Quality control for normal liquid-based cytology: Rescreening, high-risk HPV targeted reviewing and/or high-risk HPV detection?

The objective of this prospective study was to compare the number of CIN2+cases detected in negative cytology by different quality control (QC) methods. Full rescreening, high-risk (HR) human papillomavirus (HPV)-targeted reviewing and HR HPV detection were compared. Randomly selected negative cytology detected by BD FocalPoint™ (NFR), by guided screening of the prescreened which needed further review (GS) and by manual screening (MS) was used. A 3-year follow-up period was available. Full rescreening of cytology only detected 23.5% of CIN2+ cases, whereas the cytological rescreening of oncogenic positive slides (high-risk HPV-targeted reviewing) detected 7 of 17 CIN2+ cases (41.2%). Quantitative real-time PCR for 15 oncogenic HPV types detected all CIN2+ cases. Relative sensitivity to detect histological CIN2+ was 0.24 for full rescreening, 0.41 for HR-targeted reviewing and 1.00 for HR HPV detection. In more than half of the reviewed negative cytological preparations associated with histological CIN2+cases no morphologically abnormal cells were detected despite a positive HPV test. The visual cut-off for the detection of abnormal cytology was established at 6.5 HR HPV copies/cell. High-risk HPV detection has a higher yield for detection of CIN2+ cases as compared to manual screening followed by 5% full review, or compared to targeted reviewing of smears positive for oncogenic HPV types, and show diagnostic properties that support its use as a QC procedure in cytologic laboratories.