Cargando…

Clinical study on primary screening of oral cancer and precancerous lesions by oral cytology

BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to compare the histological diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral-based cytology and liquid-based cytology (LBC) methods. METHODS: Histological diagnoses of 251 cases were classified as negative (no malignancy lesion, inflammation, or mild/moderate dysplasia)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sukegawa, Shintaro, Ono, Sawako, Nakano, Keisuke, Takabatake, Kiyofumi, Kawai, Hotaka, Nagatsuka, Hitoshi, Furuki, Yoshihiko
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7488236/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32912249
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13000-020-01027-6
_version_ 1783581652768784384
author Sukegawa, Shintaro
Ono, Sawako
Nakano, Keisuke
Takabatake, Kiyofumi
Kawai, Hotaka
Nagatsuka, Hitoshi
Furuki, Yoshihiko
author_facet Sukegawa, Shintaro
Ono, Sawako
Nakano, Keisuke
Takabatake, Kiyofumi
Kawai, Hotaka
Nagatsuka, Hitoshi
Furuki, Yoshihiko
author_sort Sukegawa, Shintaro
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to compare the histological diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral-based cytology and liquid-based cytology (LBC) methods. METHODS: Histological diagnoses of 251 cases were classified as negative (no malignancy lesion, inflammation, or mild/moderate dysplasia) and positive [severe dysplasia/carcinoma in situ (CIS) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC)]. Cytological diagnoses were classified as negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy (NILM), oral low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (OLSIL), oral high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (OHSIL), or SCC. Cytological diagnostic results were compared with histology results. RESULTS: Of NILM cytology cases, the most frequent case was negative [LBC n = 50 (90.9%), conventional n = 22 (95.7%)]. Among OLSIL cytodiagnoses, the most common was negative (LBC n = 34; 75.6%, conventional n = 14; 70.0%). Among OHSIL cytodiagnoses (LBC n = 51, conventional n = 23), SCC was the most frequent (LBC n = 31; 60.8%, conventional n = 7; 30.4%). Negative cases were common (LBC n = 13; 25.5%, conventional n = 14; 60.9%). Among SCC cytodiagnoses SCC was the most common (LBC n = 16; 88.9%, conventional n = 14; 87.5%). Regarding the diagnostic results of cytology, assuming OHSIL and SCC as cytologically positive, the LBC method/conventional method showed a sensitivity of 79.4%/76.7%, specificity of 85.1%/69.2%, false-positive rate of 14.9%/30.7%, and false-negative rate of 20.6%/23.3%. CONCLUSIONS: LBC method was superior to conventional cytodiagnosis methods. It was especially superior for OLSIL and OHSIL. Because of the false-positive and false-negative cytodiagnoses, it is necessary to make a comprehensive diagnosis considering the clinical findings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7488236
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74882362020-09-16 Clinical study on primary screening of oral cancer and precancerous lesions by oral cytology Sukegawa, Shintaro Ono, Sawako Nakano, Keisuke Takabatake, Kiyofumi Kawai, Hotaka Nagatsuka, Hitoshi Furuki, Yoshihiko Diagn Pathol Research BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to compare the histological diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral-based cytology and liquid-based cytology (LBC) methods. METHODS: Histological diagnoses of 251 cases were classified as negative (no malignancy lesion, inflammation, or mild/moderate dysplasia) and positive [severe dysplasia/carcinoma in situ (CIS) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC)]. Cytological diagnoses were classified as negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy (NILM), oral low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (OLSIL), oral high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (OHSIL), or SCC. Cytological diagnostic results were compared with histology results. RESULTS: Of NILM cytology cases, the most frequent case was negative [LBC n = 50 (90.9%), conventional n = 22 (95.7%)]. Among OLSIL cytodiagnoses, the most common was negative (LBC n = 34; 75.6%, conventional n = 14; 70.0%). Among OHSIL cytodiagnoses (LBC n = 51, conventional n = 23), SCC was the most frequent (LBC n = 31; 60.8%, conventional n = 7; 30.4%). Negative cases were common (LBC n = 13; 25.5%, conventional n = 14; 60.9%). Among SCC cytodiagnoses SCC was the most common (LBC n = 16; 88.9%, conventional n = 14; 87.5%). Regarding the diagnostic results of cytology, assuming OHSIL and SCC as cytologically positive, the LBC method/conventional method showed a sensitivity of 79.4%/76.7%, specificity of 85.1%/69.2%, false-positive rate of 14.9%/30.7%, and false-negative rate of 20.6%/23.3%. CONCLUSIONS: LBC method was superior to conventional cytodiagnosis methods. It was especially superior for OLSIL and OHSIL. Because of the false-positive and false-negative cytodiagnoses, it is necessary to make a comprehensive diagnosis considering the clinical findings. BioMed Central 2020-09-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7488236/ /pubmed/32912249 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13000-020-01027-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Sukegawa, Shintaro
Ono, Sawako
Nakano, Keisuke
Takabatake, Kiyofumi
Kawai, Hotaka
Nagatsuka, Hitoshi
Furuki, Yoshihiko
Clinical study on primary screening of oral cancer and precancerous lesions by oral cytology
title Clinical study on primary screening of oral cancer and precancerous lesions by oral cytology
title_full Clinical study on primary screening of oral cancer and precancerous lesions by oral cytology
title_fullStr Clinical study on primary screening of oral cancer and precancerous lesions by oral cytology
title_full_unstemmed Clinical study on primary screening of oral cancer and precancerous lesions by oral cytology
title_short Clinical study on primary screening of oral cancer and precancerous lesions by oral cytology
title_sort clinical study on primary screening of oral cancer and precancerous lesions by oral cytology
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7488236/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32912249
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13000-020-01027-6
work_keys_str_mv AT sukegawashintaro clinicalstudyonprimaryscreeningoforalcancerandprecancerouslesionsbyoralcytology
AT onosawako clinicalstudyonprimaryscreeningoforalcancerandprecancerouslesionsbyoralcytology
AT nakanokeisuke clinicalstudyonprimaryscreeningoforalcancerandprecancerouslesionsbyoralcytology
AT takabatakekiyofumi clinicalstudyonprimaryscreeningoforalcancerandprecancerouslesionsbyoralcytology
AT kawaihotaka clinicalstudyonprimaryscreeningoforalcancerandprecancerouslesionsbyoralcytology
AT nagatsukahitoshi clinicalstudyonprimaryscreeningoforalcancerandprecancerouslesionsbyoralcytology
AT furukiyoshihiko clinicalstudyonprimaryscreeningoforalcancerandprecancerouslesionsbyoralcytology