Literature DB >> 10227593

Utility of liquid-based cytology for cervical carcinoma screening: results of a population-based study conducted in a region of Costa Rica with a high incidence of cervical carcinoma.

M L Hutchinson1, D J Zahniser, M E Sherman, R Herrero, M Alfaro, M C Bratti, A Hildesheim, A T Lorincz, M D Greenberg, J Morales, M Schiffman.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In a study using a split-sample design, liquid-based cytology (ThinPrep Processor, Cytyc Corporation, Boxborough, MA) was compared with the conventional Papanicolaou (Pap) smear in Guanacaste, Costa Rica. The study provides the first population-based comparison of the ThinPrep screening technology and includes "gold standard" measures of diagnostic accuracy.
METHODS: The population-based study was performed among over 8000 women residing in a Costa Rican province with a high incidence of cervical carcinoma. Conventional smears were prepared and diagnosed in Costa Rica, while the residual material on the sampling device was collected into a liquid preservative and shipped to the U.S., where ThinPrep cytologic slides were prepared and diagnosed. Cytologic diagnoses based on the two techniques, categorized according to the Bethesda System, were compared with a "gold standard" final case diagnosis for each patient, also based on Bethesda terminology, that reflected an integrated interpretation of all available data, including cytology, histology, and cervicography. Results were also compared with the results of HPV DNA detection (Hybrid Capture, Digene Corporation, Silver Spring, MD).
RESULTS: ASCUS was the threshold for colposcopy referral. There were significantly more women referred according to this threshold with the ThinPrep slide (12.7%) than with the conventional smear (6.7%, P<0.001). Compared with the final case diagnosis, referral by ThinPrep slides detected 92.9% of cases with high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) and 100% of carcinoma cases. Smears detected 77.8% of HSIL and 90.9% of carcinomas. Thus, ThinPrep cytology was significantly more sensitive in the detection of HSIL and cancer (McNemar test, P<0.001). Adjudication of cases in which the ThinPrep and smear diagnoses disagreed, using the final case diagnoses and the HPV DNA test results as reference standards, suggested that the ThinPrep method was detecting additional true SIL as opposed to false-positives.
CONCLUSIONS: In a population-based study of high risk women, ThinPrep cytology demonstrated significantly increased sensitivity for detecting HSIL and carcinoma, with a concurrent significant increase in colposcopy referrals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10227593     DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19990425)87:2<48::aid-cncr2>3.0.co;2-d

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  29 in total

1.  Screening for cervical cancer: should we test for infection with high-risk HPV?

Authors:  C J Meijer; P J Snijders; A J van den Brule
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2000-09-05       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Longitudinal analysis of carcinogenic human papillomavirus infection and associated cytologic abnormalities in the Guanacaste natural history study: looking ahead to cotesting.

Authors:  Sarah Coseo Markt; Ana C Rodriguez; Robert D Burk; Allan Hildesheim; Rolando Herrero; Sholom Wacholder; Martha Hutchinson; Mark Schiffman
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2011-12-05       Impact factor: 5.226

3.  Competency-based learning: the impact of targeted resident education and feedback on Pap smear adequacy rates.

Authors:  Raquel S Watkins; William P Moran
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  The advantages of incorporating liquid-based cytology (TACAS™) in mass screening for cervical cancer.

Authors:  Yoshihito Yokoyama; Masayuki Futagami; Jun Watanabe; Atsushi Sakuraba; Kazuma Nagasawa; Hidetoshi Maruyama; Shigemi Sato
Journal:  Hum Cell       Date:  2016-01-06       Impact factor: 4.174

Review 5.  Human papillomavirus testing in the prevention of cervical cancer.

Authors:  Mark Schiffman; Nicolas Wentzensen; Sholom Wacholder; Walter Kinney; Julia C Gage; Philip E Castle
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2011-01-31       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  An Observational Study of Deep Learning and Automated Evaluation of Cervical Images for Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Liming Hu; David Bell; Sameer Antani; Zhiyun Xue; Kai Yu; Matthew P Horning; Noni Gachuhi; Benjamin Wilson; Mayoore S Jaiswal; Brian Befano; L Rodney Long; Rolando Herrero; Mark H Einstein; Robert D Burk; Maria Demarco; Julia C Gage; Ana Cecilia Rodriguez; Nicolas Wentzensen; Mark Schiffman
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2019-09-01       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Cervical cancer: epidemiology, prevention and the role of human papillomavirus infection.

Authors:  E L Franco; E Duarte-Franco; A Ferenczy
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-04-03       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 8.  Human papillomavirus in cervical cancer.

Authors:  F Xavier Bosch; Silvia de Sanjosé
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 5.075

9.  Comparison of methods for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae using commercially available nucleic acid amplification tests and a liquid pap smear medium.

Authors:  Emilia H Koumans; Carolyn M Black; Lauri E Markowitz; ElizabethR Unger; Antonya Pierce; Mary K Sawyer; John R Papp
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 10.  Cervical cancer screening.

Authors:  Dorothy J Wiley; Bradley J Monk; Emmanuel Masongsong; Kristina Morgan
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 5.075

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.