OBJECTIVE: To relate aspects of online colposcopic image assessment to the diagnosis of grades 2 and 3 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 2+). METHODS: To simulate colposcopic assessment, we obtained digitized cervical images at enrollment after acetic acid application from 919 women referred for equivocal or minor cytologic abnormalities into the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study. For each, 2 randomly assigned evaluators from a pool of 20 colposcopists assessed images using a standardized tool online. We calculated the accuracy of these assessments for predicting histologic CIN 2+ over the 2 years of study. For validation, a subset of online results was compared with same-day enrollment colposcopic assessments. RESULTS: Identifying any acetowhite lesion in images yielded high sensitivity: 93% of women with CIN 2+ had at least 1 acetowhite lesion. However, 74% of women without CIN 2+ also had acetowhitening, regardless of human papillomavirus status. The sensitivity for CIN 2+ of an online colpophotographic assessment of high-grade disease was 39%. The sensitivity for CIN 2+ of a high-grade diagnosis by Reid Index scoring was 30%, and individual Reid Index component scores had similar levels of sensitivity and specificity. The performance of online assessment was not meaningfully different from that of same-day enrollment colposcopy, suggesting that these approaches have similar utility. CONCLUSIONS: Finding acetowhite lesions identifies women with CIN 2+, but using subtler colposcopic characteristics to grade lesions is insensitive. All acetowhite lesions should be assessed with biopsy to maximize sensitivity of colposcopic diagnosis with good specificity.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To relate aspects of online colposcopic image assessment to the diagnosis of grades 2 and 3 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 2+). METHODS: To simulate colposcopic assessment, we obtained digitized cervical images at enrollment after acetic acid application from 919 women referred for equivocal or minor cytologic abnormalities into the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study. For each, 2 randomly assigned evaluators from a pool of 20 colposcopists assessed images using a standardized tool online. We calculated the accuracy of these assessments for predicting histologic CIN 2+ over the 2 years of study. For validation, a subset of online results was compared with same-day enrollment colposcopic assessments. RESULTS: Identifying any acetowhite lesion in images yielded high sensitivity: 93% of women with CIN 2+ had at least 1 acetowhite lesion. However, 74% of women without CIN 2+ also had acetowhitening, regardless of human papillomavirus status. The sensitivity for CIN 2+ of an online colpophotographic assessment of high-grade disease was 39%. The sensitivity for CIN 2+ of a high-grade diagnosis by Reid Index scoring was 30%, and individual Reid Index component scores had similar levels of sensitivity and specificity. The performance of online assessment was not meaningfully different from that of same-day enrollment colposcopy, suggesting that these approaches have similar utility. CONCLUSIONS: Finding acetowhite lesions identifies women with CIN 2+, but using subtler colposcopic characteristics to grade lesions is insensitive. All acetowhite lesions should be assessed with biopsy to maximize sensitivity of colposcopic diagnosis with good specificity.
Authors: Mark Schiffman; Cosette M Wheeler; Abhijit Dasgupta; Diane Solomon; Philip E Castle Journal: Am J Clin Pathol Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 2.493
Authors: Mark E Sherman; Sophia S Wang; Robert Tarone; Laurie Rich; Mark Schiffman Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 4.254
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
Authors: Jenna L Mueller; Elizabeth Asma; Christopher T Lam; Marlee S Krieger; Jennifer E Gallagher; Alaattin Erkanli; Roopa Hariprasad; J S Malliga; Lisa C Muasher; Bariki Mchome; Olola Oneko; Peyton Taylor; Gino Venegas; Anthony Wanyoro; Ravi Mehrotra; John W Schmitt; Nimmi Ramanujam Journal: J Low Genit Tract Dis Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 1.925
Authors: L Stewart Massad; Christopher B Pierce; Howard Minkoff; D Heather Watts; Teresa M Darragh; Lorraine Sanchez-Keeland; Rodney L Wright; Christine Colie; Gypsyamber D'Souza Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2013-10-29 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Angela H Liu; Michael A Gold; Mark Schiffman; Katie M Smith; Rosemary E Zuna; S Terence Dunn; Julia C Gage; Joan L Walker; Nicolas Wentzensen Journal: J Low Genit Tract Dis Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 1.925
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