No abstract

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection causes cervical cancer and premalignant dysplasia. Type-specific HPV prevalence data provide a basis for assessing the impact of HPV vaccination programmes on cervical cytology. We report high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) type-specific prevalence data in relation to cervical cytology for 24 510 women (age range: 20–64; mean age 40.2 years) recruited into the ARTISTIC trial, which is being conducted within the routine NHS Cervical Screening Programme in Greater Manchester. The most common HR-HPV types were HPV16, 18, 31, 51 and 52, which accounted for 60% of all HR-HPV types detected. There was a marked decline in the prevalence of HR-HPV infection with age, but the proportion due to each HPV type did not vary greatly with age. Multiple infections were common below the age of 30 years but less so between age 30 and 64 years. Catch-up vaccination of this sexually active cohort would be expected to reduce the number of women with moderate or worse cytology by 45%, but the number with borderline or mild cytology would fall by only 7%, giving an overall reduction of 12% in the number of women with abnormal cytology and 27% in the number with any HR-HPV infection. In the absence of broader cross-protection, the large majority of low-grade and many high-grade abnormalities may still occur in sexually active vaccinated women.

We present data on the use of the Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) test for the detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (HR HPV) with different thresholds for positivity within a primary screening setting and as a method of triage for low-grade cytology. In the ARTISTIC population-based trial, 18,386 women were screened by cytology and for HPV. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia lesions of grade two and higher (CIN2؉ lesions) were identified for 453 women within 30 months of an abnormal baseline sample. When a relative light unit/cutoff (RLU/Co) ratio of >1 was used as the threshold for considering an HC2 result positive, 15.6% of results were positive, and the proportion of CIN2؉ lesions in this group was 14.7%. The relative sensitivity for CIN2؉ lesion detection was 93.4%. When an RLU/Co ratio of >2 was used as the threshold, there was a 2.5% reduction in positivity, with an increase in the proportion of CIN2؉ lesions detected. The relative sensitivity decreased slightly, to 90.3%. Among women with low-grade cytology, HPV prevalences were 43.7% and 40.3% at RLU/Co ratios of >1 and >2, respectively. The proportions of CIN2؉ lesions detected were 17.3% and 18.0%, with relative sensitivities of 87.7% at an RLU/Co ratio of >1 and 84.2% at an RLU/Co ratio of >2. At an RLU/Co ratio of >1, 68.3% of HC2-positive results were confirmed by the Roche line blot assay, compared to 77.2% of those at an RLU/Co ratio of >2. Fewer HC2-positive results were confirmed for 35-to 64-year-olds (50.3% at an RLU/Co ratio of >1 and 63.2% at an RLU/Co ratio of >2) than for 20-to 34-year-olds (78.7% at an RLU/Co ratio of >1 and 83.7% at an RLU/Co ratio of >2). If the HC2 test is used for routine screening as an initial test or as a method of triage for low-grade cytology, we would suggest increasing the threshold for positivity from the RLU/Co ratio of >1, recommended by the manufacturer, to an RLU/Co ratio of >2, since this study has shown that a beneficial balance between relative sensitivity and the proportion of CIN2؉ lesions detected is achieved at this threshold.Persistent infection with any of the 15 cancer-associated high-risk human papillomavirus (HR HPV) genotypes is now well recognized as essential for the subsequent development of cervical cancer and its high-grade precursor lesions (2,15,16). Due to the very high prevalence of HPV infections that typically resolve within 1 to 2 years, especially in younger women (6, 11), the role of HPV testing in the early detection of cervical lesions remains controversial. The most widely used test for the detection of a group of 13 HR HPV genotypes is the commercially available, FDA-approved Hybrid Capture 2 high-risk HPV DNA test (HC2 test; Qiagen [formally known as Digene]). Hybrid Capture 2 technology consists of a nucleic acid hybridization assay with signal amplification that utilizes microplate chemiluminescence for the qualitative detection of HPV. There is increasing interest in the use of HC2 technology within the cervical screening program either as a stand-alone screening test or i...

Background Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common cancer in men in the UK. Patients with intermediate-risk, clinically localised disease are offered radical treatments such as surgery or radiotherapy, which can result in severe side effects. A number of alternative partial ablation (PA) technologies that may reduce treatment burden are available; however the comparative effectiveness of these techniques has never been evaluated in a randomised controlled trial (RCT). Objectives To assess the feasibility of a RCT of PA using high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) versus radical prostatectomy (RP) for intermediate-risk PCa and to test and optimise methods of data capture. Design We carried out a prospective, multicentre, open-label feasibility study to inform the design and conduct of a future RCT, involving a QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI) to understand barriers to participation. Setting Five NHS hospitals in England. Participants Men with unilateral, intermediate-risk, clinically localised PCa. Interventions Radical prostatectomy compared with HIFU. Primary outcome measure The randomisation of 80 men. Secondary outcome measures Findings of the QRI and assessment of data capture methods. Results Eighty-seven patients consented to participate by 31 March 2017 and 82 men were randomised by 4 May 2017 (41 men to the RP arm and 41 to the HIFU arm). The QRI was conducted in two iterative phases: phase I identified a number of barriers to recruitment, including organisational challenges, lack of recruiter equipoise and difficulties communicating with patients about the study, and phase II comprised the development and delivery of tailored strategies to optimise recruitment, including group training, individual feedback and ‘tips’ documents. At the time of data extraction, on 10 October 2017, treatment data were available for 71 patients. Patient characteristics were similar at baseline and the rate of return of all clinical case report forms (CRFs) was 95%; the return rate of the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) questionnaire pack was 90.5%. Centres with specific long-standing expertise in offering HIFU as a routine NHS treatment option had lower recruitment rates (Basingstoke and Southampton) – with University College Hospital failing to enrol any participants – than centres offering HIFU in the trial context only. Conclusions Randomisation of men to a RCT comparing PA with radical treatments of the prostate is feasible. The QRI provided insights into the complexities of recruiting to this surgical trial and has highlighted a number of key lessons that are likely to be important if the study progresses to a main trial. A full RCT comparing clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and quality-of-life outcomes between radical treatments and PA is now warranted. Future work Men recruited to the feasibility study will be followed up for 36 months in accordance with the protocol. We will design a full RCT, taking into account the lessons learnt from this study. CRFs will be streamlined, and the length and frequency of PROMs and resource use diaries will be reviewed to reduce the burden on patients and research nurses and to optimise data completeness. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN99760303. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 52. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

IntroductionTotal ankle replacement (TAR) or ankle arthrodesis (fusion) is the main surgical treatments for end-stage ankle osteoarthritis (OA). The popularity of ankle replacement is increasing while ankle fusion rates remain static. Both treatments have efficacy but to date all studies comparing the 2 have been observational without randomisation, and there are no published guidelines as to the most appropriate management. The TAR versus arthrodesis (TARVA) trial aims to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of TAR against ankle arthrodesis in the treatment of end-stage ankle OA in patients aged 50–85 years.Methods and analysisTARVA is a multicentre randomised controlled trial that will randomise 328 patients aged 50–85 years with end-stage ankle arthritis. The 2 arms of the study will be TAR or ankle arthrodesis with 164 patients in each group. Up to 16 UK centres will participate. Patients will have clinical assessments and complete questionnaires before their operation and at 6, 12, 26 and 52 weeks after surgery. The primary clinical outcome of the study is a validated patient-reported outcome measure, the Manchester Oxford foot questionnaire, captured preoperatively and 12 months after surgery. Secondary outcomes include quality-of-life scores, complications, revision, reoperation and a health economic analysis.Ethics and disseminationThe protocol has been approved by the National Research Ethics Service Committee (London, Bloomsbury 14/LO/0807). This manuscript is based on V.5.0 of the protocol. The trial findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.Trial registration numberNCT02128555.