Guillaud Martial, Benedet John L, Cantor Scott B, Staerkel Gregg, Follen Michele, MacAulay Calum
Department of Cancer Imaging, British Columbia Cancer Research Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia.
Cancer. 2006 Jul 15;107(2):309-18. doi: 10.1002/cncr.21993.
Because 80% of cervical cancers arise in low-resource settings, many inexpensive strategies are being tested. In that spirit, the authors are testing large-scale genomic or DNA ploidy measurements as an inexpensive and semiautomated strategy.
Patients entered either a screening or diagnostic study of several optical technologies: quantitative cytology, quantitative histopathology, and fluorescence and reflectance spectroscopy using a point probe, a multispectral digital colposcope, or a combination of the two. We calculated sensitivities, specificities, positive and negative predictive values, and their confidence interval testing conventional cytology, Hybrid Capture (HC) II testing, and DNA ploidy measured on the Feulgen-stained quantitative Pap smear.
The current investigation reports on 1555 patients for whom colposcopically directed biopsies were read 3 times by study pathologists. The final histopathologic diagnosis was high grade (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia [CIN] 2, CIN 3, carcinoma in situ [CIS], and cancer) in 16% of patients. Using high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (SILs) histopathology as the threshold and gold standard, the sensitivity and specificity, respectively, were: 0.47 and 0.96 for conventional cytology, 0.91 and 0.80 for HC II, and 0.59 and 0.93 for DNA ploidy. The positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) for conventional cytology were 0.70 and 0.90, 0.46 and 0.98 for HC II, and 0.63 and 0.92 for DNA ploidy.
DNA ploidy shows comparable sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV values to conventional cytology and HC II. Unlike conventional cytology, DNA ploidy is semiautomated and can be performed in less than 8 hours. Cost effectiveness studies are under way, but in the authors' laboratory DNA ploidy is inexpensive.
由于80%的宫颈癌发生在资源匮乏地区,许多低成本策略正在接受测试。本着这种精神,作者正在测试大规模基因组或DNA倍性测量作为一种低成本且半自动化的策略。
患者进入了几项光学技术的筛查或诊断研究:定量细胞学、定量组织病理学以及使用点探针、多光谱数字阴道镜或两者结合的荧光和反射光谱学。我们计算了敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值及其置信区间,以测试传统细胞学、杂交捕获(HC)II检测以及在福尔根染色的定量巴氏涂片上测量的DNA倍性。
本研究报告了1555例患者,研究病理学家对其阴道镜引导下的活检进行了3次阅片。最终组织病理学诊断为高级别(宫颈上皮内瘤变[CIN]2、CIN3、原位癌[CIS]和癌)的患者占16%。以高级别鳞状上皮内病变(SILs)组织病理学作为阈值和金标准,传统细胞学的敏感性和特异性分别为:0.47和0.96,HC II为0.91和0.80,DNA倍性为0.59和0.93。传统细胞学的阳性和阴性预测值(PPV、NPV)分别为0.70和0.90,HC II为0.46和0.98,DNA倍性为0.63和0.92。
DNA倍性显示出与传统细胞学和HC II相当的敏感性、特异性、PPV和NPV值。与传统细胞学不同,DNA倍性是半自动化的,可在不到8小时内完成。成本效益研究正在进行,但在作者的实验室中,DNA倍性成本较低。