Cargando…

Comparing SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology as primary test method: SurePath is associated with increased CIN II(+) detection rates

PURPOSE: Within the last decade, SurePath and ThinPrep [both liquid-based cytology (LBC) tests] have replaced conventional cytology (CC) as primary test method in cervical cancer screening programs of multiple countries. The aim of our study was to examine the effect in the Dutch screening program....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rozemeijer, Kirsten, Penning, Corine, Siebers, Albert G., Naber, Steffie K., Matthijsse, Suzette M., van Ballegooijen, Marjolein, van Kemenade, Folkert J., de Kok, Inge M. C. M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4703623/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26458884
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10552-015-0678-1
_version_ 1782408755991805952
author Rozemeijer, Kirsten
Penning, Corine
Siebers, Albert G.
Naber, Steffie K.
Matthijsse, Suzette M.
van Ballegooijen, Marjolein
van Kemenade, Folkert J.
de Kok, Inge M. C. M.
author_facet Rozemeijer, Kirsten
Penning, Corine
Siebers, Albert G.
Naber, Steffie K.
Matthijsse, Suzette M.
van Ballegooijen, Marjolein
van Kemenade, Folkert J.
de Kok, Inge M. C. M.
author_sort Rozemeijer, Kirsten
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Within the last decade, SurePath and ThinPrep [both liquid-based cytology (LBC) tests] have replaced conventional cytology (CC) as primary test method in cervical cancer screening programs of multiple countries. The aim of our study was to examine the effect in the Dutch screening program. METHODS: All primary smears taken within this program from 2000 to 2011 were analyzed using the nationwide registry of histo- and cytopathology (PALGA) with a follow-up until March 2013. The percentage of smears classified as borderline/mildly dyskaryotic (BMD) and >BMD as well as CIN and cervical cancer detection rates were compared between SurePath and ThinPrep versus CC by logistic regression analyses (adjusted for age, screen region, socioeconomic status, and calendar time). RESULTS: We included 3,118,685 CC, 1,313,731 SurePath, and 1,584,587 ThinPrep smears. Using SurePath resulted in an increased rate of primary smears classified as >BMD [odds ratio (OR) = 1.12 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09–1.16)]. CIN I and II(+) detection rates increased by 14 % [OR = 1.14 (95% CI 1.08–1.20)] and 8 % [OR = 1.08 (95% CI 1.05–1.12)]. Cervical cancer detection rates were unaffected. Implementing ThinPrep did not result in major alterations of the cytological classification of smears, and it did not affect CIN detection rates. While not significant, cervical cancer detection rates were lower [OR = 0.87 (95% CI 0.75–1.01)]. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of replacing CC by LBC as primary test method depends on the type of LBC test used. Only the use of SurePath was associated with increased CIN II(+) detection, although it simultaneously increased the detection of CIN I.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4703623
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47036232016-01-12 Comparing SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology as primary test method: SurePath is associated with increased CIN II(+) detection rates Rozemeijer, Kirsten Penning, Corine Siebers, Albert G. Naber, Steffie K. Matthijsse, Suzette M. van Ballegooijen, Marjolein van Kemenade, Folkert J. de Kok, Inge M. C. M. Cancer Causes Control Original Paper PURPOSE: Within the last decade, SurePath and ThinPrep [both liquid-based cytology (LBC) tests] have replaced conventional cytology (CC) as primary test method in cervical cancer screening programs of multiple countries. The aim of our study was to examine the effect in the Dutch screening program. METHODS: All primary smears taken within this program from 2000 to 2011 were analyzed using the nationwide registry of histo- and cytopathology (PALGA) with a follow-up until March 2013. The percentage of smears classified as borderline/mildly dyskaryotic (BMD) and >BMD as well as CIN and cervical cancer detection rates were compared between SurePath and ThinPrep versus CC by logistic regression analyses (adjusted for age, screen region, socioeconomic status, and calendar time). RESULTS: We included 3,118,685 CC, 1,313,731 SurePath, and 1,584,587 ThinPrep smears. Using SurePath resulted in an increased rate of primary smears classified as >BMD [odds ratio (OR) = 1.12 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09–1.16)]. CIN I and II(+) detection rates increased by 14 % [OR = 1.14 (95% CI 1.08–1.20)] and 8 % [OR = 1.08 (95% CI 1.05–1.12)]. Cervical cancer detection rates were unaffected. Implementing ThinPrep did not result in major alterations of the cytological classification of smears, and it did not affect CIN detection rates. While not significant, cervical cancer detection rates were lower [OR = 0.87 (95% CI 0.75–1.01)]. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of replacing CC by LBC as primary test method depends on the type of LBC test used. Only the use of SurePath was associated with increased CIN II(+) detection, although it simultaneously increased the detection of CIN I. Springer International Publishing 2015-10-12 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4703623/ /pubmed/26458884 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10552-015-0678-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided 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.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Rozemeijer, Kirsten
Penning, Corine
Siebers, Albert G.
Naber, Steffie K.
Matthijsse, Suzette M.
van Ballegooijen, Marjolein
van Kemenade, Folkert J.
de Kok, Inge M. C. M.
Comparing SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology as primary test method: SurePath is associated with increased CIN II(+) detection rates
title Comparing SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology as primary test method: SurePath is associated with increased CIN II(+) detection rates
title_full Comparing SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology as primary test method: SurePath is associated with increased CIN II(+) detection rates
title_fullStr Comparing SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology as primary test method: SurePath is associated with increased CIN II(+) detection rates
title_full_unstemmed Comparing SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology as primary test method: SurePath is associated with increased CIN II(+) detection rates
title_short Comparing SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology as primary test method: SurePath is associated with increased CIN II(+) detection rates
title_sort comparing surepath, thinprep, and conventional cytology as primary test method: surepath is associated with increased cin ii(+) detection rates
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4703623/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26458884
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10552-015-0678-1
work_keys_str_mv AT rozemeijerkirsten comparingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologyasprimarytestmethodsurepathisassociatedwithincreasedciniidetectionrates
AT penningcorine comparingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologyasprimarytestmethodsurepathisassociatedwithincreasedciniidetectionrates
AT siebersalbertg comparingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologyasprimarytestmethodsurepathisassociatedwithincreasedciniidetectionrates
AT nabersteffiek comparingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologyasprimarytestmethodsurepathisassociatedwithincreasedciniidetectionrates
AT matthijssesuzettem comparingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologyasprimarytestmethodsurepathisassociatedwithincreasedciniidetectionrates
AT vanballegooijenmarjolein comparingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologyasprimarytestmethodsurepathisassociatedwithincreasedciniidetectionrates
AT vankemenadefolkertj comparingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologyasprimarytestmethodsurepathisassociatedwithincreasedciniidetectionrates
AT dekokingemcm comparingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologyasprimarytestmethodsurepathisassociatedwithincreasedciniidetectionrates