Title: Development of a Human Papillomavirus genotype-informed risk-stratification model to improve Cervical Cancer screening in resource-limited settings: a cross-sectional study
Kambou Kountchou, K. D. K. K.; Tommo Tchouaket, M. C.; Moko Fotso, L. G.; Fokou Bomgning, B. N.; Fippo Fitime, L.; Talom Teumadjou, A.; Routoube, M.; Efakika Gabisa, J.; Ngoufack Jagni Semengue, E.; Nka, A. D.; Kae, A. C.; Dobgima Pisoh, W.; Deutou, L.; Takou, D.; Fainguem, N.; Sosso, S. M.; Kamgaing Simo, R.; Yagai, B.; Tabola Fossa, L.; Perno, C.-F.; Colizzi, V.; Enow-Orock, G.; Fokam, J.; Terrinoni, A.; Kuiate, J.-R.
Show abstract
Background: In resource-limited settings, a critical bottleneck in cervical cancer prevention is the lack of practical strategies to triage high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV)- positive women. Therefore, this study aimed to develop and internally validate a genotype-specific risk stratification model. Methods: A cross-sectional study enrolled 555 women in Cameroon. Data collection integrated cervical cytology and HPV genotyping using Abbott m2000rt and Sacace multiplex systems. An iterative modeling approach with bootstrap validation was used to develop the model and address model instability. HR-HPV genotypes were transformed into a hierarchical risk variable due to sparsity and integrated with significant predictors. The final model was translated into a scoring system, and the risk gradients and performances were evaluated at two thresholds. Data was analyzed using SPSS 27.0. Results: The mean age was 44.8 years, and the prevalence of HR-HPV was 26.5% (147/555). The final model, incorporating HPV categories, age, and tobacco, demonstrated moderate discriminative ability (AUC=0.702, 0.642-0.762) with a good calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow {chi}{superscript 2}=4.05, p=0.399). The scoring system assigned women to risk groups based on their total scores which produced a clear monotonic risk gradient; the observed probability of high-grade lesions/cancer ranged from 15% (score 0) to >65% (score [≥]4). At a conservative threshold ([≥]4 points), 4.7% (26/555) of women were classified as high-risk, concentrating 46% (6/13) of cancers (positive predictive value[PPV]=58%) while a sensitive threshold ([≥]3 points) had 16.8% (93/555) high-risk, concentrating 77% (10/13) cancers (PPV=38%). Both thresholds maintained a high negative predictive value (>95%). Conclusion: This bootstrap-validated, risk-stratification tool is a proof-of-concept in resource limited settings that assigns HR-HPV-positive women to distinct management pathways using three variables. After refining through a longitudinal study and external validation, this scoring system can improve the efficiency of cervical cancer screening programs in low-resource settings.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.