Accuracy of GynTect® Methylation Markers to Detect Recurrent Disease in Patients Treated for CIN3: A Proof-of-Concept Case-Control Study
Post-treatment follow-up in women with CIN3 is mandatory due to relapse in up to 15% of patients within 2 years. Standard follow-up care based on hrHPV-DNA/cytology co-testing has high sensitivity but limited specificity. The aim of our proof-of-concept case-control study was to evaluate the performance of the methylation test GynTect<sup>®</sup> for the detection of recurrent CIN2/3 during follow-up. Residual clinical material from a recent, prospective, multicenter, observational study was available for further analysis. We studied a sample of 17 cases with recurrent CIN2/3 diagnosed within 24 months of follow-up and 31 controls without recurrence. DNA from cervical scrapes at baseline (immediately before CIN3 surgery) and up to three follow-up visits were analyzed for hrHPV and GynTect<sup>®</sup> methylation status. Cytology data were available from the previous study. Overall, 12 cases and 21 controls were GynTect-positive at baseline. In these subgroups, single test sensitivity at first follow-up was 67% (95% CI 39-87%) for GynTect<sup>®</sup> compared to 83% (95% CI 55-96%) for hrHPV (<i>p</i> = 0.50). Single test specificity was significantly higher for GynTect<sup>®</sup> (90%, 95% CI 71-98% vs. 62%, 95% CI 40-80%) (<i>p</i> = 0.03). In a co-testing setting, both hrHPV/cytology and GynTect<sup>®</sup>/cytology detected all recurrences. Specificity for GynTect<sup>®</sup>/cytology was higher than for hrHPV/cytology, but this difference was not statistically significant. In conclusion, for initially GynTect-positive patients, both hrHPV and GynTect<sup>®</sup> tests detected recurrent disease with similar sensitivity, but the GynTect<sup>®</sup> assay has a higher specificity. Incident hrHPV infection and/or persisting multifocal hrHPV infections without clinical disease are most likely responsible for the poorer specificity of the hrHPV test. A future prospective validation study will have to show whether GynTect<sup>®</sup>/cytology co-testing can outperform hrHPV/cytology co-testing in post-treatment surveillance.
Authors
- Gerd Böhmer (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7162-5302)
- Ingo B. Runnebaum (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6702-4651)
- Monika Hampl (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5949-5891)
- Sarah Scherbring
- Grit Mehlhorn
- Axel Petzold (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0344-9749)
- Cornelia Scheungraber
- Martina Schmitz (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2430-3500)
- Heike Hoyer
- Ingke Hagemann (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6383-2697)
- Matthias Dürst (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1235-1150)
- Kristina Wunsch
- Peter Hillemanns
- Linn Wölber
Institutions
- Universität Hamburg (DE)
- Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (DE)
- Düsseldorf University Hospital (DE)
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde (DE)
- University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (DE)
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Frauenheilkunde und Fortpflanzungsmedizin (DE)
- Jena University Hospital (DE)
- oncgnostics (Germany) (DE)
- Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (DE)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Cancers
- Published
- 2024-08-30
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16173022
- Citations
- 1
- Primary Topic
- Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 1.11