High-risk HPV types cause cervical lesions of varying severity, ranging from transient productive infections to high-grade neoplasia. Disease stratification requires the examination of lesional pathology, and possibly also the detection of biomarkers. P16INK4a and MCM are established surrogates of high-risk HPV E6/E7 activity, and can be extensively expressed in high-grade lesions. Here we have combined these two cellular biomarkers with detection of the abundant HPV-encoded E4 protein in order to identify both productive and transforming lesions. This approach has allowed us to distinguish true papillomavirus infections from similar pathologies, and has allowed us to divide the heterogeneous CIN2 category into those that are CIN1-like and express E4, and those that more closely resemble non-productive CIN3. To achieve this, 530 lesional areas were evaluated according to standard pathology criteria and by using a multiple staining approach that allows us to superimpose biomarker patterns either singly or in combination onto an annotated haematoxylin & eosin image. Conventional grading of neoplasia was established by review panel, and compared directly to the composite molecular pathology visualised on the same tissue section. The detection of E4 coincided with the onset of vacuolation, becoming abundant in koilocytes as the MCM marker declined and cells lost their defined nuclear margins as visualised by standard H&E staining. Of the dual marker approaches, p16INK4a and E4 appeared most promising, with E4 generally identifying areas of low-grade disease even when p16INK4a was present. Extensive p16INK4a expression usually coincided with an absence of E4 expression or its focal retention in sporadic cells within the lesion. Our results suggest that a straightforward molecular evaluation of HPV life-cycle deregulation in cervical neoplasia may help improve disease stratification, and that this can be achieved using complementary molecular biomarker pairs such as MCM/E4 or more promisingly, p16INK4a/E4 as an adjunct to conventional pathology.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infections may result in benign hyperplasia, caused by low-risk HPV types, or (pre)malignant lesions caused by high-risk HPV types. The molecular basis of this difference in malignant potential is not completely understood. Here, we performed gene profiling of different HPV infected vulvar tissues (condylomata acuminata (n 5 5), usual type vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (uVIN) (n 5 9)) and control samples (n 5 14) using Affymetrix Human U133A plus 2 GeneChips. Data were analyzed using OmniViz V R , Partek V R and Ingenuity V R Software. Results were validated by real-time RT-PCR and immunostaining. Although similarities were observed between gene expression profiles of low-and high-risk HPV infected tissues (e.g., absence of estrogen receptor in condylomata and uVIN), high-risk HPV infected tissues showed more proliferation and displayed more DNA damage than tissues infected with low-risk HPV. These observations were confirmed by differential regulation of cell cycle checkpoints and by increased expression of DNA damage-biomarkers p53 and cH2AX. Furthermore, FANCA, FANCD2, BRCA1 and RAD51, key players in the DNA damage response, were significantly upregulated (p < 0.05). In addition, we compared our results with publicly available gene expression profiles of various other HPV-induced cancers (vulva, cervix and head-and-neck). This showed p16 INK4a was the most significant marker to detect a high-risk HPV infection, but no other markers could be found. In conclusion, this study provides insight into the molecular basis of low-and high-risk HPV infections and indicates two main pathways (cell cycle and DNA damage response) that are much stronger affected by high-risk HPV as compared to low-risk HPV.Worldwide, human papillomavirus (HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted infection, with an 80% life-time infection risk. 1 Fortunately, the majority of these HPV infections ($ 90%) are cleared within one to two years, without further consequences for the host. 2 Persistent infections, however, are a well-established risk factor for a large spectrum of epithelial lesions, ranging from benign hyperplasia, caused by low-risk HPV types, to (pre)malignant lesions caused by high-risk HPV types.The best known high-risk HPV related disorder is the second most common cancer in women, namely cervical cancer, with 500,000 new cases each year worldwide resulting in 250,000 deaths every year. 3 Persistent HPV infections have also been associated with other anogenital squamous cell carcinomas, including vulvar, vaginal, anal and penile cancers and their precursors. Furthermore, recent epidemiological, molecular and clinical evidence indicate that high-risk HPV (especially HPV type 16) accounts for the development of approximately 20-30% of squamous cell carcinomas of the head-and-neck. 4,5 The molecular basis of the difference in malignant potential between low-and high-risk HPV infections is not

dPrimary screening using high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) detection has been suggested as a way of improving cervical cancer prevention. Women currently not attending screening (nonresponders) are more likely to participate when given the opportunity of self-sampling for hrHPV testing. The Evalyn Brush is a new cervicovaginal self-sampling device, developed specifically to meet women's demands, which is user-friendly and easy to use. The aims of this study were to investigate agreement of hrHPV detection by two PCR methods between the Evalyn Brush and physician-obtained samples and to study women's acceptance of this self-sampling device. Each of 134 women visiting the gynecology outpatient clinic collected a self-obtained sample (self-sample) and completed a questionnaire. The brush was stored dry. After self-sampling, a trained physician obtained a conventional cervical cytology specimen in ThinPrep medium. HrHPV detection was performed using the SPF 10 -DEIA-LiPA 25 and GP5؉/6؉-LQ-test. The overall agreement for hrHPV detection using SPF 10 -DEIA-LiPA 25 between the self-sample and the physician-taken sample was 85.8% (kappa value, 0.715; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.597 to 0.843; P ‫؍‬ 1.000). The overall agreement for hrHPV detection using GP5؉/6؉-LQ between the self-sample and the physician-taken sample was 86.6% (kappa value, 0.725; 95% CI, 0.607 to 0.843; P ‫؍‬ 0.815). Ninety-eight percent of the women rated their experience as good to excellent. Moreover, 95% of women preferred self-sampling to physician sampling. Self-sampling using the dry Evalyn Brush system is as good as a physician-taken sample for hrHPV detection and is highly acceptable to women. To validate this self-sampling device for clinical use, a large screening cohort should be studied. C ervical cytology screening programs have significantly decreased the incidence and mortality of cervical cancer. Primary screening using high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) detection has been found to be more sensitive than conventional cervical cytology for detecting cervical precancer (11,34,41,42). All data argue for the implementation of hrHPV testing as a primary test in cervical cancer screening, and the Health Council in the Netherlands has advised the Minister of Health to implement primary screening with hrHPV detection as a way of improving cervical cancer prevention (24).Cervical cancer incidence is higher among women who do not respond (nonresponders) or have no access to cervical screening programs than in screened women. A substantial number of nonresponders participate in screening when given the opportunity of self-sampling for hrHPV testing (1, 19). Self-sampling for hrHPV therefore has the potential to reduce cervical cancer incidence, especially among nonresponders (5).Cervicovaginal self-collected samples (self-samples) have proved to be as reliable as physician-obtained cervical samples for the detection of hrHPV (9, 22, 37-39, 44-45, 50). Studies on HPV selfsampling have used a great variety of collection devices, such a...

Recent studies have shown that CADM1/MAL methylation levels in cervical scrapes increase with severity and duration of the underlying cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) lesion. Multiple lesions of different histological grades and duration are frequently present on the cervix. To gain more insight into the possible epigenetic heterogeneity and its consequences for the methylation status in cervical scrapes, we performed an exploratory study of CADM1/MAL methylation in different grades of CIN lesions present in women with multiple cervical biopsies. CADM1-M18 and MAL-M1 methylation was assessed using a standardised, multiplex, quantitative methylation specific PCR on 178 biopsies with various grades of CIN in 65 women, and in their corresponding cervical scrapes. CADM1/MAL methylation positivity increased with disease severity, from 5.5% in normal biopsies to 63.3% and 100% in biopsies with CIN3 and cervical cancer, respectively. In the majority (8/9) of women where besides a CIN2/3 lesion a biopsy from normal cervical tissue was present, the CIN2/3 biopsy was CADM1/MAL methylation positive and the normal biopsy was CADM1/MAL methylation negative. A good concordance (78%) was found between CADM1/MAL methylation results on the scrapes and the biopsy with the worst diagnosis, particularly between samples of women with CIN3 and cervical cancer (92% and 100% concordance, respectively). Thus, in women with multiple cervical biopsies, CADM1/MAL methylation increases with severity of the lesion and is lesion-specific. CADM1/MAL methylation status in cervical scrapes appears to be representative of the worst underlying lesion, particularly for CIN3 and cervical cancer.

Grading cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) determines clinical management of women after abnormal cytology with potential for overdiagnosis and overtreatment. We studied a novel biomarker of human papillomavirus (HPV) life-cycle completion (panHPVE4), in combination with the minichromosome maintenance (MCM) protein cell-cycle marker and the p16INK4a transformation marker, to improve CIN diagnosis and categorization. Scoring these biomarkers alongside CIN grading by 3 pathologists was performed on 114 cervical specimens with high-risk (HR) HPV. Interobserver agreement for histopathology was moderate (κ=0.43 for CIN1/negative, 0.54 for CIN2/≤CIN1, and 0.36 for CIN3). Agreement was good or excellent for biomarker scoring (E4: κ=0.896; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.763-0.969; p16INK4a : κ=0.798; 95% CI: 0.712-0.884; MCM: κ=0.894; 95% CI: NC (this quantity cannot be calculated). Biomarker expression was studied by immunofluorescence and immunohistochemistry and was correlated with 104 final CIN diagnoses after histologic review. All 25 histologically negative specimens were p16INK4a and panHPVE4 negative, although 9 were MCM-positive. There were variable extents of p16INK4a positivity in 11/11 CIN1 and extensive panHPVE4 staining in 9/11. Ten CIN2 lesions expressed panHPVE4 and p16INK4a, and 13 CIN2 expressed only p16INK4a. CIN3 showed extensive p16INK4a positivity with no/minimal panHPVE4 staining. PanHPVE4, unlike MCM, distinguished CIN1 from negative. PanHPVE4 with p16INK4a separated CIN2/3 showing only expression of p16INK4a, indicating transforming HR-HPV E7 expression, from CIN1/2 showing completion of HR-HPV life cycle by E4 expression and variable p16INK4a expression. PanHPVE4 and p16INK4a staining are complementary markers that could provide simple, reliable support for diagnosing CIN. Their value in distinguishing CIN1/2 that supports HR-HPV life-cycle completion (and which might ultimately regress) from purely transforming CIN2/3 needing treatment warrants further research.