Ronco Guglielmo, Cuzick Jack, Pierotti Paola, Cariaggi Maria Paola, Dalla Palma Paolo, Naldoni Carlo, Ghiringhello Bruno, Giorgi-Rossi Paolo, Minucci Daria, Parisio Franca, Pojer Ada, Schiboni Maria Luisa, Sintoni Catia, Zorzi Manuel, Segnan Nereo, Confortini Massimo
Unit of Cancer Epidemiology, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Via S Francesco da Paola 31 10123 Turin, Italy.
BMJ. 2007 Jul 7;335(7609):28. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39196.740995.BE. Epub 2007 May 21.
To compare the accuracy of conventional cytology with liquid based cytology for primary screening of cervical cancer.
Randomised controlled trial.
Nine screening programmes in Italy.
Women aged 25-60 attending for a new screening round: 22 466 were assigned to the conventional arm and 22 708 were assigned to the experimental arm.
Conventional cytology compared with liquid based cytology and testing for human papillomavirus.
Relative sensitivity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or more at blindly reviewed histology, with atypical cells of undetermined significance or more severe cytology considered a positive result.
In an intention to screen analysis liquid based cytology showed no significant increase in sensitivity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or more (relative sensitivity 1.17, 95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.56) whereas the positive predictive value was reduced (relative positive predictive value v conventional cytology 0.58, 0.44 to 0.77). Liquid based cytology detected more lesions of grade 1 or more (relative sensitivity 1.68, 1.40 to 2.02), with a larger increase among women aged 25-34 (P for heterogeneity 0.0006), but did not detect more lesions of grade 3 or more (relative sensitivity 0.84, 0.56 to 1.25). Results were similar when only low grade intraepithelial lesions or more severe cytology were considered a positive result. No evidence was found of heterogeneity between centres or of improvement with increasing time from start of the study. The relative frequency of women with at least one unsatisfactory result was lower with liquid based cytology (0.62, 0.56 to 0.69).
Liquid based cytology showed no statistically significant difference in sensitivity to conventional cytology for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or more. More positive results were found, however, leading to a lower positive predictive value. A large reduction in unsatisfactory smears was evident.
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN81678807 [controlled-trials.com].
比较传统细胞学检查与液基细胞学检查在宫颈癌初筛中的准确性。
随机对照试验。
意大利的九个筛查项目。
年龄在25 - 60岁参加新一轮筛查的女性:22466人被分配到传统检查组,22708人被分配到试验组。
将传统细胞学检查与液基细胞学检查以及人乳头瘤病毒检测进行比较。
在盲法组织学检查中,对2级或更高级别宫颈上皮内瘤变的相对敏感性,具有意义不明确的非典型细胞或更严重的细胞学结果被视为阳性结果。
在意向性筛查分析中,液基细胞学检查对2级或更高级别宫颈上皮内瘤变的敏感性没有显著提高(相对敏感性1.17,95%置信区间0.87至1.56),而阳性预测值降低(与传统细胞学检查相比,相对阳性预测值0.58,0.44至0.77)。液基细胞学检查检测出更多1级或更高等级的病变(相对敏感性1.68,1.40至2.02),在25 - 34岁女性中增加幅度更大(异质性P值0.0006),但未检测出更多3级或更高等级的病变(相对敏感性0.84,0.56至1.25)。当仅将低级别上皮内病变或更严重的细胞学结果视为阳性结果时,结果相似。未发现各中心之间存在异质性或随着研究开始时间的增加有改善的证据。液基细胞学检查中至少有一次不满意结果的女性相对频率较低(0.62,0.56至0.69)。
在检测2级或更高级别宫颈上皮内瘤变方面,液基细胞学检查与传统细胞学检查在敏感性上无统计学显著差异。然而,发现更多阳性结果,导致阳性预测值降低。不满意涂片明显大幅减少。
当前对照试验ISRCTN81678807 [controlled-trials.com] 。