Screening for Cervical Cancer in High-Risk Populations: DNA Pap Test or Hybrid Capture II Test Alone?
- 1 January 2006
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in International Journal of Gynecological Pathology
- Vol. 25 (1) , 38-41
- https://doi.org/10.1097/01.pgp.0000177122.71309.72
Abstract
This study was designed to evaluate whether Hybrid Capture II (HC2) test alone refer women to colposcopy as appropriately as DNA Papanicolaou (Pap) test, in the context of a high-risk group of women using the recently validated DNACitoliq (R) LBC system. Women with suspected cervical disease were included in this cross-sectional study at a tertiary center in São Paulo, Brazil, for further workup. All women had cervical material collected for LBC and HC2 for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)-DNA test. Irrespective of cytology and HC2 results, colposcopy, and cervical biopsy when applicable, was systematically performed. All tests were performed blindly. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and overall accuracy of both methods were computed in relation to histology. A total of 1,080 women were included: 36.4% (393/1080) had ACUS+, 10.2% (110/1080) were high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) or cancer. Mean age was 33.5 years. All women underwent colposcopy, and cervical biopsies were performed in 38.4% (415/1080): 33% (137/415) of the biopsies were negative, 14.4% (155/415) were low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL), 10.7% (116/415) were HSIL, and 0.6% (7/415) were cancer. HC2 sensitivity to diagnose biopsy-proven HSIL was 100%. Because all HSIL cases had a positive HC2 test, sensitivity could not be improved by adding LBC. Specificity and positive and negative predictive values of DNA Pap were not significantly different from HC2 test alone when considering LSIL+ histology as gold standard and HSIL+ histology. As a screening strategy for women with high-risk for cervical cancer, DNA Pap test does not seem to add substantially to HC2 alone in terms of appropriately referring to colposcopy.Adolfo Lutz Inst, Div Pathol, BR-01246902 São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, BrazilPerola Byignton Hosp, São Paulo, BrazilUniv Minho, Sch Hlth Sci, Braga, PortugalDigene Brasil, São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, BrazilWeb of SciencKeywords
This publication has 11 references indexed in Scilit:
- Comparison of HPV test versus conventional and automation‐assisted Pap screening as potential screening tools for preventing cervical cancerBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 2004
- An evaluation of liquid-based cytology and human papillomavirus testing within the UK cervical cancer screening programmeBritish Journal of Cancer, 2004
- Negative human papillomavirus testing in normal smears selects a population at low risk for developing high-grade cervical lesionsBritish Journal of Cancer, 2004
- Virologic Versus Cytologic Triage of Women With Equivocal Pap Smears: A Meta-analysis of the Accuracy To Detect High-Grade Intraepithelial NeoplasiaJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2004
- Hybrid Capture II and Polymerase Chain Reaction for Identifying HPV Infections in Samples Collected in a New Collection MediumActa Cytologica, 2004
- Chapter 13: Primary Screening of Cervical Cancer With Human Papillomavirus TestsJNCI Monographs, 2003
- Chapter 14: Role of Triage Testing in Cervical Cancer ScreeningJNCI Monographs, 2003
- The detection of HPV DNA improves the recognition of cervical intraepithelial lesionsArchiv für Gynäkologie, 2003
- The 2001 Bethesda SystemTerminology for Reporting Results of Cervical CytologyJAMA, 2002
- Should cervical cytologic testing be augmented by cervicography or human papillomavirus deoxyribonucleic acid detection?American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1991