7 Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss. Beschluss des Gemeinsamen Bundesausschusses über eine Beauftragung des Instituts für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen: Erstellung von Einladungsschreiben und Versicherteninformationen zum Zervixkarzinomscreening. Accessed August 17, 2021 at: https://www.g-ba.de/downloads/39–261–2224/2015–03–19_IQWiG-Beauftragung_Einladung-Info-Zervixkarzinom-Sc_WZ.pdf
- 8 Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss. Beschluss des Gemeinsamen Bundesausschusses über eine Änderung der Krebsfrüherkennungs-Richtlinie und eine Änderung der Richtlinie für organisierte Krebsfrüherkennungsprogramme: Programm zur Früherkennung von Zervixkarzinomen. Accessed August 17, 2021 at: https://www.g-ba.de/downloads/39–261–3597/2018–11–22_oKFE-RL_Zervixkarzinom.pdf
- 9 Hillemanns P, Friese K, Dannecker C. et al. Prevention of Cervical Cancer. Guideline of the DGGG and the DKG (S3 Level, AWMF Register Number 015/027OL, December 2017) – Part 1 with Introduction, Screening and the Pathology of Cervical Dysplasia. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2019; 79: 148-159
- 10 Hillemanns P, Friese K, Dannecker C. et al. Prevention of Cervical Cancer. Guideline of the DGGG and the DKG (S3 Level, AWMF Register Number 015/027OL, December 2017) – Part 2 on Triage, Treatment and Follow-up. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2019; 79: 160-176
- 11 Frayle H, Gori S, Rizzi M. et al. HPV testing for cervical cancer screening: technical improvement of laboratory logistics and good clinical performance of the cobas 6800 in comparison to the 4800 system. BMC Womens Health 2019; 19: 47
- 12 Griesser H, Breinl H, Jordan B. Münchner Nomenklatur III: Gynäkologische Dysplasien werden klar zugeordnet. Dtsch Arztebl Ausg A 2014; 111: A640
- 13 Nayar R, Wilbur DC. The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology: A Historical Perspective. Acta Cytol 2017; 61: 359-372
- 14 Martins TR, Longatto-Filho A, Cohen D. et al. Influence of Prior Knowledge of Human Papillomavirus Status on the Performance of Cytology Screening. Am J Clin Pathol 2018; 149: 316-323
- 15 Klug SJ, Hukelmann M, Hollwitz B. et al. Prevalence of Human Papillomavirus Types in Women Screened by Cytology in Germany. J Med Virol 2007; 79: 616-625
- 16 Olesen TB, Svahn MF, Faber MT. et al. Prevalence of Human Papillomavirus in endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol 2014; 134: 206-215
- 17 Wright jr. TC, Stoler MH, Aslam S. et al. Knowledge of Patients’ Human Papillomavirus Status at the Time of Cytologic Review Significantly Affects the Performance of Cervical Cytology in the ATHENA Study. Am J Clin Pathol 2016; 146: 391-398
- 18 Ikenberg H. Computerassistierte Diagnostik in der Zervixzytologie. Pathologe 2011; 32: 476-483
- 19 Klug SJ, Neis KJ, Harlfinger W. et al. A randomized trial comparing conventional cytology to liquid-based cytology and computer assistance. Int J Cancer 2013; 132: 2849-2857
- 20 Marquardt K, Kossowski I, Pfandzelter R. Münchner Nomenklatur III. Bundesweite Jahresstatistik nach der Nomenklaturreform. Frauenarzt 2017; 58: 706-712
- 21 Dominik S, Klimas D. Wie sicher ist der HPV-Test in der Praxis? Falsch-Negativ-Befunde bei Präkanzerosen der Cervix uteri. Frauenarzt 2014; 10: 986-989