Triage Value of Cervical Exfoliated Cell DNA Ploidy Analysis in Cervical High-Risk Human Papillomavirus-Positive Women.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-16 DOI:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000757
Boliang Chu, Jie Dong, Yingying Chen, Xiaofang Ru, Wenwen Zhang, Yun Chen, Xiaoxing Zhang, Xiaodong Cheng
{"title":"Triage Value of Cervical Exfoliated Cell DNA Ploidy Analysis in Cervical High-Risk Human Papillomavirus-Positive Women.","authors":"Boliang Chu, Jie Dong, Yingying Chen, Xiaofang Ru, Wenwen Zhang, Yun Chen, Xiaoxing Zhang, Xiaodong Cheng","doi":"10.1097/LGT.0000000000000757","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to investigate the triage value obtained in DNA ploidy analysis of cervical exfoliated cells in women with high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV)-positive status in the primary screening of cervical cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The authors selected 3,000 HR-HPV-positive women for cervical exfoliated cell sampling and conducted DNA ploidy analysis, liquid-based cytology (LBC), colposcopy, and cervical biopsy. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL)-positive detection between DNA ploidy analysis and LBC were compared according to histopathology diagnosis as the golden criteria, and the efficacy of predicting HSIL-positive immediate risk was evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 2,892 HR-HPV-positive women were enrolled in the investigation. For HSIL+ women, the DNA ploidy group showed a significantly higher sensitivity (CIN2+: 79.21% vs 65.35%, p = .022; CIN3+: 81.48% vs 70.37%, p = .013), lower specificity (CIN2+: 85.00% vs 96.59%, p < .001; CIN3+: 84.14% vs 93.41%, p < .001), and lower PPV (CIN2+: 16.23% vs 29.33%, p = .001; CIN3+: 8.92% vs 16.89%, p = .002) compared with the LBC group, whereas the NPV showed no significant difference. Compared with LBC alone in diagnosing HSIL, DNA ploidy combined with LBC showed higher specificity (CIN2+: 99.21% vs 96.59%, p = .003; CIN3+: 96.48% vs 93.41%, p < .001) and higher PPV (CIN2+: 41.35% vs 29.33%, p = .022; CIN3+: 24.81% vs 16.89%, p = .028), whereas no significant difference was observed in the sensitivity (CIN2+: 54.46% vs 65.35%, p = .063; CIN3+: 61.11% vs 70.37%, p = .221) and NPV ( p > .05). Among the HR-HPV-positive women positive for DNA ploidy, the imminent risk of CIN2+ and CIN3+ were 15.62% and 8.92%, respectively, above the threshold for the colposcopy positive rate. Among the positive cases both for DNA ploidy and the LBC result of negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy, the immediate risk of CIN3+ was 3.31%, below the threshold for colposcopy positive rate. Besides, for women with LBC result of ASC-US and above, the immediate risk of CIN3+ was greater than 4%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The DNA ploidy analysis can be used as an effective triage method for HR-HPV-positive women during the primary screening of cervical cancer, although it can provide higher specificity when combined with LBC and reduce the referral rate for colposcopy.</p>","PeriodicalId":50160,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease","volume":" ","pages":"331-336"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/66/77/jlgtd-27-331.PMC10545054.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/LGT.0000000000000757","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the triage value obtained in DNA ploidy analysis of cervical exfoliated cells in women with high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV)-positive status in the primary screening of cervical cancer.

Methods: The authors selected 3,000 HR-HPV-positive women for cervical exfoliated cell sampling and conducted DNA ploidy analysis, liquid-based cytology (LBC), colposcopy, and cervical biopsy. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL)-positive detection between DNA ploidy analysis and LBC were compared according to histopathology diagnosis as the golden criteria, and the efficacy of predicting HSIL-positive immediate risk was evaluated.

Results: A total of 2,892 HR-HPV-positive women were enrolled in the investigation. For HSIL+ women, the DNA ploidy group showed a significantly higher sensitivity (CIN2+: 79.21% vs 65.35%, p = .022; CIN3+: 81.48% vs 70.37%, p = .013), lower specificity (CIN2+: 85.00% vs 96.59%, p < .001; CIN3+: 84.14% vs 93.41%, p < .001), and lower PPV (CIN2+: 16.23% vs 29.33%, p = .001; CIN3+: 8.92% vs 16.89%, p = .002) compared with the LBC group, whereas the NPV showed no significant difference. Compared with LBC alone in diagnosing HSIL, DNA ploidy combined with LBC showed higher specificity (CIN2+: 99.21% vs 96.59%, p = .003; CIN3+: 96.48% vs 93.41%, p < .001) and higher PPV (CIN2+: 41.35% vs 29.33%, p = .022; CIN3+: 24.81% vs 16.89%, p = .028), whereas no significant difference was observed in the sensitivity (CIN2+: 54.46% vs 65.35%, p = .063; CIN3+: 61.11% vs 70.37%, p = .221) and NPV ( p > .05). Among the HR-HPV-positive women positive for DNA ploidy, the imminent risk of CIN2+ and CIN3+ were 15.62% and 8.92%, respectively, above the threshold for the colposcopy positive rate. Among the positive cases both for DNA ploidy and the LBC result of negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy, the immediate risk of CIN3+ was 3.31%, below the threshold for colposcopy positive rate. Besides, for women with LBC result of ASC-US and above, the immediate risk of CIN3+ was greater than 4%.

Conclusions: The DNA ploidy analysis can be used as an effective triage method for HR-HPV-positive women during the primary screening of cervical cancer, although it can provide higher specificity when combined with LBC and reduce the referral rate for colposcopy.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
宫颈脱落细胞DNA倍体分析在宫颈高危人乳头瘤病毒阳性妇女中的分型价值。
目的:探讨高危型人乳头瘤病毒(HR-HPV)阳性妇女宫颈脱落细胞DNA倍性分析在癌症初筛中的分型价值。方法:作者选择3000名HR HPV阳性女性进行宫颈脱落细胞取样,并进行DNA倍体分析、液基细胞学(LBC)、阴道镜检查和宫颈活检。以组织病理学诊断为金标准,比较DNA倍性分析和LBC检测高级别鳞状上皮内病变(HSIL)阳性的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV),并评价预测HSIL阳性即时风险的有效性。结果:共有2892名HR HPV阳性女性参与了调查。对于HSIL+女性,与LBC组相比,DNA倍性组显示出显著更高的敏感性(CIN2+:79.21%vs 65.35%,p=0.022;CIN3+:81.48%vs 70.37%,p=0.013)、更低的特异性(CIN2+:85.00%vs 96.59%,p<.001;CIN3+:84.14%vs 93.41%,p<0.001)和更低的PPV(CIN2+16.23%vs 29.33%,p=.001;CIR3+:8.92%vs 16.89%,p=.002),而NPV无显著差异。与LBC单独诊断HSIL相比,DNA倍体联合LBC显示出更高的特异性(CIN2+:99.21%vs 96.59%,p=0.003;CIN3+:96.48%vs 93.41%,p<0.01)和更高的PPV(CIN2+:41.35%vs 29.33%,p=0.022;CIN3+:24.81%vs 16.89%,p=0.028),而敏感性(CIN2+:54.46%vs 65.35%,p=.063;CIN3+:61.11%vs 70.37%,p=.221)和NPV(p>0.05)无显著差异。在DNA倍体阳性的HR HPV阳性女性中,CIN2+和CIN3+的迫在眉睫的风险分别为15.62%和8.92%,高于阴道镜阳性率的阈值。在DNA倍性和上皮内病变或恶性肿瘤LBC结果均为阴性的阳性病例中,CIN3+的直接风险为3.31%,低于阴道镜阳性率的阈值。此外,对于ASC-US及以上LBC结果的女性,CIN3+的直接风险大于4%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease
Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
8.10%
发文量
158
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease is the source for the latest science about benign and malignant conditions of the cervix, vagina, vulva, and anus. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed original research original research that addresses prevalence, causes, mechanisms, diagnosis, course, treatment, and prevention of lower genital tract disease. We publish clinical guidelines, position papers, cost-effectiveness analyses, narrative reviews, and systematic reviews, including meta-analyses. We also publish papers about research and reporting methods, opinions about controversial medical issues. Of particular note, we encourage material in any of the above mentioned categories that is related to improving patient care, avoiding medical errors, and comparative effectiveness research. We encourage publication of evidence-based guidelines, diagnostic and therapeutic algorithms, and decision aids. Original research and reviews may be sub-classified according to topic: cervix and HPV, vulva and vagina, perianal and anal, basic science, and education and learning. The scope and readership of the journal extend to several disciplines: gynecology, internal medicine, family practice, dermatology, physical therapy, pathology, sociology, psychology, anthropology, sex therapy, and pharmacology. The Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease highlights needs for future research, and enhances health care. The Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease is the official journal of the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, the International Society for the Study of Vulvovaginal Disease, and the International Federation of Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy, and sponsored by the Australian Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology and the Society of Canadian Colposcopists.
期刊最新文献
Tiktok as a Source of Education and Misinformation in Lichen Sclerosus. Sexual Distress and Quality of Life in Women With Genital Erosive Lichen Planus-A Cross-sectional Study. Validation of the 2019 American Society of Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology Online Cervical Cancer Screening Program via 9 Large-Cohort Data of Chinese Women. The Distribution of Cervical Transformation Zone and Its Impact on Colposcopic Diagnosis: A Multicenter Study in China. The Barriers and Perceived Benefits to Vulvar Self-examination in the Management of Vulvar Lichen Sclerosus.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1