Objective

A biomarker with increased specificity for cervical dysplasia compared with human papillomavirus (HPV) testing would be an attractive option for cervical cancer screening among HIV-infected women in resource-limited settings. p16(INK4a) has been explored as a biomarker for screening in general populations.

Design

A 2-year cross-sectional study.

Setting

2 large HIV primary care clinics in western Kenya.

Participants

1054 HIV-infected women in western Kenya undergoing cervical cancer screening as part of routine HIV care from October 2010 to November 2012.

Interventions

Participants underwent p16(INK4a) specimen collection and colposcopy. Lesions with unsatisfactory colposcopy or suspicious for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2+ (CIN2+; including CIN2/3 or invasive cervical cancer) were biopsied. Following biopsy, disease status was determined by histopathological diagnosis.

Primary and secondary outcome measures

We measured the sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of p16(INK4a) ELISA for CIN2+ detection among HIV-infected women and compared them to the test characteristics of current screening methods used in general as well as HIV-infected populations.

Results

Average p16(INK4a) concentration in cervical samples was 37.4 U/mL. After colposcopically directed biopsy, 127 (12%) women were determined to have CIN2+. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed an area under the curve of 0.664 for p16(INK4a) to detect biopsy-proven CIN2+. At a p16(INK4a) cut-off level of 9 U/mL, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were 89.0%, 22.9%, 13.6% and 93.8%, respectively. The overall p16(INK4a) positivity at a cut-off level of 9 U/mL was 828 (78.6%) women. There were 325 (30.8%) cases of correct p16(INK4a) prediction to detect or rule out CIN2+, and 729 (69.2%) cases of incorrect p16(INK4a) prediction.

Conclusions

p16(INK4a) ELISA did not perform well as a screening test for CIN2+ detection among HIV-infected women due to low specificity. Our study contributes to the ongoing search for a more specific alternative to HPV testing for CIN2+ detection.

Early-onset colorectal cancer has been on the rise in Western populations. Here, we compare patient characteristics between those with early- (<50 years) vs. late-onset (≥50 years) disease in a large multinational cohort of colorectal cancer patients (n = 2193). We calculated descriptive statistics and assessed associations of clinicodemographic factors with age of onset using mutually-adjusted logistic regression models. Patients were on average 60 years old, with BMI of 29 kg/m², 52% colon cancers, 21% early-onset, and presented with stage II or III (60%) disease. Early-onset patients presented with more advanced disease (stages III-IV: 63% vs. 51%, respectively), and received more neo and adjuvant treatment compared to late-onset patients, after controlling for stage (odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval (CI)) = 2.30 (1.82-3.83) and 2.00 (1.43-2.81), respectively). Early-onset rectal cancer patients across all stages more commonly received neoadjuvant treatment, even when not indicated as the standard of care, e.g., during stage I disease. The odds of early-onset disease were higher among never smokers and lower among overweight patients (1.55 (1.21-1.98) and 0.56 (0.41-0.76), respectively). Patients with early-onset colorectal cancer were more likely to be diagnosed with advanced stage disease, to have received systemic treatments regardless of stage at diagnosis, and were less likely to be ever smokers or overweight.