Cargando…
Cervicouterine Cancer Screening – TruScreen™ vs. Conventional Cytology: Pilot Study
INTRODUCTION: Cervicouterine cancer (CC) is a health problem worldwide and is the fourth most common cancer in women, with a greater proportion of individuals affected by advanced stages of the disease in developing countries. OBJECTIVE: To determine the sensitivity and specificity of the TruScreen™...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6060572/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30089942 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JOC.JOC_111_17 |
_version_ | 1783342061185925120 |
---|---|
author | Salazar-Campos, J. E. González-Enciso, A. Díaz-Molina, R. Lara-Hernández, M. E. Coronel-Martínez, J. Pérez-Plasencia, C. de León, D. Cantú |
author_facet | Salazar-Campos, J. E. González-Enciso, A. Díaz-Molina, R. Lara-Hernández, M. E. Coronel-Martínez, J. Pérez-Plasencia, C. de León, D. Cantú |
author_sort | Salazar-Campos, J. E. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Cervicouterine cancer (CC) is a health problem worldwide and is the fourth most common cancer in women, with a greater proportion of individuals affected by advanced stages of the disease in developing countries. OBJECTIVE: To determine the sensitivity and specificity of the TruScreen™ opto-electronic device vs. conventional cytology in CC screenings. METHODOLOGY: This is a prospective observational study that included individuals who presented for the first time at the Dysplasia Clinic of the Instituto Nacional de Cancerología from March 1 through April 30, 2016, and those referred due to abnormal conventional cytology. The patients were evaluated with the TruScreen™ device, conventional cytology, colposcopy and, if necessary, cervical biopsy. The results were analyzed by descriptive statistics as well as the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of the TruScreen™, using conventional cytology as the standard. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were included who met the inclusion criteria. The average age of the patients was 40 years (range, 23–61 years). For the diagnosis of high-grade intraepithelial lesions, the TruScreen™ device showed a 43% sensitivity, a 92% specificity, a PPV of 60%, and a NPV of 85%, whereas evaluation via cervical biopsy exhibited a 33% sensitivity, an 86% specificity, a 33% PPV, and an 86% NPV. The Kappa agreement index of the TruScreen™ with the colposcopies was 0.70. CONCLUSIONS: TruScreen™ demonstrated low sensitivity and high specificity compared with conventional cytology, which had a high NPV. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6060572 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-60605722018-08-08 Cervicouterine Cancer Screening – TruScreen™ vs. Conventional Cytology: Pilot Study Salazar-Campos, J. E. González-Enciso, A. Díaz-Molina, R. Lara-Hernández, M. E. Coronel-Martínez, J. Pérez-Plasencia, C. de León, D. Cantú J Cytol Original Article INTRODUCTION: Cervicouterine cancer (CC) is a health problem worldwide and is the fourth most common cancer in women, with a greater proportion of individuals affected by advanced stages of the disease in developing countries. OBJECTIVE: To determine the sensitivity and specificity of the TruScreen™ opto-electronic device vs. conventional cytology in CC screenings. METHODOLOGY: This is a prospective observational study that included individuals who presented for the first time at the Dysplasia Clinic of the Instituto Nacional de Cancerología from March 1 through April 30, 2016, and those referred due to abnormal conventional cytology. The patients were evaluated with the TruScreen™ device, conventional cytology, colposcopy and, if necessary, cervical biopsy. The results were analyzed by descriptive statistics as well as the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of the TruScreen™, using conventional cytology as the standard. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were included who met the inclusion criteria. The average age of the patients was 40 years (range, 23–61 years). For the diagnosis of high-grade intraepithelial lesions, the TruScreen™ device showed a 43% sensitivity, a 92% specificity, a PPV of 60%, and a NPV of 85%, whereas evaluation via cervical biopsy exhibited a 33% sensitivity, an 86% specificity, a 33% PPV, and an 86% NPV. The Kappa agreement index of the TruScreen™ with the colposcopies was 0.70. CONCLUSIONS: TruScreen™ demonstrated low sensitivity and high specificity compared with conventional cytology, which had a high NPV. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6060572/ /pubmed/30089942 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JOC.JOC_111_17 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Journal of Cytology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Salazar-Campos, J. E. González-Enciso, A. Díaz-Molina, R. Lara-Hernández, M. E. Coronel-Martínez, J. Pérez-Plasencia, C. de León, D. Cantú Cervicouterine Cancer Screening – TruScreen™ vs. Conventional Cytology: Pilot Study |
title | Cervicouterine Cancer Screening – TruScreen™ vs. Conventional Cytology: Pilot Study |
title_full | Cervicouterine Cancer Screening – TruScreen™ vs. Conventional Cytology: Pilot Study |
title_fullStr | Cervicouterine Cancer Screening – TruScreen™ vs. Conventional Cytology: Pilot Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Cervicouterine Cancer Screening – TruScreen™ vs. Conventional Cytology: Pilot Study |
title_short | Cervicouterine Cancer Screening – TruScreen™ vs. Conventional Cytology: Pilot Study |
title_sort | cervicouterine cancer screening – truscreen™ vs. conventional cytology: pilot study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6060572/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30089942 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JOC.JOC_111_17 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT salazarcamposje cervicouterinecancerscreeningtruscreenvsconventionalcytologypilotstudy AT gonzalezencisoa cervicouterinecancerscreeningtruscreenvsconventionalcytologypilotstudy AT diazmolinar cervicouterinecancerscreeningtruscreenvsconventionalcytologypilotstudy AT larahernandezme cervicouterinecancerscreeningtruscreenvsconventionalcytologypilotstudy AT coronelmartinezj cervicouterinecancerscreeningtruscreenvsconventionalcytologypilotstudy AT perezplasenciac cervicouterinecancerscreeningtruscreenvsconventionalcytologypilotstudy AT deleondcantu cervicouterinecancerscreeningtruscreenvsconventionalcytologypilotstudy |