Literature DB >> 25198268

Relevance of random biopsy at the transformation zone when colposcopy is negative.

Warner K Huh1, Mario Sideri, Mark Stoler, Guili Zhang, Robert Feldman, Catherine M Behrens.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: A post hoc analysis to determine the diagnostic yield of random biopsy in detecting high-grade cervical disease in women with negative colposcopy.
METHODS: The ATHENA (Addressing the Need for Advanced HPV Diagnostics) trial screened more than 47,000 women with cytology and high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA genotyping. Colposcopy was performed in all women with abnormal cytology or positive HPV results. A single random biopsy was taken at the squamocolumnar junction if colposcopy was adequate and no lesions were identified.
RESULTS: The random biopsy diagnosed 20.9% (81/388, 95% confidence interval [CI] 16.9-25.3%) and 18.9% (45/238, 95% CI 14.1-24.5%) of the total cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or worse and grade 3 or worse, respectively. This additional disease was detected in both HPV 16 or 18+ and for 12 other high-risk HPV+ women. For HPV 16 or 18, the absolute risk for detection of CIN 2 or worse on random biopsy in the overall population was 13.1% (40/305, 95% CI 9.8-17.4%) and 8.2% (25/305, 95% CI 5.6-11.8%) for CIN 3 or worse. By contrast, the absolute risk for 12 other high-risk HPV+ women was 3.5% (29/820, 95% CI 2.5-5%) and 1.7% (14/820, 95% CI 1.0-2.8%) for CIN 2 or worse and CIN 3 or worse, respectively.
CONCLUSION: A single random biopsy increased the detection of high-grade disease when no lesions were visualized at colposcopy. The absolute risks of disease associated with the random biopsy were highest for women positive for genotype 16 or 18. Our study supports performing a random biopsy in women undergoing colposcopy without visible lesions, particularly in those positive for HPV 16 or 18. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: : II.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25198268     DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000458

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  15 in total

1.  Risk of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia 2 or Worse by Cytology, Human Papillomavirus 16/18, and Colposcopy Impression: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Michelle I Silver; Jeff Andrews; Charles K Cooper; Julia C Gage; Michael A Gold; Michelle J Khan; L Stewart Massad; Valentin Parvu; Rebecca B Perkins; Mark Schiffman; Katie M Smith; Nicolas Wentzensen
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 7.661

2.  Trends in Colposcopy Volume: Where Do We Go From Here?

Authors:  Emily E Landers; Britt K Erickson; Sejong Bae; Warner K Huh
Journal:  J Low Genit Tract Dis       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 1.925

3.  ASCCP Colposcopy Standards: How Do We Perform Colposcopy? Implications for Establishing Standards.

Authors:  Alan G Waxman; Christine Conageski; Michelle I Silver; Candice Tedeschi; Elizabeth A Stier; Barbara Apgar; Warner K Huh; Nicolas Wentzensen; L Stewart Massad; Michelle J Khan; Edward J Mayeaux; Mark H Einstein; Mark H Schiffman; Richard S Guido
Journal:  J Low Genit Tract Dis       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 1.925

4.  Comparison of Punch Biopsy and Loop Biopsy for the Management of Severe Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia (CIN).

Authors:  Anjula Sahai; Vandana Bansal; Priyanka Singh
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2021-08-06

Review 5.  False Negative Results in Cervical Cancer Screening-Risks, Reasons and Implications for Clinical Practice and Public Health.

Authors:  Anna Macios; Andrzej Nowakowski
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-20

Review 6.  Triage of HPV positive women in cervical cancer screening.

Authors:  Nicolas Wentzensen; Mark Schiffman; Timothy Palmer; Marc Arbyn
Journal:  J Clin Virol       Date:  2015-11-28       Impact factor: 3.168

7.  A prospective study of risk-based colposcopy demonstrates improved detection of cervical precancers.

Authors:  Nicolas Wentzensen; Joan Walker; Katie Smith; Michael A Gold; Rosemary Zuna; L Stewart Massad; Angela Liu; Michelle I Silver; S Terence Dunn; Mark Schiffman
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2018-02-17       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  Prevalence of high-grade dysplasia in cytology-negative, HPV-positive cervical cancer screening.

Authors:  Stephanie M Peace; Ashley J Jennings
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2021-09-25       Impact factor: 2.493

9.  Digital Colposcopy With Dynamic Spectral Imaging for Detection of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia 2+ in Low-Grade Referrals: The IMPROVE-COLPO Study.

Authors:  Aarathi Cholkeri-Singh; Philip T Lavin; Christopher G Olson; Emmanouil Papagiannakis; Lori Weinberg
Journal:  J Low Genit Tract Dis       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 1.925

10.  Colposcopy and additive diagnostic value of biopsies from colposcopy-negative areas to detect cervical dysplasia.

Authors:  Ingrid Baasland; Bjørn Hagen; Christina Vogt; Marit Valla; Pål R Romundstad
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 3.636

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.