An analysis of human papillomavirus testing and endocervical component on pap tests: A pilot study using the Roche Cobas super( registered ) assay

• Published in: Diagnostic cytopathology Vol. 44; no. 4; pp. 280 - 282
• Main Authors: Pierce, Kirsten J, Currens, Heather S, Tafe, Laura J, Tsongalis, Gregory J, Padmanabhan, Vijayalakshmi
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: 01.04.2016
• Subjects: Human papillomavirus; Human papillomavirus 16
• ISSN: 8755-1039; 1097-0339
• DOI: 10.1002/dc.23436

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 super( registered ) liquid-based PT protocol. The Roche Cobas super( registered ) 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.