Literature DB >> 22581670

Accuracy of concurrent visual and cytology screening in detecting cervical cancer precursors in rural India.

Kedar Deodhar1, Rengaswamy Sankaranarayanan, Kasturi Jayant, Jose Jeronimo, Ranjit Thorat, Sanjay Hingmire, Richard Muwonge, Aruna Chiwate, Rutha Deshpande, Dulhan Ajit, Rohini Kelkar, Bharat Rekhi, Irene Ruben, Sylla G Malvi, Roshni Chinoy, Nirmala Jambhekar, Bhagwan M Nene.   

Abstract

The high burden of cervical cancer and inadequate/suboptimal cytology screening in developing countries led to the evaluation of visual screening tests, like visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) and Lugol's iodine (VILI). We describe the performance of VIA, VILI and cytology, carried out in a multinational project called "Screening Technologies to Advance Rapid Testing" in 5,519 women aged 30-49 years, in detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). VIA, VILI and cytology were positive in 16.9%, 15.6% and 6.1% women, respectively. We found 57 cases of CIN2, 55 of CIN3 and 12 of cervical cancer; 90% of CIN3 and 43% CIN2 cases were positive for p16 overexpression and high-risk HPV infection, indicating a high validity of histological diagnosis. The sensitivity of VIA, VILI and cytology to detect high-grade CIN were 64.5%, 64.5% and 67.7%, respectively; specificities were 84.2%, 85.5% and 95.4%. A high proportion of p16 positive CIN 3 (93.8%) and 2 (76.9%) were positive on cytology compared with visual tests (68.8% and 53.8%, respectively) indicating a higher sensitivity of cytology to detect p16 positive high-grade CIN. However, the immediate availability of the results from the visual tests permits diagnosis and/or treatment to be performed in the same sitting, which can potentially reduce loss to follow-up when women must be recalled following positive cytology. Organizing visual screening services in low-resource countries may facilitate the gradual building of an infrastructure committed to screening allowing the eventual introduction of more sensitive, highly objective, reproducible and affordable human papillomavirus screening tests in future.
Copyright © 2012 UICC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22581670     DOI: 10.1002/ijc.27633

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cancer        ISSN: 0020-7136            Impact factor:   7.396


  9 in total

Review 1.  Implementing community-based cervical cancer screening programs using visual inspection with acetic acid in India: A systematic review.

Authors:  Prajakta Adsul; Nitin Manjunath; Vijaya Srinivas; Anjali Arun; Purnima Madhivanan
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol       Date:  2017-07-10       Impact factor: 2.984

Review 2.  Advancing cervical cancer prevention in India: implementation science priorities.

Authors:  Suneeta Krishnan; Emily Madsen; Deborah Porterfield; Beena Varghese
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2013-11-11

Review 3.  Cancer Screening: Should Cancer Screening be Essential Component of Primary Health Care in Developing Countries?

Authors:  Saurabh Bobdey; Ganesh Balasubramanium; Abhinendra Kumar; Aanchal Jain
Journal:  Int J Prev Med       Date:  2015-07-06

4.  Burden of cervical cancer and role of screening in India.

Authors:  Saurabh Bobdey; Jignasa Sathwara; Aanchal Jain; Ganesh Balasubramaniam
Journal:  Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol       Date:  2016 Oct-Dec

5.  Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Individual Patient Data to Assess the Sensitivity of Cervical Cytology for Diagnosis of Cervical Cancer in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Authors:  Alejandra Castanon; Rebecca Landy; Dimitrios Michalopoulos; Roshni Bhudia; Hannah Leaver; You Lin Qiao; Fanghui Zhao; Peter Sasieni
Journal:  J Glob Oncol       Date:  2017-03-01

6.  Secondary Prevention of Cervical Cancer: ASCO Resource-Stratified Clinical Practice Guideline.

Authors:  Jose Jeronimo; Philip E Castle; Sarah Temin; Lynette Denny; Vandana Gupta; Jane J Kim; Silvana Luciani; Daniel Murokora; Twalib Ngoma; Youlin Qiao; Michael Quinn; Rengaswamy Sankaranarayanan; Peter Sasieni; Kathleen M Schmeler; Surendra S Shastri
Journal:  J Glob Oncol       Date:  2016-10-12

7.  Determinants of acceptance of cervical cancer screening in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

Authors:  Crispin Kahesa; Susanne Kjaer; Julius Mwaiselage; Twalib Ngoma; Britt Tersbol; Myassa Dartell; Vibeke Rasch
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2012-12-19       Impact factor: 3.295

8.  Evaluation of stationary colposcope and the Gynocular, by the Swede score systematic colposcopic system in VIA positive women: a crossover randomized trial.

Authors:  Ashrafun Nessa; Charlotte Wistrand; Shirin Akter Begum; Marcus Thuresson; Isaac Shemer; Malin Thorsell; Elisabeth Andrea Wikström Shemer
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 3.437

9.  Resources Required for Cervical Cancer Prevention in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Authors:  Nicole G Campos; Monisha Sharma; Andrew Clark; Jane J Kim; Stephen C Resch
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-10-06       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.