OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of TruScreen™ (an objective optoelectronic cervical screening device) in improving the sensitivity of cervical screening programs either alone or in combination with Papanicolaou (PAP) smear or human papilloma virus (HPV) DNA screening. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Our study was performed in 285 patients with abnormal Pap test results. TruScreen™ and HPV screening methods were performed in all participants. Consistency and differences between the tests were compared with cervical biopsy results. RESULTS: TruScreen™ was found to be an approach method in the determination of cervical pathologies (ROC curve area underlined=0.606) and with an 89.5% negative predictive value. HPV screening remains a counterpart to TruScreen™ with a 0.620 area underlined in the ROC curve and an 83% negative predictive value. CONCLUSION: As determined in our study, TruScreen™ with a sensitivity of 86.1% can be used as a screening test with instant and not professional dependent results for cervical cancer screening. Avoiding from subjectivity in interpretation of Pap smears and requirement for pathologists, TruScreen™ can be a used for cervical cancer screening especially in countries with a low socio-economic status. The combination of TruScreen™ and HPV screening was not able to demonstrate a significant rise of effectiveness in screening.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of TruScreen™ (an objective optoelectronic cervical screening device) in improving the sensitivity of cervical screening programs either alone or in combination with Papanicolaou (PAP) smear or human papilloma virus (HPV) DNA screening. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Our study was performed in 285 patients with abnormal Pap test results. TruScreen™ and HPV screening methods were performed in all participants. Consistency and differences between the tests were compared with cervical biopsy results. RESULTS: TruScreen™ was found to be an approach method in the determination of cervical pathologies (ROC curve area underlined=0.606) and with an 89.5% negative predictive value. HPV screening remains a counterpart to TruScreen™ with a 0.620 area underlined in the ROC curve and an 83% negative predictive value. CONCLUSION: As determined in our study, TruScreen™ with a sensitivity of 86.1% can be used as a screening test with instant and not professional dependent results for cervical cancer screening. Avoiding from subjectivity in interpretation of Pap smears and requirement for pathologists, TruScreen™ can be a used for cervical cancer screening especially in countries with a low socio-economic status. The combination of TruScreen™ and HPV screening was not able to demonstrate a significant rise of effectiveness in screening.
Authors: A Singer; M Coppleson; K Canfell; V Skladnev; G Mackellar; N Pisal; A Deery Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2003 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: D B Thomas; Q Qin; J Kuypers; N Kiviat; R L Ashley; A Koetsawang; R M Ray; S Koetsawang Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2001-04-15 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rajesh Dikshit; Sultan Eser; Colin Mathers; Marise Rebelo; Donald Maxwell Parkin; David Forman; Freddie Bray Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: J E Salazar-Campos; A González-Enciso; R Díaz-Molina; M E Lara-Hernández; J Coronel-Martínez; C Pérez-Plasencia; D Cantú de León Journal: J Cytol Date: 2018 Jul-Sep Impact factor: 1.000