Zhou Haijun, Mody Roxanne R, Luna Eric, Armylagos Donna, Xu Jiaqiong, Schwartz Mary R, Mody Dina R, Ge Yimin
Department of Pathology and Genomic Medicine, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, St Joseph's Hospital, Denver, Colorado.
Cancer Cytopathol. 2016 May;124(5):317-23. doi: 10.1002/cncy.21687. Epub 2016 Jan 15.
In recent years, high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing for triaging atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance and cotesting with cytology have been implemented in clinical practice. However, clinical data for primary screening with human papillomavirus (HPV) testing alone are currently lacking.
This study retrospectively reviewed the correlation of cytology, histology, and hrHPV testing through the use of a cytology laboratory quality assurance database with 130,648 Papanicolaou (Pap) tests interpreted at Houston BioReference Laboratories and Houston Methodist Hospital between March 1, 2013 and June 30, 2014. Among the 47,499 patients who had undergone cytology-HPV cotesting, 1654 underwent follow-up biopsies.
The sensitivities of the hrHPV and Pap tests were 80.8% and 81.2%, respectively, for detecting any type of cervicovaginal dysplasia and 91.3% and 90.9%, respectively, for high-grade cervicovaginal lesions. For biopsy-confirmed high-grade cervicovaginal lesions (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+, adenocarcinoma in situ, or carcinoma; n = 253), the false-negative rates for hrHPV and Pap tests were 8.7% and 9.1%, respectively. The false-negative rate for cytology-hrHPV cotesting was only 1.2%.
In clinical practice, the hrHPV test alone is not significantly superior to the Pap test as a primary screening method for cervicovaginal lesions. The false-negative rate of the hrHPV test in detecting biopsy-confirmed high-grade cervicovaginal lesions is comparable to the rate of the Pap test. Women with cytology and hrHPV cotesting, however, have a significantly lower false-negative rate than those undergoing either test alone. Currently, cytology-HPV cotesting remains the best strategy for detecting high-grade cervicovaginal lesions. Cancer Cytopathol 2016;124:317-23. © 2016 American Cancer Society.
近年来,高危型人乳头瘤病毒(hrHPV)检测用于对意义不明确的非典型鳞状细胞进行分流以及与细胞学联合检测已应用于临床实践。然而,目前缺乏仅用人乳头瘤病毒(HPV)检测进行初筛的临床数据。
本研究通过使用细胞学实验室质量保证数据库,回顾性分析了2013年3月1日至2014年6月30日期间在休斯顿生物参考实验室和休斯顿卫理公会医院解读的130,648份巴氏试验中细胞学、组织学和hrHPV检测之间的相关性。在47,499例行细胞学-HPV联合检测的患者中,1654例接受了后续活检。
hrHPV检测和巴氏试验检测任何类型宫颈阴道发育异常的敏感度分别为80.8%和81.2%,检测高级别宫颈阴道病变的敏感度分别为91.3%和90.9%。对于活检确诊的高级别宫颈阴道病变(宫颈上皮内瘤变2级及以上、原位腺癌或癌;n = 253),hrHPV检测和巴氏试验的假阴性率分别为8.7%和9.1%。细胞学-hrHPV联合检测的假阴性率仅为1.2%。
在临床实践中,仅hrHPV检测作为宫颈阴道病变的初筛方法并不显著优于巴氏试验。hrHPV检测在检测活检确诊的高级别宫颈阴道病变时的假阴性率与巴氏试验相当。然而,同时进行细胞学和hrHPV联合检测的女性的假阴性率明显低于单独进行任何一种检测的女性。目前,细胞学-HPV联合检测仍然是检测高级别宫颈阴道病变的最佳策略。《癌症细胞病理学》2016年;124:317 - 23。©2016美国癌症协会