Cargando…

Different cervical cancer screening approaches in a Chinese multicentre study

To evaluate alternative cervical cancer screening methods, digital colposcopy and collection of cervical exfoliated cells for liquid-based cytology (LBC) and hybrid capture 2 (HC2) testing were performed among 2562 women aged 15–59 years in three study sites in the People's Republic of China (r...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, N, Shi, J-F, Franceschi, S, Zhang, W-H, Dai, M, Liu, B, Zhang, Y-Z, Li, L-K, Wu, R-F, De Vuyst, H, Plummer, M, Qiao, Y-L, Clifford, G
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2658545/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19127262
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6604840
_version_ 1782165640719630336
author Li, N
Shi, J-F
Franceschi, S
Zhang, W-H
Dai, M
Liu, B
Zhang, Y-Z
Li, L-K
Wu, R-F
De Vuyst, H
Plummer, M
Qiao, Y-L
Clifford, G
author_facet Li, N
Shi, J-F
Franceschi, S
Zhang, W-H
Dai, M
Liu, B
Zhang, Y-Z
Li, L-K
Wu, R-F
De Vuyst, H
Plummer, M
Qiao, Y-L
Clifford, G
author_sort Li, N
collection PubMed
description To evaluate alternative cervical cancer screening methods, digital colposcopy and collection of cervical exfoliated cells for liquid-based cytology (LBC) and hybrid capture 2 (HC2) testing were performed among 2562 women aged 15–59 years in three study sites in the People's Republic of China (rural Shanxi province, Shenyang city in Liaoning province and Shenzhen city in Guangdong province). Visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) was also evaluated independently from colposcopy. A total of 74 cases of histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) were identified, and 16 CIN2+ cases were imputed among unbiopsied women to correct for verification bias. Corrected sensitivity for CIN2+ was 37% for VIA, 54% for colposcopy, 87% for LBC with a threshold of atypical cells of undetermined significance (LBC⩾ASCUS), 90% for HC2, 84% for LBC using HC2 to triage ASCUS and 96% for positivity to LBC⩾ASCUS or HC2. For VIA, sensitivity was much lower among women ⩾40 years (12%) than those aged ⩽39 years (50%). Specificity varied from 77% for positivity to LBC⩾ASCUS or HC2, up to 94% for LBC using HC2 to triage ASCUS. In conclusion, LBC, HC2 and their combinations performed well, whereas VIA missed a majority of CIN2+, particularly in older women. Digital colposcopy performed better than VIA, but still missed nearly half of CIN2+ in this study.
format Text
id pubmed-2658545
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher Nature Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-26585452010-02-10 Different cervical cancer screening approaches in a Chinese multicentre study Li, N Shi, J-F Franceschi, S Zhang, W-H Dai, M Liu, B Zhang, Y-Z Li, L-K Wu, R-F De Vuyst, H Plummer, M Qiao, Y-L Clifford, G Br J Cancer Epidemiology To evaluate alternative cervical cancer screening methods, digital colposcopy and collection of cervical exfoliated cells for liquid-based cytology (LBC) and hybrid capture 2 (HC2) testing were performed among 2562 women aged 15–59 years in three study sites in the People's Republic of China (rural Shanxi province, Shenyang city in Liaoning province and Shenzhen city in Guangdong province). Visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) was also evaluated independently from colposcopy. A total of 74 cases of histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) were identified, and 16 CIN2+ cases were imputed among unbiopsied women to correct for verification bias. Corrected sensitivity for CIN2+ was 37% for VIA, 54% for colposcopy, 87% for LBC with a threshold of atypical cells of undetermined significance (LBC⩾ASCUS), 90% for HC2, 84% for LBC using HC2 to triage ASCUS and 96% for positivity to LBC⩾ASCUS or HC2. For VIA, sensitivity was much lower among women ⩾40 years (12%) than those aged ⩽39 years (50%). Specificity varied from 77% for positivity to LBC⩾ASCUS or HC2, up to 94% for LBC using HC2 to triage ASCUS. In conclusion, LBC, HC2 and their combinations performed well, whereas VIA missed a majority of CIN2+, particularly in older women. Digital colposcopy performed better than VIA, but still missed nearly half of CIN2+ in this study. Nature Publishing Group 2009-02-10 2009-01-06 /pmc/articles/PMC2658545/ /pubmed/19127262 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6604840 Text en Copyright © 2009 Cancer Research UK https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material.If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Epidemiology
Li, N
Shi, J-F
Franceschi, S
Zhang, W-H
Dai, M
Liu, B
Zhang, Y-Z
Li, L-K
Wu, R-F
De Vuyst, H
Plummer, M
Qiao, Y-L
Clifford, G
Different cervical cancer screening approaches in a Chinese multicentre study
title Different cervical cancer screening approaches in a Chinese multicentre study
title_full Different cervical cancer screening approaches in a Chinese multicentre study
title_fullStr Different cervical cancer screening approaches in a Chinese multicentre study
title_full_unstemmed Different cervical cancer screening approaches in a Chinese multicentre study
title_short Different cervical cancer screening approaches in a Chinese multicentre study
title_sort different cervical cancer screening approaches in a chinese multicentre study
topic Epidemiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2658545/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19127262
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6604840
work_keys_str_mv AT lin differentcervicalcancerscreeningapproachesinachinesemulticentrestudy
AT shijf differentcervicalcancerscreeningapproachesinachinesemulticentrestudy
AT franceschis differentcervicalcancerscreeningapproachesinachinesemulticentrestudy
AT zhangwh differentcervicalcancerscreeningapproachesinachinesemulticentrestudy
AT daim differentcervicalcancerscreeningapproachesinachinesemulticentrestudy
AT liub differentcervicalcancerscreeningapproachesinachinesemulticentrestudy
AT zhangyz differentcervicalcancerscreeningapproachesinachinesemulticentrestudy
AT lilk differentcervicalcancerscreeningapproachesinachinesemulticentrestudy
AT wurf differentcervicalcancerscreeningapproachesinachinesemulticentrestudy
AT devuysth differentcervicalcancerscreeningapproachesinachinesemulticentrestudy
AT plummerm differentcervicalcancerscreeningapproachesinachinesemulticentrestudy
AT qiaoyl differentcervicalcancerscreeningapproachesinachinesemulticentrestudy
AT cliffordg differentcervicalcancerscreeningapproachesinachinesemulticentrestudy