BACKGROUND

High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) detection and genotyping by Cobas HPV test has become an important technical platform in cervical cancer screening. It may be used as a co-test with cervical cytology or as a standalone test. Aptima HPV assay (AHPV) is another hrHPV test detecting 13 genotypes through qPCR based amplification of viral E6/E7 transcripts. Partial genotyping with Aptima HPV 16 18/45 genotype assay (AHPV GT) on positive samples is possible. Evidence supporting the performance of AHPV in Asian populations is scarce.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the performances of Cobas and AHPV in detection of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions (SIL) and triage of cytologically equivocal smears in a cohort of Hong Kong women.

STUDY DESIGN

442 liquid based cytology (LBC) residues with biopsy confirmed diagnoses were evaluated by both AHPV and Cobas HPV tests.

RESULTS

Overall, there was a moderate agreement between AHPV and Cobas (κ = 0.5082, 95% CI: 0.492-0.672). The sensitivities of AHPV and Cobas for detecting biopsy confirmed HSIL or worse lesions (HSIL+) were 96.71% (95% CI: 92.49%-98.92%) and 97.37% (95% CI: 93.40%-99.28%) respectively. AHPV demonstrated significantly higher specificity than Cobas (37.85% vs 23.96%, p < 0.0001). Both tests could identify all ASC-US and AGC cases with HSIL + in follow-up biopsies, but AHPV showed a significantly higher specificity in both settings (ASC-US: 28.81% vs 11.86%, p < 0.0001; AGC: 55.00% vs 20.00%, p = 0.0233).

CONCLUSIONS

Both AHPV and Cobas were equally sensitive in detecting high-grade SIL in both scenarios of screening and ASC-US or AGC triage but AHPV showed a higher specificity.