Literature DB >> 14970277

Virologic versus cytologic triage of women with equivocal Pap smears: a meta-analysis of the accuracy to detect high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia.

Marc Arbyn1, Frank Buntinx, Marc Van Ranst, Evangelos Paraskevaidis, Pierre Martin-Hirsch, Joakim Dillner.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The appropriate management of women with minor cytologic lesions in their cervix is unclear. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the accuracy of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing as an alternative to repeat cytology in women who had equivocal results on a previous Pap smear.
METHODS: Data were extracted from articles published between 1992 and 2002 that contained results of virologic and cytologic testing followed by colposcopically directed biopsy in women with an index smear showing atypical cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS). Fifteen studies were identified in which HPV triage and the histologic outcome (presence or absence of a cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade II or worse [CIN2+]) was documented. Nine, seven, and two studies also documented the accuracy of repeat cytology when the cutoff for abnormal cytology was set at a threshold of ASCUS or worse, low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) or worse, or high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) or worse, respectively. Random-effects models were used for pooling of accuracy parameters in case of interstudy heterogeneity. Differences in accuracy were assessed by pooling the ratio of the sensitivity (or specificity) of HPV testing to that of repeat cytology.
RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity were 84.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 77.6% to 91.1%) and 72.9% (95% CI = 62.5% to 83.3%), respectively, for HPV testing overall and 94.8% (95% CI = 92.7% to 96.9%) and 67.3% (95% CI = 58.2% to 76.4%), respectively, for HPV testing in the eight studies that used the Hybrid Capture II assay. Sensitivity and specificity of repeat cytology at a threshold for abnormal cytology of ASCUS or worse was 81.8% (95% CI = 73.5% to 84.3%) and 57.6% (95% CI = 49.5% to 65.7%), respectively. Repeat cytology that used higher cytologic thresholds yielded substantially lower sensitivity but higher specificity than triage with the Hybrid Capture II assay. The ratio of the sensitivity of the Hybrid Capture II assay to that of repeat cytology at a threshold of ASCUS or worse pooled from the four studies that used both triage tests was 1.16 (95% CI = 1.04 to 1.29). The specificity ratio was not statistically different from unity.
CONCLUSION: The published literature indicates that the Hybrid Capture II assay has improved accuracy (higher sensitivity, similar specificity) than the repeat Pap smear using the threshold of ASCUS for an outcome of CIN2+ among women with equivocal cytologic results. The sensitivity of triage at higher cytologic cutoffs is poor.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14970277     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djh037

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  60 in total

Review 1.  Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer: biomarkers for improved prevention efforts.

Authors:  Vikrant V Sahasrabuddhe; Patricia Luhn; Nicolas Wentzensen
Journal:  Future Microbiol       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 3.165

2.  Lifetime effects, costs, and cost effectiveness of testing for human papillomavirus to manage low grade cytological abnormalities: results of the NHS pilot studies.

Authors:  Rosa Legood; Alastair Gray; Jane Wolstenholme; Sue Moss
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-01-06

3.  Monitoring cell cycle distributions in MCF-7 cells using near-field photothermal microspectroscopy.

Authors:  Azzedine Hammiche; Matthew J German; Rebecca Hewitt; Hubert M Pollock; Francis L Martin
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2005-02-18       Impact factor: 4.033

4.  Evaluation of combined general primer-mediated PCR sequencing and type-specific PCR strategies for determination of human papillomavirus genotypes in cervical cell specimens.

Authors:  Véronique Fontaine; Corinne Mascaux; Christine Weyn; Aurore Bernis; Nathalie Celio; Philippe Lefèvre; Leonard Kaufman; Christian Garbar
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2007-01-17       Impact factor: 5.948

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.  The Need for Societal Investment to Improve Cervical Cancer Outcomes in Nigeria: A commentary.

Authors:  Jonah Musa
Journal:  Afr J Reprod Health       Date:  2017-12

7.  Comparison of hybrid capture II, linear array, and a bead-based multiplex genotyping assay for detection of human papillomavirus in women with negative pap test results and atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance.

Authors:  Manola Comar; Michelle R Iannacone; Giorgia Casalicchio; Sandrine McKay-Chopin; Massimo Tommasino; Tarik Gheit
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2012-10-03       Impact factor: 5.948

8.  Human papillomavirus-related gynecologic neoplasms: screening and prevention.

Authors:  Whitfield B Growdon; Marcela Del Carmen
Journal:  Rev Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008

Review 9.  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

10.  Characterization of Molecular Markers Indicative of Cervical Cancer Progression.

Authors:  Hilal Arnouk; Mark A Merkley; Robert H Podolsky; Hubert Stöppler; Carlos Santos; Manuel Alvarez; Julio Mariategui; Daron Ferris; Jeffrey R Lee; William S Dynan
Journal:  Proteomics Clin Appl       Date:  2009-05-05       Impact factor: 3.494

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.