Search

Background: Only a few small studies have compared the 2-step method (biopsy followed by treatment) with a see-and-treat (immediate treatment) approach in women both low-grade or high-grade referral cytology. The clinical practice variation in the Netherlands has not been reviewed before., Objectives: To determine overtreatment rates in the 2-step versus see-and-treat approach in women referred for colposcopy because of abnormal cytology results, and to evaluate clinical practice variation in the Netherlands., Materials and Methods: This was a population-based retrospective cohort study including 36,581 women with a histologic result of the cervix identified from the Dutch Pathology Registry (PALGA) between 2016 and 2017. Odds ratios for overtreatment, defined primarily as cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 or less, were determined for the 2-step and see-and-treat approach in relation to age, high-risk human papillomavirus status, and referral cytology., Results: Of the included women 10,713 women (29.3%) received the 2-step method; 6,851 women (18.7%) underwent see-and-treat; and 19,017 women (52.0%) received conservative management after colposcopy with histologic assessment with cytologic follow-up or another type of treatment. Despite the existence of a national guideline advising see-and-treat only in case of suspected high-grade disease in women who have completed their childbearing, there is a wide practice variation between the 2 strategies in the Netherlands, with 7.0-88.3% of the women receiving see-and-treat per laboratory. The median time between cytology and treatment was 1-2 months (range, 0-12 months) in women receiving see-and-treat and the 2-step method, respectively. A total of 4119 women (23.5%) were overtreated, with older women, high-risk human papillomavirus-negative women, and women with low-grade cytology results being more likely to be overtreated. Women with low-grade cytology results and see-and-treat were associated with a higher overtreatment rate than women receiving the 2-step method (65.0% [1414 of 2174] versus 32.1% [1161 of 3613], respectively; odds ratio, 3.34; 95% confidence interval, 2.92-3.82). However, in women with high-grade cytology results, see-and-treat was inversely associated with overtreatment (11.3% [529 of 4677] versus 14.3% [1015 of 7100], respectively; odds ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.58-0.81)., Conclusion: A see-and-treat approach is justified only in women with high-grade cytology results who have completed their childbearing. There is a wide practice variation between the 2 strategies in the Netherlands, and gynecologists should adhere to the guideline to prevent overtreatment., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We determined whether the participation rate for a brush-based cervicovaginal self-sampling device is noninferior to the participation rate for a lavage-based one for testing for hrHPV (high-risk human papillomavirus). Additionally, positivity rates for hrHPV, the detection rates for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grades 2 and 3 or worse (CIN2+/3+), and user comfort were compared. A total of 35,477 non-responders of the regular cervical screening program aged 33-63 years were invited to participate. Eligible women (n = 30,130) were randomly assigned to receive either a brush-based or a lavage-based device, and a questionnaire for reporting user convenience. Self-sampling responders testing hrHPV-positive were invited for a physician-taken sample for cytology; triage-positive women were referred for colposcopy. A total of 5,218 women participated in the brush-based sampling group (34.6%) and 4809 women in the lavage-based group (31.9%), i.e. an absolute difference of 2.7% (95%CI 1.8-4.2). The hrHPV-positivity rates in the two groups were identical (8.3%, relative risk (RR) 0.99, 95%CI 0.87-1.13). The detection of CIN2+ and CIN3+ in the brush group (2.0% for CIN2+; 1.3% for CIN3+) was similar to that in the lavage group (1.9% for CIN2+; 1.0% for CIN3+) with a cumulative RR of 1.01, 95%CI 0.83-1.24 for CIN2+ and 1.25, 95%CI 0.92-1.70 for CIN3+. The two self-sampling devices performed similarly in user comfort. In conclusion, offering a brush-based device to non-responders is noninferior to offering a lavage-based device in terms of participation. The two self-sampling methods are equally effective in detecting hrHPV, CIN2+/CIN3+ and are both well accepted., (© 2014 UICC.)

The aim of this study was to determine the frequency of abnormal cervical cytology in preoperative cervical cytology of patients diagnosed with uterine papillary serous carcinoma (UPSC) and endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (EEC). In addition, associations between abnormal cervical cytology and clinicopathologic factors were evaluated. In this multicentre study, EEC patients diagnosed at two hospitals from 1999 to 2009 and UPSC patients diagnosed at five hospitals from 1992 to 2009, were included. Revision of the histologic slides was performed systematically and independently by 3 gynecopathologists. Cervical cytology within six months before histopathologic diagnosis of endometrial carcinoma was available for 267 EEC and 80 UPSC patients. Cervical cytology with atypical, malignant, or normal endometrial cells in postmenopausal women was considered as abnormal cytology, specific for endometrial pathology. Abnormal cervical cytology was found in 87.5% of UPSC patients, compared with 37.8% in EEC patients. In UPSC, abnormal cytology was associated with extrauterine spread of disease (P=0.043). In EEC, abnormal cytology was associated with cervical involvement (P=0.034). In both EEC and UPSC patients, abnormal cervical cytology was not associated with survival. In conclusion, abnormal cervical cytology was more frequently found in UPSC patients. It was associated with extrauterine disease in UPSC patients, and with cervical involvement in EEC patients. More prospective research should be performed to assess the true clinical value of preoperative cervical cytology in endometrial cancer patients.

Objective and reproducible assessment of cancer biomarkers may be performed using rare event detection systems. Because many biomarkers are not true 'rare events', in this study a semi-rare event detection system was developed. The system is capable of assigning a discriminant score to detected positive cells, expressing the extent and intensity of the immunocytochemical staining. A gallery image is constructed showing the diagnostically most interesting cells as well as quantitative data expressing the biomarker staining pattern. To increase scanning speed, an adaptive scanning strategy is studied in which scanning is aborted when a sufficient number of positive cells has been identified. System performance was evaluated using liquid based cervical smears, stained with an antibody directed against p16(INK4a) tumor suppressor protein. Overexpression of p16(INK4a) in cervix is related to high-risk HPV infection, which is associated with carcinogenesis. Reproducibility of the system was tested on specimens containing limited positivity. Quantitative analysis was evaluated using 10 cases within normal limits and 10 high grade lesions. The system was highly reproducible in detecting positive cells and in calculating discriminant scores (average CV 0.7%). Quantitative features were significantly increased in high grade lesions (p<0.001). Adaptive scanning decreased scanning time with only minor impact on scanning results. The system is capable of automated, objective and reproducible assessment of biomarker expression and may be useful for a variety of applications.

Background: Chlamydia trachomatis is more prevalent in subfertile women than in the general population and is the leading cause of tubal factor subfertility. As C. trachomatis infections are sexually transmitted, it can be expected that infections with human papillomavirus (HPV) are also more prevalent in this group of women. HPV is a necessary cause for the development of cervical (pre-)malignancies. We therefore hypothesized that subfertile women are more likely to have HPV-induced cervical abnormalities compared to the general population., Methods: In this retrospective case-control study, all cervical smears of women visiting the fertility clinic for IVF (cases) and of women attending the population-based screening programme for cervical cancer (controls) were retrieved from an electronic database and assessed., Results: The cases (n = 669) showed significantly more abnormal cervical smears compared to the controls (77,055) (6.1 and 3.9%, respectively, P < 0.02)., Conclusions: The probability that subfertile women eligible for IVF are diagnosed with a high-grade cervical lesion is almost twice as high compared to women in the general population. We therefore suggest to take a cervical smear from all women referred for fertility problems.

The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence rate ratio of squamous lesions in women with recent smears without endocervical component (ECC-) versus women having a smear with ECC+ and to estimate the true prevalence of these lesions in women with ECC- smears by addition of short-term follow-up results of negative ECC- smears. Results of initial smears in a 3-year period, as well as follow-up results of negative ECC- smears in the same period were retrieved. Women were categorized into two groups: having ECC- and ECC+ smears. The data were analysed for three outcome parameters, ASCUS or higher (ASCUS+), LSIL or higher (LSIL+) and HSIL or higher (HSIL+). Squamous abnormalities occurred far less frequently in women with initial ECC- than with ECC+ smears. Prevalence rate ratio (PRR) was 0.27 for ASCUS+, 0.39 for LSIL+ and 0.36 for HSIL+. Addition of follow-up results of negative ECC- smears, as a correction for false-negative ECC- smears, results in PRRs which are still significantly lower than 1, and most marked in subset HSIL+ (PRR = 0.60). We conclude that the true prevalence of squamous lesions in women with recent ECC- smears is significantly lower as compared with ECC+ smears. These findings lent support to the decision to abolish the repeat of ECC- smears in the Dutch population screening programme.

Background: Acquisition of DNA ploidy histograms by image analysis may yield important information regarding the behavior of premalignant cervical lesions. Accurate selection of nuclei for DNA measurement is an important prerequisite for obtaining reliable data. Traditionally, manual selection of nuclei of diagnostic and reference cells is performed by an experienced cytotechnologist. In the present study, a method for the fully automated identification of nuclei of diploid epithelial reference cells in Feulgen- restained Papanicolaou (PAP) smears is described., Methods: The automated procedure consists of a decision tree implemented on the measurement device, containing nodes with feature threshold values and multivariate discriminant functions. Nodes were constructed to recognize debris and inflammatory cells, as well as diploid and nondiploid epithelial cells of the uterine cervix. Evaluation of the classifier was performed by comparing resulting diploid integrated optical densities with those from manually selected reference cells., Results and Conclusion: On average, automatically acquired values deviated 2.4% from manually acquired values, indicating that the method described in this paper may be useful in cytometric practice., (Copyright 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.)