Summary
1. HPV testing took years to gain acceptance as a co-test with the standard Liquid Based Cytology (LBC) or Pap test. 2. The recent UK research study published in Lancet Oncology appears to support these skeptics... but 3. Due to elevation of HPV DNA testing to the level of standard of care supported by practice guidelines, it is not likely that the UK study will make a significant dent on the market and the manufacturers of HPV tests in the USA. [Analysis is solely the opinion of Author]
Analysis
Even years after the publication of 2006 consensus guidelines for the management of women with abnormal cervical cancer screening tests, there are many gynecologists who do not use DNA test as a co-test, and prefer using it only as a "reflex" test following an ambiguous LBC result. The recent UK research study published in Lancet Oncology appears to support these skeptics. While it is not likely that the UK study will affect the manufacturers of HPV tests in the USA, it might slightly slow down the market penetration of the HPV tests in Europe and elsewhere, and may hider aspirations of using the DNA assay as the primary modality in cervical cancer screening. Further caution may be exercised with the introduction of additional testing such as the Hologic Cervista 16/18 HPV assay, and a similar genotype specific assay under development by Qiagen. Competition between Qiagen, Hologic, and Gene-Probe (presumably from 2010 in the US market) will put the users in the driver's seat and may result in improved tests and more favorable pricing. [Analysis is solely the opinion of Author]
