[Value of high-risk HPV viral load in cervical cancer screening and triage: a real world retrospective study based on cervical cancer screening program in Quanzhou, China].

Objective: To evaluate the clinical value of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) viral load for the cervical cancer screening and triage of high-risk HPV positive populations without additional tests. Methods: (1) This study conducted a retrospective analysis of 29 720 women aged 35-64 years who received cervical cancer screening in Quanzhou, China, in 2021. Fourteen high-risk HPV types (including HPV 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, 66, and 68) were detected for cervical cancer primary screening using hybrid capture-chemiluminescence method. High-risk HPV positive samples were further subjected to HPV 16/18 genotyping using hybrid capture-chemiluminescence method. Among them, HPV 16/18 positive women were directly referred to colposcopy, while the other 12 high-risk HPV positive samples were further subjected to liquid based cytology test. Those with abnormal or suspicious cytology were referred to colposcopy. Biopsies were taken for histopathological examination of suspicious or abnormal individuals under colposcopy. (2) Ten cases of colposcopy loss or refusal to undergo examination were excluded, and the data from the 29 710 cases were analyzed. The HPV viral loads of the other 12 high-risk HPV positive populations were focused and evaluated their HPV viral loads for further cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) Ⅱ and above lesions (CINⅡ⁺) triage in cervical cancer screening. Results: (1) Among 29 720 women, 2 487 women (8.37%, 2 487/29 720) were positive for high-risk HPV, including 807 women (2.72%, 807/29 720) were positive for HPV 16/18 and 1 680 patients (5.65%, 1 680/29 720) were positive for the other 12 high-risk HPV types. Among 1 680 women who tested positive for the other 12 high-risk HPV types, 573 patients were atypical squamous cell carcinoma of unclear significance or above, 346 patients were CIN Ⅰ, 122 patients were CIN Ⅱ-Ⅲ, 9 patients were squamous cell carcinoma patients, and 4 patients were adenocarcinoma in situ. The immediate risk of CIN Ⅱ⁺ in HPV 16/18 positive women (11.13%) was approximately four times higher than that of other 12 high-risk HPV positive women (2.74%). (2) Through the viral load analysis of the other 12 high-risk HPV types, we found that the viral load of the other 12 high-risk HPV provide a good value for the pathological results, with a clinical cutoff (CO) value of 11.21 relative light unit/CO (RLU/CO) for the CINⅡ⁺ detection. Except for HPV 16/18 positive patients, when the viral load values of the other 12 high-risk HPV types were greater than 10 RLU/CO, these patients had a higher risk of CINⅡ⁺, with a positive predictive value of 31.29%. CINⅡ⁺ was not found in any of the other 12 high-risk HPV positive with viral load values less than or equal to 10 RLU/CO. Conclusions: Using hybrid capture-chemiluminescence HPV tests for HPV 16/18 genotyping, combined with the viral loads (>10 RLU/CO) of the other 12 high-risk HPV analysis, one could triage HPV positive population without additional tests. Such triage strategy could promote the coverage of cervical cancer screening, particularly where cytology pathologists or economic resources are limited.