Cargando…

Cervical cancer incidence after normal cytological sample in routine screening using SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology: population based study

Objective To compare the cumulative incidence of cervical cancer diagnosed within 72 months after a normal screening sample between conventional cytology and liquid based cytology tests SurePath and ThinPrep. Design Retrospective population based cohort study. Setting Nationwide network and registry...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rozemeijer, Kirsten, Naber, Steffie K, Penning, Corine, Overbeek, Lucy I H, Looman, Caspar W N, de Kok, Inge M C M, Matthijsse, Suzette M, Rebolj, Matejka, van Kemenade, Folkert J, van Ballegooijen, Marjolein
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5421440/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28196844
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j504
_version_ 1783234584148705280
author Rozemeijer, Kirsten
Naber, Steffie K
Penning, Corine
Overbeek, Lucy I H
Looman, Caspar W N
de Kok, Inge M C M
Matthijsse, Suzette M
Rebolj, Matejka
van Kemenade, Folkert J
van Ballegooijen, Marjolein
author_facet Rozemeijer, Kirsten
Naber, Steffie K
Penning, Corine
Overbeek, Lucy I H
Looman, Caspar W N
de Kok, Inge M C M
Matthijsse, Suzette M
Rebolj, Matejka
van Kemenade, Folkert J
van Ballegooijen, Marjolein
author_sort Rozemeijer, Kirsten
collection PubMed
description Objective To compare the cumulative incidence of cervical cancer diagnosed within 72 months after a normal screening sample between conventional cytology and liquid based cytology tests SurePath and ThinPrep. Design Retrospective population based cohort study. Setting Nationwide network and registry of histo- and cytopathology in the Netherlands (PALGA), January 2000 to March 2013. Population Women with 5 924 474 normal screening samples (23 833 123 person years). Exposure Use of SurePath or ThinPrep versus conventional cytology as screening test. Main outcome measure 72 month cumulative incidence of invasive cervical cancer after a normal screening sample for each screening test. Cox regression analyses assessed the hazard ratios, adjusted for calendar time, age, screening history, and socioeconomic status and including laboratories as random effects. Results The 72 month cumulative cancer incidence was 58.5 (95% confidence interval 54.6 to 62.7) per 100 000 normal conventional cytology samples, compared with 66.8 (56.7 to 78.7) for ThinPrep and 44.6 (37.8 to 52.6) for SurePath. Compared with conventional cytology, the hazard of invasive cancer was 19% lower (hazard ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.66 to 0.99) for SurePath, mainly caused by a 27% lower hazard (0.73, 0.57 to 0.93) of a clinically detected cancer. For ThinPrep, the hazard was on average 15% higher (hazard ratio 1.15, 0.95 to 1.38), mainly caused by a 56% higher hazard of a screen detected cancer (1.56, 1.17 to 2.08). Conclusions These findings should provoke reconsideration of the assumed similarity in sensitivity to detect progressive cervical intraepithelial neoplasia between different types of liquid based cytology and conventional cytology.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5421440
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54214402017-05-12 Cervical cancer incidence after normal cytological sample in routine screening using SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology: population based study Rozemeijer, Kirsten Naber, Steffie K Penning, Corine Overbeek, Lucy I H Looman, Caspar W N de Kok, Inge M C M Matthijsse, Suzette M Rebolj, Matejka van Kemenade, Folkert J van Ballegooijen, Marjolein BMJ Research Objective To compare the cumulative incidence of cervical cancer diagnosed within 72 months after a normal screening sample between conventional cytology and liquid based cytology tests SurePath and ThinPrep. Design Retrospective population based cohort study. Setting Nationwide network and registry of histo- and cytopathology in the Netherlands (PALGA), January 2000 to March 2013. Population Women with 5 924 474 normal screening samples (23 833 123 person years). Exposure Use of SurePath or ThinPrep versus conventional cytology as screening test. Main outcome measure 72 month cumulative incidence of invasive cervical cancer after a normal screening sample for each screening test. Cox regression analyses assessed the hazard ratios, adjusted for calendar time, age, screening history, and socioeconomic status and including laboratories as random effects. Results The 72 month cumulative cancer incidence was 58.5 (95% confidence interval 54.6 to 62.7) per 100 000 normal conventional cytology samples, compared with 66.8 (56.7 to 78.7) for ThinPrep and 44.6 (37.8 to 52.6) for SurePath. Compared with conventional cytology, the hazard of invasive cancer was 19% lower (hazard ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.66 to 0.99) for SurePath, mainly caused by a 27% lower hazard (0.73, 0.57 to 0.93) of a clinically detected cancer. For ThinPrep, the hazard was on average 15% higher (hazard ratio 1.15, 0.95 to 1.38), mainly caused by a 56% higher hazard of a screen detected cancer (1.56, 1.17 to 2.08). Conclusions These findings should provoke reconsideration of the assumed similarity in sensitivity to detect progressive cervical intraepithelial neoplasia between different types of liquid based cytology and conventional cytology. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2017-02-14 /pmc/articles/PMC5421440/ /pubmed/28196844 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j504 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Research
Rozemeijer, Kirsten
Naber, Steffie K
Penning, Corine
Overbeek, Lucy I H
Looman, Caspar W N
de Kok, Inge M C M
Matthijsse, Suzette M
Rebolj, Matejka
van Kemenade, Folkert J
van Ballegooijen, Marjolein
Cervical cancer incidence after normal cytological sample in routine screening using SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology: population based study
title Cervical cancer incidence after normal cytological sample in routine screening using SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology: population based study
title_full Cervical cancer incidence after normal cytological sample in routine screening using SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology: population based study
title_fullStr Cervical cancer incidence after normal cytological sample in routine screening using SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology: population based study
title_full_unstemmed Cervical cancer incidence after normal cytological sample in routine screening using SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology: population based study
title_short Cervical cancer incidence after normal cytological sample in routine screening using SurePath, ThinPrep, and conventional cytology: population based study
title_sort cervical cancer incidence after normal cytological sample in routine screening using surepath, thinprep, and conventional cytology: population based study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5421440/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28196844
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j504
work_keys_str_mv AT rozemeijerkirsten cervicalcancerincidenceafternormalcytologicalsampleinroutinescreeningusingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologypopulationbasedstudy
AT nabersteffiek cervicalcancerincidenceafternormalcytologicalsampleinroutinescreeningusingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologypopulationbasedstudy
AT penningcorine cervicalcancerincidenceafternormalcytologicalsampleinroutinescreeningusingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologypopulationbasedstudy
AT overbeeklucyih cervicalcancerincidenceafternormalcytologicalsampleinroutinescreeningusingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologypopulationbasedstudy
AT loomancasparwn cervicalcancerincidenceafternormalcytologicalsampleinroutinescreeningusingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologypopulationbasedstudy
AT dekokingemcm cervicalcancerincidenceafternormalcytologicalsampleinroutinescreeningusingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologypopulationbasedstudy
AT matthijssesuzettem cervicalcancerincidenceafternormalcytologicalsampleinroutinescreeningusingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologypopulationbasedstudy
AT reboljmatejka cervicalcancerincidenceafternormalcytologicalsampleinroutinescreeningusingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologypopulationbasedstudy
AT vankemenadefolkertj cervicalcancerincidenceafternormalcytologicalsampleinroutinescreeningusingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologypopulationbasedstudy
AT vanballegooijenmarjolein cervicalcancerincidenceafternormalcytologicalsampleinroutinescreeningusingsurepaththinprepandconventionalcytologypopulationbasedstudy