Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We compared clinical performance of three strategies of primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, primary cytology and co-testing for cervical cancer screening. DESIGN: A population-based prospective cohort study of clinical performance of screening strategy. SETTING: Patients recruited from community in Changzhi County, Shanxi Province, China. PATIENT: 3209 women aged 30-64 years without gynaecological issues. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The performance of different screening strategies for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe (CIN2+). RESULTS: A total of 53 CIN2+ and 31 CIN3+ cases are detected. For CIN2+, sensitivity of primary HPV (95.9%) and co-testing (98.0%) are not statistically different, but significantly higher than primary cytology (48.0%). Specificity (86.8%), colposcopy referral rate (7.8%) and number of colposcopies required to detect one case (9.8) for primary HPV are better than co-testing (79.8%, 11.9%, 14.3%, respectively). For CIN3+, primary HPV, co-testing have 100% of sensitivity and specificity, which is significantly higher than primary cytology (56.7% and 90.2%). Number of colposcopies required to detect one case for primary HPV (15.9) is better than co-testing (23.8). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with co-testing, HPV primary screening had comparable sensitivity and higher specificity for CIN2+ detection, and both of them showed better performance than cytology primary screening in cervical cancer screening.