Background/Aims: Iodide efflux from thyroid cells into the follicular lumen is essential for the synthesis of thyroid hormones, however, the pathways mediating this transport have only been partially identified. A calcium-activated pathway of iodide efflux has long been recognized, but its molecular identity unknown. Anoctamin 1 (ANO1) is a calcium-activated chloride channel (CaCC), and this study aims to investigate its contribution to iodide fluxes in thyroid cells. Methods: RT-PCR, immunohistochemistry, and live cell imaging with the fluorescent halide biosensor YFP-H148Q/I152L were used to study the expression, localization and function of ANO1 in thyroid cells. Results: ANO1 mRNA was detected in human thyroid tissue and FRTL-5 thyrocytes, and ANO1 protein was localized to the apical membrane of follicular cells. ATP induced a transient loss of iodide from FRTL-5 cells that was dependent on the mobilization of intracellular calcium, and was inhibited by CaCC/ANO1 inhibitors and siRNA against ANO1. Calcium-activated iodide efflux was also observed in CHO cells over-expressing the Sodium Iodide Symporter (NIS) and ANO1. Conclusion: ANO1 in thyrocytes functions as a calcium-activated channel mediating iodide efflux, and may contribute to the rapid delivery of iodide into the follicular lumen for the synthesis of thyroid hormones following activation by calcium-mobilizing stimuli.

Each high-risk HPV genotype has different oncogenic potential, and the risk of CIN3+ varies according to genotype. We evaluated the performance of different strategies of HPV-positivity triage combining cytology, p16/ki67 dual staining (DS), and extended genotyping. Samples from 3180 consecutive women from the NTCC2 study (NCT01837693) positive for HPV DNA at primary screening, were retrospectively analyzed by the BD Onclarity HPV Assay, which allows extended genotyping. Genotypes were divided into three groups based on the risk of CIN3+. HPV DNA-positive women were followed up for 24 months or to clearance. Combining the three groups of genotypes with cytology or DS results we identify a group of women who need immediate colposcopy (PPV for CIN3+ from 7.8 to 20.1%), a group that can be referred to 1-year HPV retesting (PPV in those HPV-positive at retesting from 2.2 to 3.8), and a group with a very low 24-month CIN3+ risk, i.e. 0.4%, composed by women cytology or DS negative and positive for HPV 56/59/66 or 35/39/68 or negative with the Onclarity test, who can be referred to 3-year retesting. Among the baseline HPV DNA positive/cytology or DS negative women, the extended genotyping allows to stratify for risk of CIN3+, and to identify a group of women with a risk of CIN3+ so low in the next 24 months that they could be referred to a new screening round after 3 years. Italian Ministry of Health (grant number RF-2009-1536040). Hologic-Genprobe, Roche Diagnostics, and Becton & Dickinson provided financial and non-financial support.

Cervical cancer screening by human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing with cytology triage is more effective than cytology testing. Compared to cytology, the HPV DNA test's higher sensitivity, which allows better protection with longer intervals, makes it necessary to triage the women with a positive result to compensate its lower specificity. We are conducting a large randomized clinical trial (New Technologies for Cervical Cancer 2 [NTCC2]) within organized population-based screening programs in Italy using HPV DNA as the primary screening test to evaluate, by the Aptima HPV assay (Hologic), the use of HPV E6-E7 mRNA in a triage test in comparison to cytology. By the end of June 2016, data were available for 35,877 of 38,535 enrolled women, 2,651 (7.4%) of whom were HPV DNA positive. Among the samples obtained, 2,453 samples were tested also by Aptima, and 1,649 (67.2%) gave a positive result. The proportion of mRNA positivity was slightly higher among samples tested for HPV DNA by the Cobas 4800 HPV assay (Roche) than by the Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) assay (Qiagen). In our setting, the observed E6-E7 mRNA positivity rate, if used as a triage test, would bring a rate of immediate referral to colposcopy of about 4 to 5%. This value is higher than that observed with cytology triage for both immediate and delayed referrals to colposcopy. By showing only a very high sensitivity and thus allowing a longer interval for HPV DNA-positive/HPV mRNA-negative women, a triage by this test might be more efficient than by cytology.

The use of clinically validated human papillomavirus (HPV) assays is recommended in cervical cancer screening, and extended genotyping is getting attention as a triage biomarker because of the different oncogenic risk of the high-risk HPV genotypes. We compared the results of the Becton & Dickinson (BD) Onclarity HPV assay, on the residual baseline cervico-vaginal specimens of the NTCC2 trial, to those of the screening HPV-DNA assay (Cobas 4800 or HC2) and to cytology, p16/ki67 and E6/E7 mRNA triage results. We genotyped virtually all HPV-positive women and a consecutive sample of HPV-negatives. Among the 3,129 baseline-positives, 75.5% ( k = 0.368) were BD-positive, as were 5 of the 333 baseline-negatives (1.5%). The concordance between BD and HPV-DNA screening test was 87% for Cobas (1,250/1,436) and 65.9% for HC2 (1,115/1,693). A higher than the recommended positivity threshold for Onclarity would increase the agreement but would not improve concordance in the overall screening population. Among the baseline-positive cases, we observed an increasing trend of BD positivity with cytology severity (from 71.6% in negative for intraepithelial lesion of malignancy to 95.1% in ASC-H+ samples), with histologically confirmed CIN3 (96.9%), with p16/ki67 dual staining positivity (90.9% among the positive and 69.6% among the negative specimens), and with E6/E7 mRNA positivity (93.4% in the mRNA-positive cases vs 39.7% among the mRNA-negatives). Our findings confirm some disagreement among different HPV assays used for screening. Nevertheless, the agreement is substantial for women with high-grade cytology, histologically confirmed CIN3, and p16/ki67 or mRNA positivity at triage, thus confirming a good clinical performance of all the tests used. The NTCC2 trial is registered as Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01837693 . IMPORTANCE: Large randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for high-risk types is more effective than cytology in detecting pre-cancerous lesions and preventing cervical cancer. Its use is being implemented in cervical cancer screening in several countries. The most recent guidelines recommend a risk-based management. It is therefore important to assess the individual risk of having/developing high-grade lesions of women testing high-risk HPV-positive. A crucial viral factor influencing the risk is the HPV genotype since different types are associated to different carcinogenetic risks. Understanding the degree of concordance among different assays targeting either HPV presence/type(s) or cellular morphology and proteins’ expression provides knowledge useful to better define how these tests can be used in screening protocols for an effective triage and to anticipate the possible implementation issues. Our study shows that the concordance between tests is higher when the infections have a higher probability of producing a clinically relevant lesion.

Objective: To compare, in a primary human papillomavirus screening setting, two different validated human papillomavirus tests, considering their analytical and clinical screening performances. Methods: In Tuscany, a human papillomavirus screening program was implemented in 2013. Hybrid capture 2 (Qiagen) was used for testing until May 2016, when it was replaced by the cobas^® 4800 human papillomavirus test (Cobas; Roche). We evaluated the performance of Hybrid capture 2 and Cobas on: the same screening population in two different periods (before and after changing to Cobas); the same Hybrid capture 2-positive consecutive samples. Discordant samples (Hybrid capture 2-positive/Cobas negative) were typed on the L1 gene (reverse line blot, AB Analitica) and E6/E7 genes (BD Onclarity assay). Results: In the considered time period ( n = 37,775), human papillomavirus positivity was 9.8% and 7.4%, respectively, for Hybrid capture 2 and Cobas ( p < 0.0001). At immediate colposcopy, the cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, grade 2 positive predictive value was, respectively, 23.8% and 34% ( p < 0.001). At one-year recall, human papillomavirus persistence was, respectively, 40.6% and 62.2% ( p < 0.0001). Of Hybrid capture 2-positive re-tested samples ( n = 620), 32.4% were Cobas negative. Of discordant samples typed on L1, 7% were positive for the 12 high-risk human papillomavirus. Of the samples found to be negative for the 12 high-risk human papillomavirus types on L1, 14.5% were positive on E6/E7 typing. Among the discordant samples, the only two cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 3 lesions were non-high-risk human papillomavirus positive on both L1 and E6/E7 typing. Conclusion: At baseline, Hybrid capture 2 showed greater human papillomavirus positivity and a lower CIN2+ positive predictive value than Cobas, which was more specific than Hybrid capture 2 in detection of high-risk human papillomavirus: 80% of discordant samples were confirmed as high-risk human papillomavirus negative. This higher analytical specificity determined the non-identification of two CIN3 lesions.