S. Dick

Clinical indications for host-cell DNA methylation markers in cervical screening and management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: A review

DNA methylation of host-cell genes is an epigenetic process that regulates gene expression and is associated with cervical cancer development. Studies on the natural history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and the molecular alterations associated with cervical carcinogenesis led to the identification of several host-cell DNA methylation markers. Over the past years, various studies on methylation markers have shown promising results in terms of diagnostic and prognostic value to improve cervical cancer screening and management of CIN. This review provides an overview of the clinical indications of host-cell DNA methylation markers in cervical screening and management of CIN, and outlines avenues for further applications.

Evaluation of Six Methylation Markers Derived from Genome-Wide Screens for Detection of Cervical Precancer and Cancer

Risk prediction of cervical abnormalities: The value of sociodemographic and lifestyle factors in addition to HPV status

High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) assessment as a primary screening test improves sensitivity but decreases specificity. Determining risk for cervical abnormalities and adapting policy accordingly may improve the balance between screening benefits and harms. Our aim is to assess the value of factors other than HPV in prediction of cervical abnormalities. Data from a Dutch prospective cohort were used. Women aged 18-29 years, not yet eligible for screening, were included in 2007. Data collection consisted of a questionnaire and a cervicovaginal self-sample. Linkage with PALGA (pathology database) was performed in 2017. The analyses included 1483 women. The full model, including sociodemographic and lifestyle factors, was compared to the null model, including baseline HPV only. The outcome of interest was cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse (CIN2+). There were 86 women with CIN2+. Baseline hrHPV status was an important predictor (OR = 5.20, 95%CI = 3.27-8.27). The area under the ROC curve (AUC) of the null model was 0.67 (95%CI = 0.61-0.72). The full model had a slightly higher AUC of 0.73 (95%CI = 0.67-0.79). Bootstrap validation indicated that overfitting was present. This exploratory study has confirmed that a single hrHPV measurement is a strong predictor of cervical abnormalities, and additional risk factors in young women appeared to have limited added value. However, prediction based on hrHPV only does leave room for improvement. Future studies should therefore focus on women in the screening age range and search for other predictors to further enhance risk prediction. Adapting policy based on risk may eventually help optimise screening performance.

Classification of high‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia by p16ink4a, Ki‐67, HPV E4 and FAM19A4/miR124‐2 methylation status demonstrates considerable heterogeneity with potential consequences for management

AbstractHigh‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2 and CIN3) represents a heterogeneous disease with varying cancer progression risks. Biomarkers indicative for a productive human papillomavirus (HPV) infection (HPV E4) and a transforming HPV infection (p16ink4a, Ki‐67 and host‐cell DNA methylation) could provide guidance for clinical management in women with high‐grade CIN. This study evaluates the cumulative score of immunohistochemical expression of p16ink4a (Scores 0‐3) and Ki‐67 (Scores 0‐3), referred to as the “immunoscore” (IS), in 262 CIN2 and 235 CIN3 lesions derived from five European cohorts in relation to immunohistochemical HPV E4 expression and FAM19A4/miR124‐2 methylation in the corresponding cervical scrape. The immunoscore classification resulted in 30 lesions within IS group 0‐2 (6.0%), 151 lesions within IS group 3‐4 (30.4%) and 316 lesions within IS group 5‐6 (63.6%). E4 expression decreased significantly from CIN2 to CIN3 (P < .001) and with increasing immunoscore group (Ptrend < .001). Methylation positivity increased significantly from CIN2 to CIN3 (P < .001) and with increasing immunoscore group (Ptrend < .001). E4 expression was present in 9.8% of CIN3 (23/235) and in 12.0% of IS group 5‐6 (38/316). Notably, in a minority (43/497, 8.7%) of high‐grade lesions, characteristics of both transforming HPV infection (DNA hypermethylation) and productive HPV infection (E4 expression) were found simultaneously. Next, we stratified all high‐grade CIN lesions, based on the presumed cancer progression risk of the biomarkers used, into biomarker profiles. These biomarker profiles, including immunoscore and methylation status, could help the clinician in the decision for immediate treatment or a “wait and see” policy to reduce overtreatment of high‐grade CIN lesions.

Risk-stratification of HPV-positive women with low-grade cytology by FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation and HPV genotyping

Abstract Background The introduction of primary HPV screening has doubled the number of colposcopy referrals because of the direct referral of HPV-positive women with a borderline or mild dyskaryosis (BMD) cytology (ASC-US/LSIL) triage test. Further risk-stratification is warranted to improve the efficiency of HPV-based screening. Methods This study evaluated the discriminative power of FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation, HPV16/18 genotyping and HPV16/18/31/33/45 genotyping in HPV-positive women with BMD (n = 294) in two Dutch screening trials. Absolute CIN3+ risks and colposcopy referrals within one screening round were calculated. Results Methylation analysis discriminated well, yielding a CIN3+ risk of 33.1% after a positive result and a CIN3+ risk of 9.8% after a negative result. HPV16/18 and HPV16/18/31/33/45 genotyping resulted in a 27.6% and 24.6% CIN3+ risk after a positive result, and a 13.2% and 9.1% CIN3+ risk after a negative result. Colposcopy referral percentages were 41.2%, 43.2%, and 66.3% for FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation, HPV16/18 and HPV16/18/31/33/45 genotyping, respectively. The CIN3+ risk after a negative result could be lowered to 2.8% by combining methylation and extended genotyping, at the expense of a higher referral percentage of 75.5%. Conclusion The use of FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation and/or HPV genotyping in HPV-positive women with BMD can lead to a substantial reduction in the number of direct colposcopy referrals.

Clinical Regression of High-Grade Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Is Associated With Absence of FAM19A4/miR124-2 DNA Methylation (CONCERVE Study)

PURPOSE Cervical screening can prevent cancer by detection and treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3 (CIN2/3). Screening also results in considerable overtreatment because many CIN2/3 lesions show spontaneous regression when left untreated. In this multicenter longitudinal cohort study of women with untreated CIN2/3, the prognostic value of FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation was evaluated for clinical regression. PATIENTS AND METHODS Women with CIN2/3 were prospectively followed for 24 months. Surgical excision was replaced by a wait-and-see policy. FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation was evaluated on all clinician-collected samples and self-collected samples collected at baseline. Every 6 months, human papillomavirus (HPV) testing and cytology were conducted on a clinician-collected sample, and a colposcopic examination was performed by a gynecologist to exclude progression. At the final study visit, two biopsies were taken. Clinical regression was defined as histologically confirmed absence of CIN2+ or an HPV-negative clinician-collected sample with normal cytology. Regression incidences were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS One hundred fourteen women (median age, 30 years; range, 20-53 years) were included, 80 of whom were diagnosed with CIN2 and 34 with CIN3. During the study, 65.8% of women (75/114) did not receive surgical treatment. Women with a negative FAM19A4/miR124-2 result on the baseline clinician-collected sample showed more clinical regression (74.7%) than women with a positive methylation result (51.4%, P = .013). Regression in women with a negative FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation test was highest when cytology was atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance/low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (88.4%) or HPV16 was negative (85.1%). CONCLUSION Most women with untreated CIN2/3 and a negative baseline FAM19A4/miR124-2 methylation test showed clinical regression. Methylation, in combination with cytology or HPV genotyping, can be used to support a wait-and-see policy in women with CIN2/3.

Methylation testing for the detection of recurrent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

AbstractWomen treated for CIN2/3 remain at increased risk of recurrent CIN and cervical cancer, and therefore posttreatment surveillance is recommended. This post hoc analysis evaluates the potential of methylation markers ASCL1/LHX8 and FAM19A4/miR124‐2 for posttreatment detection of recurrent CIN2/3. Cervical scrapes taken at 6 and 12 months posttreatment of 364 women treated for CIN2/3 were tested for methylation of ASCL1/LHX8 and FAM19A4/miR124‐2 using quantitative multiplex methylation‐specific PCR. Performance of the methylation tests were calculated and compared with the performance of HPV and/or cytology. Methylation levels of recurrent CIN were compared between women with a persistent HPV infection, and women with an incident HPV infection or without HPV infection. Recurrent CIN2/3 was detected in 42 women (11.5%), including 28 women with CIN2 and 14 with CIN3. ASCL1/LHX8 tested positive in 13/14 (92.9%) of recurrent CIN3 and 13/27 (48.1%) of recurrent CIN2. FAM19A4/miR124‐2 tested positive in 14/14 (100%) of recurrent CIN3 and 10/27 (37.0%) of recurrent CIN2. Combined HPV and/or methylation testing showed similar positivity rates as HPV and/or cytology. The CIN2/3 risk at 12 months posttreatment was 30.8% after a positive ASCL1/LHX8 result at 6 months posttreatment. Methylation levels of CIN2/3 in women with a persistent HPV infection were significantly higher compared with women with an incident or no HPV infection. In conclusion, posttreatment monitoring by methylation analysis of ASCL1/LHX8 and FAM19A4/miR124‐2 showed a good performance for the detection of recurrent CIN. DNA methylation testing can help to identify women with recurrent CIN that require re‐treatment.