CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians publishes information about the prevention, early detection, and treatment of cancer, as well as nutrition, palliative care, survivorship, and additional topics of interest related to cancer care.

To determine whether testing for DNA of oncogenic human papillomaviruses (HPV) is superior to the Papanicolaou (Pap) test for cervical-cancer screening, we conducted a randomized trial comparing the two methods. We compared HPV testing, using an assay approved by the Food and Drug Administration, with conventional Pap testing as a screening method to identify high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in women ages 30 to 69 years in Montreal and St. John's, Canada. Women with abnormal Pap test results or a positive HPV test (at least 1 pg of high-risk HPV DNA per milliliter) underwent colposcopy and biopsy, as did a random sample of women with negative tests. Sensitivity and specificity estimates were corrected for verification bias. A total of 10,154 women were randomly assigned to testing. Both tests were performed on all women in a randomly assigned sequence at the same session. The sensitivity of HPV testing for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or 3 was 94.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 84.2 to 100), whereas the sensitivity of Pap testing was 55.4% (95% CI, 33.6 to 77.2; P=0.01). The specificity was 94.1% (95% CI, 93.4 to 94.8) for HPV testing and 96.8% (95% CI, 96.3 to 97.3; P<0.001) for Pap testing. Performance was unaffected by the sequence of the tests. The sensitivity of both tests used together was 100%, and the specificity was 92.5%. Triage procedures for Pap or HPV testing resulted in fewer referrals for colposcopy than did either test alone but were less sensitive. No adverse events were reported. As compared with Pap testing, HPV testing has greater sensitivity for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN57612064.)

Given the strong etiologic link between high‐risk HPV infection and cervical cancer high‐risk HPV testing is now being considered as an alternative for cytology‐based cervical cancer screening. Many test systems have been developed that can detect the broad spectrum of hrHPV types in one assay. However, for screening purposes the detection of high‐risk HPV is not inherently useful unless it is informative for the presence of high‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 2/3) or cancer. Candidate high‐risk HPV tests to be used for screening should reach an optimal balance between clinical sensitivity and specificity for detection of high‐grade CIN and cervical cancer to minimize redundant or excessive follow‐up procedures for high‐risk HPV positive women without cervical lesions. Data from various large screening studies have shown that high‐risk HPV testing by hybrid capture 2 and GP5+/6+‐PCR yields considerably better results in the detection of CIN 2/3 than cytology. The data from these studies can be used to guide the translation of high‐risk HPV testing into clinical practice by setting standards of test performance and characteristics. On the basis of these data we have developed guidelines for high‐risk HPV test requirements for primary cervical screening and validation guidelines for candidate HPV assays.