Cargando…

A Randomized Trial Comparing the Diagnostic Accuracy of Visual Inspection with Acetic Acid to Visual Inspection with Lugol’s Iodine for Cervical Cancer Screening in HIV-Infected Women

Visual inspection with Acetic Acid (VIA) and Visual Inspection with Lugol’s Iodine (VILI) are increasingly recommended in various cervical cancer screening protocols in low-resource settings. Although VIA is more widely used, VILI has been advocated as an easier and more specific screening test. VIL...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Huchko, Megan J., Sneden, Jennifer, Zakaras, Jennifer M., Smith-McCune, Karen, Sawaya, George, Maloba, May, Bukusi, Elizabeth Ann, Cohen, Craig R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4388564/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25849627
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118568
_version_ 1782365406170710016
author Huchko, Megan J.
Sneden, Jennifer
Zakaras, Jennifer M.
Smith-McCune, Karen
Sawaya, George
Maloba, May
Bukusi, Elizabeth Ann
Cohen, Craig R.
author_facet Huchko, Megan J.
Sneden, Jennifer
Zakaras, Jennifer M.
Smith-McCune, Karen
Sawaya, George
Maloba, May
Bukusi, Elizabeth Ann
Cohen, Craig R.
author_sort Huchko, Megan J.
collection PubMed
description Visual inspection with Acetic Acid (VIA) and Visual Inspection with Lugol’s Iodine (VILI) are increasingly recommended in various cervical cancer screening protocols in low-resource settings. Although VIA is more widely used, VILI has been advocated as an easier and more specific screening test. VILI has not been well-validated as a stand-alone screening test, compared to VIA or validated for use in HIV-infected women. We carried out a randomized clinical trial to compare the diagnostic accuracy of VIA and VILI among HIV-infected women. Women attending the Family AIDS Care and Education Services (FACES) clinic in western Kenya were enrolled and randomized to undergo either VIA or VILI with colposcopy. Lesions suspicious for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or greater (CIN2+) were biopsied. Between October 2011 and June 2012, 654 were randomized to undergo VIA or VILI. The test positivity rates were 26.2% for VIA and 30.6% for VILI (p = 0.22). The rate of detection of CIN2+ was 7.7% in the VIA arm and 11.5% in the VILI arm (p = 0.10). There was no significant difference in the diagnostic performance of VIA and VILI for the detection of CIN2+. Sensitivity and specificity were 84.0% and 78.6%, respectively, for VIA and 84.2% and 76.4% for VILI. The positive and negative predictive values were 24.7% and 98.3% for VIA, and 31.7% and 97.4% for VILI. Among women with CD4+ count < 350, VILI had a significantly decreased specificity (66.2%) compared to VIA in the same group (83.9%, p = 0.02) and compared to VILI performed among women with CD4+ count ≥ 350 (79.7%, p = 0.02). VIA and VILI had similar diagnostic accuracy and rates of CIN2+ detection among HIV-infected women. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02237326
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4388564
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43885642015-04-21 A Randomized Trial Comparing the Diagnostic Accuracy of Visual Inspection with Acetic Acid to Visual Inspection with Lugol’s Iodine for Cervical Cancer Screening in HIV-Infected Women Huchko, Megan J. Sneden, Jennifer Zakaras, Jennifer M. Smith-McCune, Karen Sawaya, George Maloba, May Bukusi, Elizabeth Ann Cohen, Craig R. PLoS One Research Article Visual inspection with Acetic Acid (VIA) and Visual Inspection with Lugol’s Iodine (VILI) are increasingly recommended in various cervical cancer screening protocols in low-resource settings. Although VIA is more widely used, VILI has been advocated as an easier and more specific screening test. VILI has not been well-validated as a stand-alone screening test, compared to VIA or validated for use in HIV-infected women. We carried out a randomized clinical trial to compare the diagnostic accuracy of VIA and VILI among HIV-infected women. Women attending the Family AIDS Care and Education Services (FACES) clinic in western Kenya were enrolled and randomized to undergo either VIA or VILI with colposcopy. Lesions suspicious for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or greater (CIN2+) were biopsied. Between October 2011 and June 2012, 654 were randomized to undergo VIA or VILI. The test positivity rates were 26.2% for VIA and 30.6% for VILI (p = 0.22). The rate of detection of CIN2+ was 7.7% in the VIA arm and 11.5% in the VILI arm (p = 0.10). There was no significant difference in the diagnostic performance of VIA and VILI for the detection of CIN2+. Sensitivity and specificity were 84.0% and 78.6%, respectively, for VIA and 84.2% and 76.4% for VILI. The positive and negative predictive values were 24.7% and 98.3% for VIA, and 31.7% and 97.4% for VILI. Among women with CD4+ count < 350, VILI had a significantly decreased specificity (66.2%) compared to VIA in the same group (83.9%, p = 0.02) and compared to VILI performed among women with CD4+ count ≥ 350 (79.7%, p = 0.02). VIA and VILI had similar diagnostic accuracy and rates of CIN2+ detection among HIV-infected women. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02237326 Public Library of Science 2015-04-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4388564/ /pubmed/25849627 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118568 Text en © 2015 Huchko et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Huchko, Megan J.
Sneden, Jennifer
Zakaras, Jennifer M.
Smith-McCune, Karen
Sawaya, George
Maloba, May
Bukusi, Elizabeth Ann
Cohen, Craig R.
A Randomized Trial Comparing the Diagnostic Accuracy of Visual Inspection with Acetic Acid to Visual Inspection with Lugol’s Iodine for Cervical Cancer Screening in HIV-Infected Women
title A Randomized Trial Comparing the Diagnostic Accuracy of Visual Inspection with Acetic Acid to Visual Inspection with Lugol’s Iodine for Cervical Cancer Screening in HIV-Infected Women
title_full A Randomized Trial Comparing the Diagnostic Accuracy of Visual Inspection with Acetic Acid to Visual Inspection with Lugol’s Iodine for Cervical Cancer Screening in HIV-Infected Women
title_fullStr A Randomized Trial Comparing the Diagnostic Accuracy of Visual Inspection with Acetic Acid to Visual Inspection with Lugol’s Iodine for Cervical Cancer Screening in HIV-Infected Women
title_full_unstemmed A Randomized Trial Comparing the Diagnostic Accuracy of Visual Inspection with Acetic Acid to Visual Inspection with Lugol’s Iodine for Cervical Cancer Screening in HIV-Infected Women
title_short A Randomized Trial Comparing the Diagnostic Accuracy of Visual Inspection with Acetic Acid to Visual Inspection with Lugol’s Iodine for Cervical Cancer Screening in HIV-Infected Women
title_sort randomized trial comparing the diagnostic accuracy of visual inspection with acetic acid to visual inspection with lugol’s iodine for cervical cancer screening in hiv-infected women
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4388564/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25849627
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118568
work_keys_str_mv AT huchkomeganj arandomizedtrialcomparingthediagnosticaccuracyofvisualinspectionwithaceticacidtovisualinspectionwithlugolsiodineforcervicalcancerscreeninginhivinfectedwomen
AT snedenjennifer arandomizedtrialcomparingthediagnosticaccuracyofvisualinspectionwithaceticacidtovisualinspectionwithlugolsiodineforcervicalcancerscreeninginhivinfectedwomen
AT zakarasjenniferm arandomizedtrialcomparingthediagnosticaccuracyofvisualinspectionwithaceticacidtovisualinspectionwithlugolsiodineforcervicalcancerscreeninginhivinfectedwomen
AT smithmccunekaren arandomizedtrialcomparingthediagnosticaccuracyofvisualinspectionwithaceticacidtovisualinspectionwithlugolsiodineforcervicalcancerscreeninginhivinfectedwomen
AT sawayageorge arandomizedtrialcomparingthediagnosticaccuracyofvisualinspectionwithaceticacidtovisualinspectionwithlugolsiodineforcervicalcancerscreeninginhivinfectedwomen
AT malobamay arandomizedtrialcomparingthediagnosticaccuracyofvisualinspectionwithaceticacidtovisualinspectionwithlugolsiodineforcervicalcancerscreeninginhivinfectedwomen
AT bukusielizabethann arandomizedtrialcomparingthediagnosticaccuracyofvisualinspectionwithaceticacidtovisualinspectionwithlugolsiodineforcervicalcancerscreeninginhivinfectedwomen
AT cohencraigr arandomizedtrialcomparingthediagnosticaccuracyofvisualinspectionwithaceticacidtovisualinspectionwithlugolsiodineforcervicalcancerscreeninginhivinfectedwomen
AT huchkomeganj randomizedtrialcomparingthediagnosticaccuracyofvisualinspectionwithaceticacidtovisualinspectionwithlugolsiodineforcervicalcancerscreeninginhivinfectedwomen
AT snedenjennifer randomizedtrialcomparingthediagnosticaccuracyofvisualinspectionwithaceticacidtovisualinspectionwithlugolsiodineforcervicalcancerscreeninginhivinfectedwomen
AT zakarasjenniferm randomizedtrialcomparingthediagnosticaccuracyofvisualinspectionwithaceticacidtovisualinspectionwithlugolsiodineforcervicalcancerscreeninginhivinfectedwomen
AT smithmccunekaren randomizedtrialcomparingthediagnosticaccuracyofvisualinspectionwithaceticacidtovisualinspectionwithlugolsiodineforcervicalcancerscreeninginhivinfectedwomen
AT sawayageorge randomizedtrialcomparingthediagnosticaccuracyofvisualinspectionwithaceticacidtovisualinspectionwithlugolsiodineforcervicalcancerscreeninginhivinfectedwomen
AT malobamay randomizedtrialcomparingthediagnosticaccuracyofvisualinspectionwithaceticacidtovisualinspectionwithlugolsiodineforcervicalcancerscreeninginhivinfectedwomen
AT bukusielizabethann randomizedtrialcomparingthediagnosticaccuracyofvisualinspectionwithaceticacidtovisualinspectionwithlugolsiodineforcervicalcancerscreeninginhivinfectedwomen
AT cohencraigr randomizedtrialcomparingthediagnosticaccuracyofvisualinspectionwithaceticacidtovisualinspectionwithlugolsiodineforcervicalcancerscreeninginhivinfectedwomen