Literature DB >> 23519309

Five-year risk of recurrence after treatment of CIN 2, CIN 3, or AIS: performance of HPV and Pap cotesting in posttreatment management.

Hormuzd A Katki1, Mark Schiffman, Philip E Castle, Barbara Fetterman, Nancy E Poitras, Thomas Lorey, Li C Cheung, Tina Raine-Bennett, Julia C Gage, Walter K Kinney.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: After excisional treatment, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN 2+) can recur. It is not clear how many negative posttreatment Pap or cotest results are needed to ensure adequate safety against CIN 2+ before returning to extended retesting intervals.
METHODS: We observed 5-year risks of CIN 2+ for 3 follow-up management strategies after treatment (Pap-alone, human papillomavirus [HPV]-alone, and HPV/Pap cotesting) for 3,273 women aged 25 years and older who were treated for CIN 2, CIN 3, or adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) between 2003 and 2010 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California.
RESULTS: Five-year risks of recurrent CIN 2+ after treatment varied both by antecedent screening test result and the histology of the treated lesion. The risk ranged from 5% for CIN 2 preceded by HPV-positive/atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion to 16% for CIN 3/AIS preceded by atypical glandular cells (AGC)/atypical squamous cells cannot rule out high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (ASC-H)/high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or worse (HSIL+) (p < .0001). However, after posttreatment negative tests, risks were lowered and similar regardless of antecedent screening test and histology of treated disease. The 5-year recurrent CIN 2+ risk after a negative posttreatment cotest (2.4%) was lower than that following a negative HPV test (3.7%, p = .3) or negative Pap result (4.2%, p = .1). Two negative posttreatment tests of each kind conferred slightly lower 5-year CIN 2+ risk than one (2 negative Pap tests vs. 1, 2.7% vs 4.2%, p = .2; 2 negative HPV tests vs. 1, 2.7% vs 3.7%, p = .7; 2 negative cotests vs. 1, 1.5% vs 2.4%, p = .8). The 5-year CIN 2+ risk after 2 negative cotests of 1.5% (95% confidence interval = 0.3%-7.2%) approached the 0.68% risk after a negative Pap test during routine screening.
CONCLUSIONS: Women with antecedent AGC/ASC-H/HSIL+ Pap results or those treated for CIN 3/AIS had a substantial risk of developing CIN 2+ posttreatment. On the basis of the principle of "equal management of equal risks," after negative test results posttreatment, no subgroup of women achieved risk sufficiently low to return to 5-year routine screening. However, negative cotests after treatment provided more reassurance against recurrent CIN 2+ than either negative Pap tests or HPV tests alone.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23519309      PMCID: PMC3616418          DOI: 10.1097/LGT.0b013e31828543c5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Low Genit Tract Dis        ISSN: 1089-2591            Impact factor:   1.925


  26 in total

Review 1.  The role of HPV DNA testing in the follow-up period after treatment for CIN: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Evangelos Paraskevaidis; Marc Arbyn; Alexandros Sotiriadis; Emmanuel Diakomanolis; Pierre Martin-Hirsch; George Koliopoulos; George Makrydimas; Jovan Tofoski; Dimitrios H Roukos
Journal:  Cancer Treat Rev       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 12.111

2.  Clinical utility of HPV-DNA detection: triage of minor cervical lesions, follow-up of women treated for high-grade CIN: an update of pooled evidence.

Authors:  M Arbyn; E Paraskevaidis; P Martin-Hirsch; W Prendiville; J Dillner
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2005-09-09       Impact factor: 5.482

3.  Benchmarking CIN 3+ risk as the basis for incorporating HPV and Pap cotesting into cervical screening and management guidelines.

Authors:  Hormuzd A Katki; Mark Schiffman; Philip E Castle; Barbara Fetterman; Nancy E Poitras; Thomas Lorey; Li C Cheung; Tina Raine-Bennett; Julia C Gage; Walter K Kinney
Journal:  J Low Genit Tract Dis       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 1.925

4.  Invasive cervical cancer after conservative therapy for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.

Authors:  W P Soutter; A de Barros Lopes; A Fletcher; J M Monaghan; I D Duncan; E Paraskevaidis; H C Kitchener
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1997-04-05       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Long-term risk of recurrent cervical human papillomavirus infection and precancer and cancer following excisional treatment.

Authors:  Aimée R Kreimer; Mark Schiffman; Rolando Herrero; Allan Hildesheim; Paula González; Robert D Burk; Carolina Porras; Mark E Sherman; Franklin Demuth; Li Cheung; Concepción Bratti; Ana Cecilia Rodríguez
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2011-08-30       Impact factor: 7.396

6.  Alterations in human papillomavirus-related biomarkers after treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.

Authors:  G Valasoulis; G Koliopoulos; C Founta; M Kyrgiou; I Tsoumpou; O Valari; P Martin-Hirsch; A Daponte; P Karakitsos; E Paraskevaidis
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2011-01-08       Impact factor: 5.482

7.  Human papillomavirus testing following loop electrosurgical excision procedure identifies women at risk for posttreatment cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3 disease.

Authors:  Aimée R Kreimer; Richard S Guido; Diane Solomon; Mark Schiffman; Sholom Wacholder; José Jeronimo; Cosette M Wheeler; Philip E Castle
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  HPV16 and increased risk of recurrence after treatment for CIN.

Authors:  Murat Gök; Veerle M H Coupé; Johannes Berkhof; René H M Verheijen; Theo J M Helmerhorst; Cornelis J A Hogewoning; Peter J F Snijders; Chris J L M Meijer
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2006-12-08       Impact factor: 5.482

9.  Post-treatment CIN: randomised clinical trial using hrHPV testing for prediction of residual/recurrent disease.

Authors:  Aagje G Bais; Marinus J C Eijkemans; Mateja Rebolj; Peter J F Snijders; René H M Verheijen; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Chris J L M Meijer; Theo J M Helmerhorst
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2009-02-15       Impact factor: 7.396

10.  Addition of high-risk HPV testing improves the current guidelines on follow-up after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.

Authors:  M A Nobbenhuis; C J Meijer; A J van den Brule; L Rozendaal; F J Voorhorst; E K Risse; R H Verheijen; T J Helmerhorst
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2001-03-23       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  20 in total

Review 1.  Clinical application of DNA ploidy to cervical cancer screening: A review.

Authors:  David Garner
Journal:  World J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-12-10

2.  The value of HPV-HR DNA testing during the follow-up after treatment of CIN3/AIS.

Authors:  Maja Banović; Vesna Mahovlić; Kristina Meljanac Salopek; Vladimir Banović; Ivan Babić; Slavko Orešković; Damir Babić
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2014-11-29       Impact factor: 3.201

3.  Making Sense of Cervical Cancer Screening Guidelines and Recommendations.

Authors:  Michelle Davis; Sarah Feldman
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2015-12

Review 4.  Hysterectomy in the Urologist's Practice.

Authors:  Steven J Weissbart; Ariana L Smith
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 3.092

5.  Clinical significance of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance after treatment for cervical intraepithelial grade 3 neoplasia: A retrospective single-center cohort study.

Authors:  Toshimichi Onuma; Kimihisa Tajima; Kumiko Sato; Katsushige Hattori; Shin Fukuda; Takahiro Tsuji; Yoshio Yoshida
Journal:  Mol Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-10-04

6.  Factors associated with recurrence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2+ after treatment among HIV-infected women in Western Kenya.

Authors:  Megan J Huchko; Hannah Leslie; May Maloba; Elizabeth A Bukusi; Craig R Cohen
Journal:  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr       Date:  2014-06-01       Impact factor: 3.731

7.  Genome-wide methylation profiling reveals Zinc finger protein 516 (ZNF516) and FK-506-binding protein 6 (FKBP6) promoters frequently methylated in cervical neoplasia, associated with HPV status and ethnicity in a Chilean population.

Authors:  Priscilla Brebi; Leonel Maldonado; Maartje G Noordhuis; Carmen Ili; Pamela Leal; Patricia Garcia; Mariana Brait; Judit Ribas; Christina Michailidi; Jimena Perez; Ethan Soudry; Oscar Tapia; Pablo Guzman; Sergio Muñoz; Leander Van Neste; Wim Van Criekinge; Rafael Irizarry; David Sidransky; Juan C Roa; Rafael Guerrero-Preston
Journal:  Epigenetics       Date:  2013-11-15       Impact factor: 4.528

8.  Human Papillomavirus Genotyping Compared With a Qualitative High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Test After Treatment of High-Grade Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Fabio Bottari; Anna D Iacobone; Rita Passerini; Eleonora P Preti; Maria T Sandri; Clementina E Cocuzza; Devin S Gary; Jeffrey C Andrews
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 7.623

9.  Conization Using an Electrosurgical Knife for Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia and Microinvasive Carcinoma.

Authors:  Libing Xiang; Jiajia Li; Wentao Yang; Xiaoli Xu; Xiaohua Wu; Huaying Wang; Ziting Li; Huijuan Yang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-08       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Uptake of co-testing with HPV and cytology for cervical screening: A population-based evaluation in the United States.

Authors:  Jack Cuzick; Ruofei Du; Rachael Adcock; Walter Kinney; Nancy Joste; Ruth M McDonald; Kevin English; Salina M Torres; Debbie Saslow; Cosette M Wheeler
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2021-07-10       Impact factor: 5.304

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.