Cargando…

Comparison Between Two Detection Methods for HPV16, HPV18 and P16Ink4a Biomarkers in Diagnosis of Abnormal Cervical Cytology

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is the second most common cancer among women in many populations. While the Pap smear is a well established screening test it suffers from both false-positive and false-negative results in diagnosis of cancers and precancerous states. In this study, immunocytochemistry of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Khazaei, Sedigheh, Izadi, Babak, Mirbahari, Seyed Ghasem, Madani, Seyed Hamid, Khosravi, Shohre Malek, Alagha, Mohsen Emami, Sajadimajd, Soraya
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: West Asia Organization for Cancer Prevention 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5454662/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28125865
http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/APJCP.2016.17.12.5223
_version_ 1783240872730558464
author Khazaei, Sedigheh
Izadi, Babak
Mirbahari, Seyed Ghasem
Madani, Seyed Hamid
Khosravi, Shohre Malek
Alagha, Mohsen Emami
Sajadimajd, Soraya
author_facet Khazaei, Sedigheh
Izadi, Babak
Mirbahari, Seyed Ghasem
Madani, Seyed Hamid
Khosravi, Shohre Malek
Alagha, Mohsen Emami
Sajadimajd, Soraya
author_sort Khazaei, Sedigheh
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is the second most common cancer among women in many populations. While the Pap smear is a well established screening test it suffers from both false-positive and false-negative results in diagnosis of cancers and precancerous states. In this study, immunocytochemistry of the P16 biomarker and HPV-PCR were compared for their diagnostic potential. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the study, we obtained pairs of specimens from 45 women with cervical dysplasia. One sample was placed in a liquid-based solution, and processed for staining of sections with antibodies to P16. HPV-PCR was performed on the other and the results obtained were analyzed by T-test using SPSS v. 15. RESULTS: Using HPV-PCR 71% of the samples were found to be infected with either HPV 16 or HPV 18, and the rate of infection did not have a statistically significant relationship with higher grades of dysplasia (p= 0.253). In contrast, with immunocytochemistry evaluation of P16, 64% of the specimens were positive, but the percentage of positive results significantly increased with higher grades of dysplasia (p= 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Employment of the P16 marker as an optional test might be preferable over HPV-PCR for cervical dysplasia in our geographical region.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5454662
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher West Asia Organization for Cancer Prevention
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54546622017-08-28 Comparison Between Two Detection Methods for HPV16, HPV18 and P16Ink4a Biomarkers in Diagnosis of Abnormal Cervical Cytology Khazaei, Sedigheh Izadi, Babak Mirbahari, Seyed Ghasem Madani, Seyed Hamid Khosravi, Shohre Malek Alagha, Mohsen Emami Sajadimajd, Soraya Asian Pac J Cancer Prev Research Article BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is the second most common cancer among women in many populations. While the Pap smear is a well established screening test it suffers from both false-positive and false-negative results in diagnosis of cancers and precancerous states. In this study, immunocytochemistry of the P16 biomarker and HPV-PCR were compared for their diagnostic potential. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the study, we obtained pairs of specimens from 45 women with cervical dysplasia. One sample was placed in a liquid-based solution, and processed for staining of sections with antibodies to P16. HPV-PCR was performed on the other and the results obtained were analyzed by T-test using SPSS v. 15. RESULTS: Using HPV-PCR 71% of the samples were found to be infected with either HPV 16 or HPV 18, and the rate of infection did not have a statistically significant relationship with higher grades of dysplasia (p= 0.253). In contrast, with immunocytochemistry evaluation of P16, 64% of the specimens were positive, but the percentage of positive results significantly increased with higher grades of dysplasia (p= 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Employment of the P16 marker as an optional test might be preferable over HPV-PCR for cervical dysplasia in our geographical region. West Asia Organization for Cancer Prevention 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC5454662/ /pubmed/28125865 http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/APJCP.2016.17.12.5223 Text en Copyright: © Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-SA/4.0 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
spellingShingle Research Article
Khazaei, Sedigheh
Izadi, Babak
Mirbahari, Seyed Ghasem
Madani, Seyed Hamid
Khosravi, Shohre Malek
Alagha, Mohsen Emami
Sajadimajd, Soraya
Comparison Between Two Detection Methods for HPV16, HPV18 and P16Ink4a Biomarkers in Diagnosis of Abnormal Cervical Cytology
title Comparison Between Two Detection Methods for HPV16, HPV18 and P16Ink4a Biomarkers in Diagnosis of Abnormal Cervical Cytology
title_full Comparison Between Two Detection Methods for HPV16, HPV18 and P16Ink4a Biomarkers in Diagnosis of Abnormal Cervical Cytology
title_fullStr Comparison Between Two Detection Methods for HPV16, HPV18 and P16Ink4a Biomarkers in Diagnosis of Abnormal Cervical Cytology
title_full_unstemmed Comparison Between Two Detection Methods for HPV16, HPV18 and P16Ink4a Biomarkers in Diagnosis of Abnormal Cervical Cytology
title_short Comparison Between Two Detection Methods for HPV16, HPV18 and P16Ink4a Biomarkers in Diagnosis of Abnormal Cervical Cytology
title_sort comparison between two detection methods for hpv16, hpv18 and p16ink4a biomarkers in diagnosis of abnormal cervical cytology
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5454662/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28125865
http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/APJCP.2016.17.12.5223
work_keys_str_mv AT khazaeisedigheh comparisonbetweentwodetectionmethodsforhpv16hpv18andp16ink4abiomarkersindiagnosisofabnormalcervicalcytology
AT izadibabak comparisonbetweentwodetectionmethodsforhpv16hpv18andp16ink4abiomarkersindiagnosisofabnormalcervicalcytology
AT mirbahariseyedghasem comparisonbetweentwodetectionmethodsforhpv16hpv18andp16ink4abiomarkersindiagnosisofabnormalcervicalcytology
AT madaniseyedhamid comparisonbetweentwodetectionmethodsforhpv16hpv18andp16ink4abiomarkersindiagnosisofabnormalcervicalcytology
AT khosravishohremalek comparisonbetweentwodetectionmethodsforhpv16hpv18andp16ink4abiomarkersindiagnosisofabnormalcervicalcytology
AT alaghamohsenemami comparisonbetweentwodetectionmethodsforhpv16hpv18andp16ink4abiomarkersindiagnosisofabnormalcervicalcytology
AT sajadimajdsoraya comparisonbetweentwodetectionmethodsforhpv16hpv18andp16ink4abiomarkersindiagnosisofabnormalcervicalcytology