Li Yu1, Liantang Wang, Juemin Zhong, Shangwu Chen. 1. Department of Histopathology, First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen (Zhongshan) University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to evaluate the reliability and role of cell block preparations in the diagnosis of neoplastic and preneoplastic lesions of the cervix and to improve the value of cell block preparations in diagnosing and predicting the prognosis of cervical lesions through immunostaining of p16INK4A (p16), Ki-67, and human papillomavirus (HPV) L1 capsid protein (HPV L1). METHODS: In total, 138 specimens were diagnosed on liquid-based cytology (LBC) and cell block preparations, and 63 specimens were subjected subsequently to tissue follow-up and immunostaining for p16, Ki-67, and HPV L1 on cell block sections. RESULTS: In 42 specimens that were diagnosed as low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL), and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) on cell blocks, 38 specimens (90.5%) were confirmed by histopathologic reports, and there was slightly better than 81.6% agreement between LBC and tissue follow-up. Immunointensity and cells that were positive for p16 were enhanced according to increased pathologic grade and differed statistically between cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 1 (CIN-1) and CIN-2/CIN-3 as well as SCC. The positive rates of HPV L1 decreased gradually according to the severity of cervical neoplasia, and HPV L1/p16 expression patterns were related to the severity of cervical lesions. CONCLUSIONS: The cell block preparation technique was complementary to LBC, and the authors concluded that the application of LBC combined with cell block preparations may improve the diagnostic accuracy of cytology. Immunostaining for p16 and Ki-67 on cell block preparations can help to improve the diagnostic accuracy of HSIL and SCC. A combined expression pattern of p16 and HPV L1 may serve as a valuable index for predicting prognosis and follow-up of cervical dysplastic lesions. (c) 2010 American Cancer Society.
BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to evaluate the reliability and role of cell block preparations in the diagnosis of neoplastic and preneoplastic lesions of the cervix and to improve the value of cell block preparations in diagnosing and predicting the prognosis of cervical lesions through immunostaining of p16INK4A (p16), Ki-67, and human papillomavirus (HPV) L1 capsid protein (HPV L1). METHODS: In total, 138 specimens were diagnosed on liquid-based cytology (LBC) and cell block preparations, and 63 specimens were subjected subsequently to tissue follow-up and immunostaining for p16, Ki-67, and HPV L1 on cell block sections. RESULTS: In 42 specimens that were diagnosed as low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL), and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) on cell blocks, 38 specimens (90.5%) were confirmed by histopathologic reports, and there was slightly better than 81.6% agreement between LBC and tissue follow-up. Immunointensity and cells that were positive for p16 were enhanced according to increased pathologic grade and differed statistically between cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 1 (CIN-1) and CIN-2/CIN-3 as well as SCC. The positive rates of HPV L1 decreased gradually according to the severity of cervical neoplasia, and HPV L1/p16 expression patterns were related to the severity of cervical lesions. CONCLUSIONS: The cell block preparation technique was complementary to LBC, and the authors concluded that the application of LBC combined with cell block preparations may improve the diagnostic accuracy of cytology. Immunostaining for p16 and Ki-67 on cell block preparations can help to improve the diagnostic accuracy of HSIL and SCC. A combined expression pattern of p16 and HPV L1 may serve as a valuable index for predicting prognosis and follow-up of cervical dysplastic lesions. (c) 2010 American Cancer Society.
Authors: Cornelia Peterson; Rupin N Parikh; Meleha T Ahmad; Ashley A Campbell; Yassine Daoud; Nicholas Mahoney; Sepideh Siadati; Charles G Eberhart Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2022-06-29 Impact factor: 6.208
Authors: Anna Yemelyanova; Patti E Gravitt; Brigitte M Ronnett; Ann F Rositch; Aleksandra Ogurtsova; Jeffrey Seidman; Richard B S Roden Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2012-09-21 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: Vinod B Shidham; Ravi Mehrotra; George Varsegi; Krista L D'Amore; Bryan Hunt; Raj Narayan Journal: Cytojournal Date: 2011-01-31 Impact factor: 2.091
Authors: Manish V Bais; Matthew A Nugent; Danielle N Stephens; S Selva Sume; Kathrin H Kirsch; Gail E Sonenshein; Philip C Trackman Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-02-08 Impact factor: 3.240