Literature DB >> 14504189

A comparison of single and combined visual, cytologic, and virologic tests as screening strategies in a region at high risk of cervical cancer.

Catterina Ferreccio1, Maria C Bratti, Mark E Sherman, Rolando Herrero, Sholom Wacholder, Allan Hildesheim, Robert D Burk, Martha Hutchinson, Mario Alfaro, Mitchell D Greenberg, Jorge Morales, Ana C Rodriguez, John Schussler, Claire Eklund, Guillermo Marshall, Mark Schiffman.   

Abstract

Increased understanding of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection as the central cause of cervical cancer has permitted the development of improved screening techniques. To evaluate their usefulness, we evaluated the performance of multiple screening methods concurrently in a large population-based cohort of >8500 nonvirginal women without hysterectomies, whom we followed prospectively in a high-risk region of Latin America. Using Youden's index as a measure of the trade-off between sensitivity and specificity, we estimated the performances of a visual screening method (cervicography), conventional cytology, liquid-based cytology (ThinPrep), and DNA testing for 13 oncogenic HPV types. The reference standard of disease was neoplasia > or = cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN 3), defined as histologically confirmed CIN 3 detected within 2 years of enrollment (n=90) or invasive cancer detected within 7 years (n=20). We analyzed each technique alone and in paired combinations (n=112 possible strategies), and evaluated the significance of differences between strategies using a paired Z test that equally weighted sensitivity and specificity. As a single test, either liquid-based cytology or HPV DNA testing was significantly more accurate than conventional cytology or cervicography. Paired tests incorporating either liquid-based cytology or HPV DNA testing were not substantially more accurate than either of those two test strategies alone. However, a possibly useful synergy was observed between the conventional smear and cervicography. Consideration of age or behavioral risk profiles did not alter any of these conclusions. Overall, we conclude that highly accurate screening for cervical cancer and CIN 3 is now technically feasible. The remaining vital issue is to extend improved cervical cancer prevention programs to resource-poor regions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14504189

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  15 in total

1.  Neither one-time negative screening tests nor negative colposcopy provides absolute reassurance against cervical cancer.

Authors:  Philip E Castle; Ana C Rodríguez; Robert D Burk; Rolando Herrero; Allan Hildesheim; Diane Solomon; Mark E Sherman; Jose Jeronimo; Mario Alfaro; Jorge Morales; Diego Guillén; Martha L Hutchinson; Sholom Wacholder; Mark Schiffman
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2009-10-01       Impact factor: 7.396

2.  Switch from cytology-based to human papillomavirus test-based cervical screening: implications for colposcopy.

Authors:  Carolina Porras; Nicolas Wentzensen; Ana C Rodríguez; Jorge Morales; Robert D Burk; Mario Alfaro; Martha Hutchinson; Rolando Herrero; Allan Hildesheim; Mark E Sherman; Sholom Wacholder; Diane Solomon; Mark Schiffman
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2011-08-02       Impact factor: 7.396

3.  Detection of TERC amplification in cervical epithelial cells for the diagnosis of high-grade cervical lesions and invasive cancer: a multicenter study in China.

Authors:  Jing Jiang; Li-Hui Wei; Ya-Li Li; Rui-Fang Wu; Xing Xie; You-Ji Feng; Guo Zhang; Chao Zhao; Yun Zhao; Zhong Chen
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2010-09-23       Impact factor: 5.568

4.  Comparison of linear array and line blot assay for detection of human papillomavirus and diagnosis of cervical precancer and cancer in the atypical squamous cell of undetermined significance and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion triage study.

Authors:  Philip E Castle; Patti E Gravitt; Diane Solomon; Cosette M Wheeler; Mark Schiffman
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2007-11-07       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  A comparison of linear array and hybrid capture 2 for detection of carcinogenic human papillomavirus and cervical precancer in ASCUS-LSIL triage study.

Authors:  Patti E Gravitt; Mark Schiffman; Diane Solomon; Cosette M Wheeler; Philip E Castle
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 4.254

6.  ELISA test to detect CDKN2A (p16(INK4a)) expression in exfoliative cells: a new screening tool for cervical cancer.

Authors:  Li Ding; Xian-Jin Zou; Jin-E Ao; Ai-Xiang Yao; Lan Cai
Journal:  Mol Diagn Ther       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.074

7.  Rationale and design of a community-based double-blind randomized clinical trial of an HPV 16 and 18 vaccine in Guanacaste, Costa Rica.

Authors:  Rolando Herrero; Allan Hildesheim; Ana C Rodríguez; Sholom Wacholder; Concepción Bratti; Diane Solomon; Paula González; Carolina Porras; Silvia Jiménez; Diego Guillen; Jorge Morales; Mario Alfaro; Jean Cyr; Kerrygrace Morrisey; Yenory Estrada; Bernal Cortés; Lidia Ana Morera; Enrique Freer; John Schussler; John Schiller; Douglas Lowy; Mark Schiffman
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2008-07-18       Impact factor: 3.641

8.  [Risk-adapted multimodal laboratory cervical screening---Pap test of the future?].

Authors:  R Bollmann; A D Varnai; A Bankfalvi; M Bollmann
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 0.973

9.  Absolute quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction for the measurement of human papillomavirus E7 mRNA in cervical cytobrush specimens.

Authors:  Michael E Scheurer; Laura M Dillon; Zhuo Chen; Michele Follen; Karen Adler-Storthz
Journal:  Infect Agent Cancer       Date:  2007-04-02       Impact factor: 2.965

10.  Different cervical cancer screening approaches in a Chinese multicentre study.

Authors:  N Li; J-F Shi; S Franceschi; W-H Zhang; M Dai; B Liu; Y-Z Zhang; L-K Li; R-F Wu; H De Vuyst; M Plummer; Y-L Qiao; G Clifford
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-01-06       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.