Sharon A Greene1,2, Hugo De Vuyst3, Grace C John-Stewart1,2,4,5, Barbra A Richardson1,6,7, Christine J McGrath1, Kara G Marson1, T Tony Trinh1, Nelly Yatich1, Catherine Kiptinness1, Anthony Cagle1, Evans Nyongesa-Malava1, Samah R Sakr8, Nelly R Mugo1,9, Michael H Chung1,2,4. 1. Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle. 2. Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle. 3. Prevention and Implementation Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer (WHO-IARC), Lyon, France. 4. Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle. 5. Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle. 6. Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle. 7. Vaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington. 8. Coptic Hospital, Nairobi, Kenya. 9. Kenya Medical Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya.
Abstract
Importance: The World Health Organization recommends cryotherapy or loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) for histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or higher regardless of HIV status. Cryotherapy is more feasible in resource-limited settings but may be less effective for women living with HIV. Objective: To evaluate whether cryotherapy or LEEP is a more effective treatment for high-grade cervical lesions among women with HIV. Design, Setting, and Participants: Single-center randomized trial conducted among women with HIV and CIN grade 2 or 3. From June 2011 to September 2016, women with HIV in Kenya underwent cervical screening with Papanicolaou testing and confirmatory biopsy. The final date on which a study procedure was administered was September 7, 2016. Interventions: Women with HIV infection and CIN grade 2 or 3 were randomized 1:1 to receive cryotherapy (n = 200) or LEEP (n = 200) and were followed up every 6 months for 24 months with a Papanicolaou test and confirmatory biopsy. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was disease recurrence, defined as CIN grade 2 or higher on cervical biopsy, during the 24-month follow-up period. Results: Among 400 women who were randomized (median age, 37.4 [interquartile range, 31.9-43.8] years), 339 (85%) completed the trial. Over 2 years, 60 women (30%) randomized tocryotherapy had recurrent CIN grade 2 or higher vs 37 (19%) in the LEEP group (relative risk, 1.71 [95% CI, 1.12-2.65]; risk difference, 7.9% [95% CI, 1.9%-14.0%]; P = .01). Adverse events occurred in 40 women (45 events, including change in pathology and death due to other causes) in the cryotherapy group and in 30 women (38 events, including change in pathology and unrelated gynecological complications) in the LEEP group. Conclusions and Relevance: In this single-center study of women with HIV infection and CIN grade 2 or 3, treatment with LEEP compared with cryotherapy resulted in a significantly lower rate of cervical neoplasia recurrence over 24 months. Cost-effectiveness analysis is necessary to determine whether the additional benefit of LEEP represents an efficient use of the additional resources that would be required. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01298596.
RCT Entities:
Importance: The World Health Organization recommends cryotherapy or loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) for histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or higher regardless of HIV status. Cryotherapy is more feasible in resource-limited settings but may be less effective for women living with HIV. Objective: To evaluate whether cryotherapy or LEEP is a more effective treatment for high-grade cervical lesions among women with HIV. Design, Setting, and Participants: Single-center randomized trial conducted among women with HIV and CIN grade 2 or 3. From June 2011 to September 2016, women with HIV in Kenya underwent cervical screening with Papanicolaou testing and confirmatory biopsy. The final date on which a study procedure was administered was September 7, 2016. Interventions: Women with HIV infection and CIN grade 2 or 3 were randomized 1:1 to receive cryotherapy (n = 200) or LEEP (n = 200) and were followed up every 6 months for 24 months with a Papanicolaou test and confirmatory biopsy. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was disease recurrence, defined as CIN grade 2 or higher on cervical biopsy, during the 24-month follow-up period. Results: Among 400 women who were randomized (median age, 37.4 [interquartile range, 31.9-43.8] years), 339 (85%) completed the trial. Over 2 years, 60 women (30%) randomized to cryotherapy had recurrent CIN grade 2 or higher vs 37 (19%) in the LEEP group (relative risk, 1.71 [95% CI, 1.12-2.65]; risk difference, 7.9% [95% CI, 1.9%-14.0%]; P = .01). Adverse events occurred in 40 women (45 events, including change in pathology and death due to other causes) in the cryotherapy group and in 30 women (38 events, including change in pathology and unrelated gynecological complications) in the LEEP group. Conclusions and Relevance: In this single-center study of women with HIV infection and CIN grade 2 or 3, treatment with LEEP compared with cryotherapy resulted in a significantly lower rate of cervical neoplasia recurrence over 24 months. Cost-effectiveness analysis is necessary to determine whether the additional benefit of LEEP represents an efficient use of the additional resources that would be required. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01298596.
Authors: Laura L Reimers; Susan Sotardi; David Daniel; Lydia G Chiu; Anne Van Arsdale; Daryl L Wieland; Jason M Leider; Xiaonan Xue; Howard D Strickler; David J Garry; Gary L Goldberg; Mark H Einstein Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Lynette Denny; Louise Kuhn; Michelle De Souza; Amy E Pollack; William Dupree; Thomas C Wright Journal: JAMA Date: 2005-11-02 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Akiko Kobayashi; Ruth M Greenblatt; Kathryn Anastos; Howard Minkoff; Leslie S Massad; Mary Young; Alexandra M Levine; Teresa M Darragh; Vivian Weinberg; Karen K Smith-McCune Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2004-09-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: J Jordan; P Martin-Hirsch; M Arbyn; U Schenck; J-J Baldauf; D Da Silva; A Anttila; P Nieminen; W Prendiville Journal: Cytopathology Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 2.073
Authors: Howard Minkoff; Ye Zhong; Robert D Burk; Joel M Palefsky; Xiaonan Xue; D Heather Watts; Alexandra M Levine; Rodney L Wright; Christine Colie; Gypsyamber D'Souza; L Stewart Massad; Howard D Strickler Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Rose C Slavkovsky; Pooja Bansil; Manuel A Sandoval; Jacqueline Figueroa; Doris M Rodriguez; Jose Saul Lobo; Jose A Jeronimo; Silvia de Sanjosé Journal: JCO Glob Oncol Date: 2020-10
Authors: Michelle B Shin; Gui Liu; Nelly Mugo; Patricia J Garcia; Darcy W Rao; Cara J Bayer; Linda O Eckert; Leeya F Pinder; Judith N Wasserheit; Ruanne V Barnabas Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2021-07-01
Authors: Pablo Noel Perez-Guzman; Michael Hoonbae Chung; Hugo De Vuyst; Shona Dalal; Kennedy K Mutai; Karanja Muthoni; Bartilol Kigen; Nduku Kilonzo; Timothy B Hallett; Mikaela Smit Journal: BMJ Glob Health Date: 2020-03-29