Display options
Share it on

Diagnostics (Basel). 2021 Mar 30;11(4). doi: 10.3390/diagnostics11040619.

Multicentre Evaluation of Hepika Test Clinical Accuracy in Diagnosing HPV-Induced Cancer and Precancerous Lesions of the Uterine Cervix.

Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)

Daniela Gustinucci, Lucia Ciccocioppo, Luigi Coppola, Giovanni Negri, Gianfranco Zannoni, Basilio Passamonti, Elena Cesarini, Ciro Ianzano, Tiziana Andreano, Anjuta Pireddu, Paolo Giorgi-Rossi

Affiliations

  1. Laboratorio Unico di Screening USL Umbria 1, 06124 Perugia, Italy.
  2. Cytopathology Unit, Renzetti Hospital, 66034 Lanciano, Italy.
  3. Pathology Unit, San Filippo Neri Hospital, 00135 Rome, Italy.
  4. Pathology Unit, Central Hospital Bolzano, 39100 Bolzano, Italy.
  5. Department of Woman, Child and Public Health Sciences, Gynecopathology and Breast Pathology Unit, Catholic University of Sacred Hearth, 00168 Rome, Italy.
  6. Pathology Unit, Renzetti Hospital, 66034 Lanciano, Italy.
  7. Pathology Unit, USL Umbria 1, 06012 Città di Castello, Italy.
  8. Epidemiology Unit, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale-Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico di Reggio Emilia, 42123 Reggio Emilia, Italy.

PMID: 33808260 PMCID: PMC8066214 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11040619

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical accuracy of Hepika test to identify cancer/precancerous lesions of the uterine cervix.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multicentre retrospective study was carried out in 2018 and included 330 liquid-based cytology samples from three Italian centres of women aged 25-64 who had been tested for the human papillomavirus (HPV) and whose histology or follow-up outcome was known. Hepika is an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) targeting the protein complexes E6#p53 and E7#pRb. After excluding samples without sufficient residual material, the clinical accuracy of Hepika test was evaluated in 274 samples: adenocarcinoma (ADC) (4), squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) (7), adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) (1), cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 3 (60), CIN2 (51), CIN1 (34), and negative histology (117). Association, sensitivity, and specificity for carcinoma, CIN3+ and CIN2+ are reported.

RESULTS: Positive Hepika test was associated with a high probability of carcinoma (odds ratio (DOR) = 33.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 7.0-163.1); sensitivity was 81.8%, specificity, 88.2%. A positive Hepika test showed a weaker association with CIN3+ lesions (DOR = 3.5; 95% CI 1.75-6.99) and lower sensitivity (27.8%).

CONCLUSION: The Hepika test was found to be an accurate biomarker for HPV-induced cervical carcinoma. Population-based prospective studies are needed to confirm the clinical usefulness of the Hepika test in the differential diagnosis of HPV-induced invasive lesions.

Keywords: CIN; HPV; Hepika; cancer; carcinoma; precancerous lesion; tumor biomarker; uterine cervix

References

  1. Int J Cancer. 1998 Feb 9;75(4):536-45 - PubMed
  2. Lancet Oncol. 2008 May;9(5):425-34 - PubMed
  3. JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Jul 1;179(7):881-888 - PubMed
  4. Mech Ageing Dev. 2004 Jan;125(1):31-40 - PubMed
  5. Cancer Res. 2004 Jun 1;64(11):3878-84 - PubMed
  6. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000 May 3;92(9):690-8 - PubMed
  7. Oncogene. 1999 Dec 13;18(53):7690-700 - PubMed
  8. Oncogene. 2003 Aug 11;22(33):5201-7 - PubMed
  9. Vaccine. 2012 Nov 20;30 Suppl 5:F55-70 - PubMed
  10. APMIS. 2010 Jun;118(6-7):471-93 - PubMed
  11. Acta Cytol. 2011;55(2):213-7 - PubMed
  12. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Nov;68(6):394-424 - PubMed
  13. JAMA. 2018 Aug 21;320(7):674-686 - PubMed
  14. J Virol. 1995 May;69(5):2989-97 - PubMed
  15. Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2012 Sep;19(9):1474-9 - PubMed
  16. IARC Sci Publ. 1986;(76):1-315 - PubMed
  17. Diagn Mol Pathol. 2000 Sep;9(3):145-50 - PubMed
  18. Int J Cancer. 2011 Apr 1;128(7):1596-605 - PubMed
  19. Rev Med Virol. 2015 Mar;25 Suppl 1:2-23 - PubMed
  20. Semin Cancer Biol. 1999 Dec;9(6):405-11 - PubMed
  21. J Clin Pathol. 2002 Apr;55(4):244-65 - PubMed
  22. Am J Clin Pathol. 2008 Apr;129(4):606-12 - PubMed
  23. Bioinformation. 2012;8(13):607-12 - PubMed
  24. Pathol Oncol Res. 2008 Dec;14(4):345-54 - PubMed
  25. Curr Genomics. 2009 Mar;10(1):26-34 - PubMed
  26. Int J Cancer. 1997 Apr 10;71(2):159-65 - PubMed
  27. Am J Clin Pathol. 2016 Jan;145(1):35-45 - PubMed
  28. Int J Cancer. 2014 Feb 15;134(4):897-904 - PubMed
  29. Lancet Oncol. 2010 Nov;11(11):1048-56 - PubMed
  30. Virus Genes. 2010 Feb;40(1):1-13 - PubMed
  31. J Virol. 2003 Jan;77(2):1551-63 - PubMed
  32. Nature. 2016 Jan 28;529(7587):541-5 - PubMed
  33. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008 Apr 2;100(7):492-501 - PubMed
  34. Cancer Causes Control. 1997 Sep;8(5):755-63 - PubMed
  35. Lancet Oncol. 2008 Oct;9(10):937-45 - PubMed
  36. Int J Cancer. 2015 Jun 15;136(12):2741-51 - PubMed
  37. Lancet Oncol. 2013 Feb;14(2):168-76 - PubMed
  38. BMJ. 2008 Oct 13;337:a1754 - PubMed
  39. Womens Health (Lond). 2013 Sep;9(5):443-52 - PubMed
  40. Lancet Oncol. 2010 Mar;11(3):249-57 - PubMed
  41. Am J Clin Pathol. 2011 Mar;135(3):468-75 - PubMed
  42. Lancet. 2014 Feb 8;383(9916):524-32 - PubMed
  43. Science. 1990 Apr 6;248(4951):76-9 - PubMed
  44. WormBook. 2005 Sep 21;:1-16 - PubMed
  45. Int J Cancer. 2016 Mar 1;138(5):1163-74 - PubMed
  46. J Dermatol. 2000 Feb;27(2):73-86 - PubMed
  47. Eur J Cancer. 2012 Jul;48(11):1633-7 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support