Factors contributing to false‐negative and potential false‐negative cytology reports in SurePath™ liquid‐based cervical cytology

N. Gupta, D. John, N. Dudding, J. Crossley and J. H. F. Smith
Factors contributing to false‐negative and potential false‐negative cytology reports in SurePath ? liquid‐based cervical cytology Objectives: The characteristics of false‐negative conventional cervical cytology smears have been well documented, but there is limited literature available for liquid‐based cytology (LBC), especially SurePath? samples. We aimed to assess the characteristics of false‐negative SurePath LBC samples. Methods: Over a period of 5 years, an audit of false‐negative reports in SurePath cervical cytology was undertaken. In a workload of 183, 112 samples, 481 (0.3%) false negatives were identified using two routes: those detected by routine laboratory internal quality control (rapid pre‐screening) (n = 463) and those reported as normal (true false negatives) with concurrent high‐grade cervical histology (n = 18). Ninety‐five false‐negative cases with a subsequent biopsy reported as at least cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2+) were reviewed for a number of different cytomorphological features. Results: Of 95 samples with subsequent CIN2+, 30.5% predominately contained microbiopsies/hyperchromatic crowded cell groups (HCGs), 27.3% sparse dyskarytotic cells, 4.2% pale cell dyskaryosis, 6.3% small dyskaryotic cells; 3.2% were misinterpreted cells, 8.4% contained other distracting cells, 7.4% were low contrast, 5.3% were unexplained and 7.4% were true negatives. The mean number of microbiopsies/HCGs in that category was 4.6. The mean number of abnormal cells in the sparse dyskaryotic cell category was 13.8. Conclusions: Microbiopsies/HCGs were the commonest reason for false negatives. They were usually present in sufficient numbers to be detected but interpretation could be problematic. Dispersed single abnormal cells were usually not identified because of their scarcity or the presence of distracters.     

The role of cervical cytology and colposcopy in detecting cervical glandular neoplasia

Objective:  To determine the role of cervical cytology and colposcopy in the management of endocervical neoplasia.
Setting:  Colposcopy unit and cytology laboratory in a teaching hospital.
Sample:  Group 1 included 184 smears showing endocervical glandular neoplasia from 129 patients and group 2 included 101 patients with histology showing endocervical abnormalities in a 6-year period (1993–1998). Follow-up of 6–11 years to 2004 was available.
Methods:  Group 1 were identified from the cytology computer records. Group 2 were identified from histology records on the cytology database and a record of histology cases kept for audit purposes. The clinical records were examined retrospectively.
Results:  The positive predictive value (PPV) of abnormal endocervical cells in smears was 81.1% for significant glandular/squamous [cervical glandular intraepithelial neoplasia (CGIN)/cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade2 (CIN2 or worse)] lesions. The PPV of colposcopy was 93.5% for significant glandular/squamous lesions of the cervix. The postcolposcopy probability of a significant lesion when colposcopy was normal was 87.5%. The sensitivity of colposcopy in detecting endocervical lesions was 9.8%. The sensitivity of cervical smears in detecting a significant endocervical abnormality (CGIN or worse) was 66.3%. The false negative rate for cytology of endocervical glandular lesions was 4.0%.
Conclusions:  Endocervical glandular neoplasia detected on cytology is predictive of significant cervical pathology even when colposcopy is normal, which supports excisional biopsy in the primary assessment of these smears. The high concomitant squamous abnormality rate justifies the use of colposcopy to direct biopsies from the ectocervix. Cervical cytology is the only current screening method for cervical glandular abnormalities but sensitivity is poor.     

Rapid review in cervical cytology: a retrospective review of cases detected on rapid review within a DGH cytology department and subsequent outcome

We retrospectively reviewed smears detected by rapid review within a district general hospital (DGH) laboratory over a period of 33 months and the subsequent histological or cytological outcome. Sixty-three cases had adequate follow-up data: 32 subsequently had two negative smears and 31 had a histological abnormality on subsequent biopsy. Twenty were high-grade lesions (CIN2, CIN3 or a glandular lesion) and eight of these were preceded by a low-grade smear abnormality. We reviewed and compared the pattern and distribution of smear abnormalities in these 63 cases. Abnormalities were often present within few cells (76%, n = 48 with 50 abnormal cells or less) or in micro-biopsies (27%, n = 17). There was no statistical difference in the pattern and distribution of smear abnormality between the rapid review-detected smears with a biopsy-proven abnormality and those with negative follow-up smears. Overall, the positive predictive value for high-grade CIN detected by rapid review (75%) was within NHSCSP achievable standards targets. This review of rapid review-detected abnormalities and the biopsy and cytological follow-up reiterates the importance of the method in cervical screening.     

Rapid pre-screening is more sensitive in liquid-based cytology than in conventional smears

Rapid pre-screening (RPS) is a useful tool to measure and improve performance in the cytology laboratory. Whether RPS is more or less effective in liquid-based cytology than in conventional smears is unknown. We compared the estimated sensitivity in a laboratory of 11 cytotechnologists which converted from conventional smears to SurePath? (Becton Dickinson, Franklin Lakes, N.J., USA) liquid based cytology. In the 9 months prior to conversion, 23,286 smears were screened compared with 30,610 smears in the 12 months immediately after conversion. The estimated sensitivity of rapid pre-screening for 90 s improved significantly with liquid based cytology for all abnormalities (58.7 vs. 68.7%, p<0.001), atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance+low-grade squamous intra-epithelial lesion (52.6 vs. 63.1%, p<0.001), and high-grade squamous intra-epithelial alone (76.2 vs. 85%, p<0.001). Histologic follow up for 156 cases identified by rapid pre-screening of SurePath slides showed 32 (21%) cases of CIN1 or greater and 18 cases (12%) with CIN3 or worse. We conclude that rapid pre-screening is significantly more sensitive in liquid-based cytology compared with conventional smears, and detects significant lesions that are missed by routine screening.     

Estimating the sensitivity of cervical cytology: errors of interpretation and test limitations

The objective of this study was to estimate: (i) the sensitivity of cytologists in recognizing abnormal smears; (ii) the sensitivity of cervical cytology as a method of detecting abnormal smears among those obtained in the presence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). Study subjects were 61 women with a histologically confirmed CIN identified through colpohistological and cytologic screening. For objective (i) new smears were taken from study subjects just before treatment, mixed with routine preparations, interpreted by unaware cytologists and then blindly reviewed by a group of three expert supervisors, who reached a consensus diagnosis. Cytologists classified as positive for squamous intraepithelial lesion (SIL) 30 of the 34 smears judged as positive by supervisors (100% of smears classified as high-grade and 67% of smears classified as low-grade SIL by the supervisors). Our approach, based on creating a set of smears with a high a priori probability of being positive, proved to be an efficient way of estimating errors of interpretation. For objective (ii), smears taken at the moment of diagnosis, just before biopsy, were also reviewed by the same supervisors. These CIN cases were identified among asymptomatic women independently of cytological findings and results are therefore not subject to verification bias. Among the 33 histological CINII/III, four (12%) smears had no atypical cells (three negatives and one unsatisfactory) at review. The same proportion was 26% (four negatives and one unsatisfactory) among the 19 histological CINI. No significant differences in smear content were found between the seven ‘false negatives’ and a sample of ‘true positives’ and ‘true negatives’ for a number of formal adequacy criteria (including presence of endocervical cells). Strong differences were found between positive smears taken just before biopsy and those taken just before treatment (in 11 women the first smear only was positive, while the opposite was never observed), suggesting an effect of punch biopsy in removing lesions.     

The sensitivity of rapid (partial) review of cervical smears

SHIELD P. W. AND COX N. C. (1998) Cytopathology 9, 84–92 The sensitivity of rapid (partial) review of cervical smears Rapid review involves a daily rapid (e.g. 30 s) review of all smears not normally double-screened. It has been suggested that the method may increase the sensitivity of cervical cytology by identifying abnormalities not reported on initial screening, true false negatives (TFN). Rapid screening is reported to have high sensitivity for cervical neoplasia when used as a preview tool. To be effective, however, in a review mode it must be able to detect TFN. Several studies have found that many TFN result from factors such as low numbers of abnormal cells or subtle expression of diagnostic criteria. Studies on the sensitivity of rapid screening for detecting TFN would therefore provide a more reliable estimate of its value as a review tool. The sensitivity of rapid re-screening was evaluated using a test set of 200 cases. Each of 15 screeners rapidly reviewed (30 s partial screen) the set over a 2-week period. The set consisted of 129 normal, 28 low-grade squamous lesions (CIN I), 37 high-grade lesions (CIN II, III and adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS)) and six invasive carcinomas. The abnormals included 20 TFN cases. The median sensitivity for abnormalities was 62%. Rapid review was more sensitive for CIN II and CIN III (67%) and invasive carcinoma (66.7%) than for CIN I (53%). Great variation was apparent in the sensitivity for individual screeners, with a range of 41–86% for all abnormalities. The sensitivity for TFN cases varied even more (10–75%, median 35%) and for most screeners was significantly (P < 0.05) lower than for cases which were detected on initial screen (53–90%, median 70.6%). Following this trial rapid review was used routinely for a period of 3 months. In this time 11 413 cases were rapidly reviewed. This led to the full review of 415 slides (3.5%) and the identification of 16 cases of undetected CIN (12 CIN I, three CIN II, one CIN III). Based on current estimates of our laboratory false-negative rate this represents between a quarter and half of the TFN cases of CIN that probably occurred in this period. In conclusion, rapid screening is likely to be significantly less sensitive when used in a review rather than a preview mode. In routine practice the method requires a daily commitment of screener time, but does provide a higher yield of TFN smears than does random review, and allows amendment of these results prior to reporting.     

O-9Uncommon subtypes of borderline nuclear changes: cytological features and predictive value

Introduction:  To establish the significance of cytological features which could predict clinically significant endometrial pathology, and therefore guide reporting practice in cervical samples.
Methods:  A retrospective review of SurePath liquid-based cytology (LBC) cervical samples between 2002 and 2006, obtained at screening and colposcopy. These smears contained normal endometrial cells present at inappropriate times of the menstrual cycle, endometrial cells with atypia (borderline change) and with features suspicious / diagnostic of endometrial carcinoma (glandular neoplasia). False negative and false positive cases detected on subsequent histology were also included. The control group comprised negative samples and a few abnormal smears. All smears were randomly assigned and blinded to menopausal status, age, use of oral contraceptive pill and hormone replacement therapy and presence of intrauterine device. Each smear was reviewed for 16 cytologic criteria and a cytological diagnosis was given for each.
Results:  A total of 219 smears were available for review; 137 were negative, out of which 85 contained normal endometrial cells, 41 contained endometrial cells with atypia, 10 contained endometrial cells with features suggestive of adenocarcinoma and 31 contained endometrial cells with features diagnostic of adenocarcinoma. The feature most associated with benign endometrial cells is top hat with central cell condensation. In contrast, the features associated with malignant endometrial cells are smooth nuclear membrane, pale chromatin, small nucleoli and scalloped borders.
Discussion:  The criteria identified in this study do not definitively define a neoplastic process, but appear to be helpful in individual cases. This study emphasises that endometrial changes should be always interpreted with the relevant clinical information, which would otherwise lead to overdiagnosis in premenopausal women.     

Quality assurance in cervical smears: 100% rapid rescreening vs. 10% random rescreening

OBJECTIVE: To compare 100% rapid rescreening of cervical smears with 10% random rescreening as a method of quality assurance. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 5215 smears, randomly selected from smears reported as negative by cytotechnologists during routine screening, underwent 100% rapid rescreening by senior cytotechnologists. Ten percent of these smears, selected at random, were rescreened by other senior cytotechnologists. The gold standard was defined by cytopathologists, who rescreened all 5215 smears. After excluding unsatisfactory smears detected by cytopathologists, 4271 were included in the analysis. RESULTS: The 100% rapid rescreening method identified 69.9%, 95.7% and 100%, respectively, of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance, low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion and high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion cases reported by the cytopathologists. The 100% rapid rescreening method showed a sensitivity of 73.5% and specificity of 98.6%. The 10% rescreening method showed sensitivity of 40.9% and specificity of 98.8%. CONCLUSION: One hundred percent rapid rescreening is an efficient method of internal quality assurance in cervical smear diagnosis. It can reduce the false negative rate and therefore can provide greater certainty to women who have received negative results. Well-trained cytotechnologists are able to identify abnormal smears in 1-minute rapid rescreening.     

Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III (CIN III) and invasive cervical carcinoma: the yawning gap revisited and the treatment of risk

In a 3-year study of the population of Southampton and south-west Hampshire there were 10 times as many cases of CIN III compared with invasive squamous carcinoma (700 compared with 70). The peak incidence of CIN III per 1000 screened women years was in those aged 25-29 years, which was 20 years earlier than the peak incidence of invasive cervical cancer per 1000 women years at risk. Ninety percent of CIN III was diagnosed in women under 50 years. There were 14 cases of cervical glandular intraepithelial neoplasia grade III (CGIN III), three coexisting with CIN III, all in women aged under 50 years: the gap between intraepithelial and invasive lesions was not seen for glandular neoplasia. Although referral was for at least moderate dyskaryosis in 86.8% of women with CIN III or CGIN III, most had been screened previously, either having had mild abnormalities requiring repeat cytology (39.8%) or negative cytology (34.5%). Only 12 women aged > or = 50 years had previous negative cytology: 21.4% compared with 35.6% of women aged < 50 years (P = 0.034). The results of this study suggest that the best opportunity for preventing invasive squamous cell carcinoma lies in screening women aged 20-39 years when the incidence of CIN III in the screened population is highest and before the peak incidence of invasive disease. The results also indicate the importance of repeated screening and follow up of minor cytological abnormalities in the detection of CIN III. The benefit of screening must be regarded as a treatment of risk, since it is almost certain that a high proportion of CIN III regresses or persists unchanged.     

Rapid cervicovaginal smear screening: method of quality control and assessing individual cytotechnologist performance

AIM: To validate the method of rapid screening (RS) in the detection of cervical lesions and false-negative results as well as in quality control of cytotechnologist performance. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The RS method was validated on Papanicolaou-stained and initially conventionally analysed vaginal, cervical and endocervical (VCE) smears collected in an opportunistic programme for the detection of cervical carcinoma. The study included 3680 VCE smears from the Department of Gynaecologic Cytology, University Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Zagreb University Hospital Center, Zagreb and from the Department of Clinical Cytology, Osijek University Hospital, Osijek. Histologically verified abnormal findings accounted for 10% of the study samples. Thirteen cytotechnologists, with no previous experience in RS, performed the test. Each slide was examined using the 'step' technique for 1.5 minutes, the findings were classified as negative or abnormal, and the abnormal ones were also classified according to differential cytological diagnosis. The results were compared with those obtained on initial screening. Abnormal findings from a group of initially negative findings were reanalysed using conventional methods to make definitive cytological diagnosis. RESULTS: RS yielded a sensitivity of 83.7%, specificity of 93.7%, positive predictive value of 62.4%, negative predictive value of 97.9% and diagnostic accuracy of 92.6%. Relative to the initial abnormal differential cytological diagnosis, the diagnostic value of RS increased with lesion severity [54.8%, 68.0% and 91.3% for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) I, CIN II and CIN III respectively]. RS detected 38 additional positive findings; 94.2% of these were atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS)/abnormal glandular cells undetermined significance (AGUS) and CIN I. The rate of additional positive findings was 1.14% (38/3135). The false-negative rate of initial screening was 9.4% (38/406), and individual cytotechnologist sensitivity was 60.0-100.0%. CONCLUSION: RS could be introduced as an efficient method of quality control to improve the sensitivity of cytological screening as well as for quality control of cytotechnologist performance.     

A retrospective clinical audit of cervical smears reported as 'glandular neoplasia'.

The aims of this study were to review the diagnostic pathway of women with smears reported as 'glandular neoplasia' and to outline the management, colposcopy findings, treatment and final histological diagnosis in these women. The design was a retrospective review. A total of 114 women were identified over a 5-year period from the cytology database at the Royal Liverpool University Hospital Cytology Department, whose hospital case notes were available for review. Methods included a review of the case notes for the demographic details, indication for smear, colposcopic findings, investigation and/or treatment procedures, histology, final diagnosis and current disease status. Of 114 smears reported as 'glandular neoplasia', 67 were reported as consistent with cervical glandular intra-epithelial neoplasia (CGIN), six with endocervical adenocarcinoma, 36 with endometrial adenocarcinoma and five with other glandular neoplastic abnormalities. The average age was 46.5 years. 79 (69.3%) smears were routine call/recall and 36 (30.7%) women were symptomatic. The positive predictive value (PPV) for a significant histological abnormality in the CGIN smear group was 80.6% (23.9% invasive carcinomas, 43.3% CGIN and 13.4% CIN) and the PPV of an 'endometrial adenocarcinoma' smear was 86.1%. Smears indicating glandular neoplasia are associated with a high probability of clinically significant lesions, the PPV of a CGIN smear being over 80%. Immediate referral for colposcopy and assessment by an experienced colposcopist is recommended.     

Risk of significant gynaecological pathology in women with ?glandular neoplasia on cervical cytology

A. Talaat, D. Brinkmann, J. Dhundee, Y. Hana, J. Bevan, R. Irvine, S. Bailey and R. Woolas
Risk of significant gynaecological pathology in women with ?glandular neoplasia on cervical cytology Objective: To review the risk of pre‐invasive and invasive gynaecological pathology in women referred with cervical cytology reporting ?glandular neoplasia. Methods: Review of the case notes of all women referred with cervical cytology reported as ?glandular neoplasia between January 1999 and December 2008 at two UK hospitals: Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust and Queen Mary’s Hospital Sidcup. The category of ‘borderline nuclear change in endocervical cells’, result code 8 according to the national health service cancer screening programme (NHSCSP), was excluded from the study. Results: A total of 200 women were identified using the hospitals’ pathology computer systems. Invasive carcinoma was found in 48 women (24%): 28 endocervical adenocarcinomas, eight squamous cell carcinomas (SCC), ten endometrial and two ovarian adenocarcinomas. Pre‐invasive neoplasia was found in 115 (57.5%), including 14 cervical glandular intraepithelial neoplasia (CGIN), 31 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2/3 and 70 concomitant CGIN and CIN2/3. CIN1/HPV was found in 25, simple endometrial hyperplasia in three and no histological abnormality in three. Thirty‐four (70.8%) of 48 invasive carcinomas (of which 23 were endocervical adenocarcinomas) were in asymptomatic women investigated for abnormal cytology. Fourteen of 34 (41.4%) of those with ?glandular neoplasia thought to be endometrial were CGIN or CIN2/3. Colposcopic appearances were normal in 47.6% of women with pure cervical glandular neoplasia (adenocarcinoma or CGIN) compared with 12.8% with squamous cell lesions (CIN2/3 or SCC): P = 0.0001. Thus, colposcopy was more sensitive for detecting squamous cell abnormalities than their glandular counterparts. Although cervical adenocarcinomas are less amenable to prevention by screening than cervical SCC, in our study cervical cytology predominantly detected these abnormalities at their early asymptomatic stages. Conclusion: At least CIN2 was found in 81.5% in women referred with cervical cytology reporting ?glandular neoplasia. A thorough evaluation of the whole genital tract is needed if colposcopy is negative.     

Accuracy of liquid-based Pap tests: comparison of concurrent liquid-based tests and cervical biopsies on 782 women with previously abnormal Pap smears

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of a liquid-based Pap test, the ThinPrep Pap test (TP) (Cytyc Corp., Boxborough, Massachusetts, U.S.A.), by comparing concurrent TP and cervical biopsy results on 782 patients who were referred for colposcopy because of previously abnormal conventional Pap smears (CPs). STUDY DESIGN: The ability of TP diagnoses of atypical cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) and squamous intraepithelial lesions (SILs) to predict biopsy diagnoses of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) was analyzed using chi2 and McNemar tests. RESULTS: The rate of agreement between diagnoses of SIL by TP and CIN by biopsy was 74.7%. ASC-US accounted for 16.0% of TP diagnoses. ASC-US had biopsy diagnoses of CIN 1 in 60% and CIN 2/3 in 12.8% of cases. For TP diagnosis of low grade SIL, biopsy diagnoses of CIN 2/3 were found in 13.5% of cases. For TP diagnoses of ASC-US and higher, the proportions of TP and cervical biopsies in comparable diagnostic categories were statistically significant (p < 0.001), with TP having sensitivity of 89.4% and positive predictive value of 89.7% for the detection of CIN. The false positive rate for TP was 8.1%, but rescreening confirmed the presence of abnormal cells in 51 of 63 (81.0%) cases of ASC-US or higher having negative biopsies. TP had a false negative rate of 8.3% and negative predictive value of 61.3%. Rescreening showed that most (77.6%) of the false negative TP specimens failed to have abnormal cells on the slides. CONCLUSION: For patients having previously detected cervical abnormalities by CP, concurrent TP demonstrated the following: (1) that it has high diagnostic accuracy for SIL, (2) that ASC-US was diagnostically equivalent to LSIL, and (3) that false negative TP for SIL can be attributed primarily to sampling rather than cytotechnologists' screening errors.     

Rapid pre-screening of cervical smears as a method of internal quality control in a cervical screening programme

Objective:  To evaluate the performance of rapid pre-screening (RPS) as a method of internal quality control in the cytopathological examination of cervical smears for cervical cancer screening.
Methods:  The sample consisted of 6135 cervical smears submitted to RPS and routine screening (RS) methods. The smears classified as negative in RPS and RS were considered final diagnoses, and were not, therefore, submitted to any additional review. The smears identified as suspect or unsatisfactory according to RPS were analysed separately by two different cytologists irrespective of the diagnosis reached in RS. Smears considered abnormal or unsatisfactory at RS were also reviewed. When both cytologists issued concordant diagnoses, this was considered the final diagnosis. Discordant results were analysed by a third cytologist and a consensus meeting was held to define the final diagnosis.
Results:  Taking abnormalities detected by RS as the denominator, RPS had a sensitivity of 63.0% for the detection of all abnormal smears and 96.7% for high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL). When compared with the final diagnosis, sensitivity of RPS for all abnormal smears was 74.9% and for HSIL 95.0%. Of the 529 abnormal smears confirmed in the final diagnosis, 2.15% were detected only by the RPS.
Conclusion:  RPS is an effective alternative method of internal quality control with high sensitivity for the detection of more severe lesions. It also permits monitoring of the laboratory rate of false-negative results, and allows constant evaluation of the performance both of the pre-screening and RS cytologists.     

Rapid rescreening of cervical smears as a quality control method in a high-risk population

OBJECTIVE: Cancer of the cervix is one of the commonest cancers in South Africa. Accurate cytological diagnosis is one of the prerequisites for an effective cervical screening programme and requires the implementation of appropriate quality assurance modalities. This study was undertaken to determine if rapid review of reportedly negative cervical smears is a useful internal quality assurance modality in an unscreened population with very high rates of cervical carcinoma. METHOD: Approximately 26% of all cervical smears received at the study institution between 1 January 1998 and 31 December 2003, and initially reported as negative or inadequate, underwent rapid review. RESULTS: A total of 62,866 (26%) cervical smears out of 241,796 reportedly negative or inadequate cervical smears underwent rapid review. An amended report was sent out in 373 (0.59%) of these 62,866 cervical smears. This included 101 cases of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) and high-grade atypical squamous cells (ASC-H), 143 low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, 54 atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) and 33 atypical glandular cells that were not reported initially. The false-negative proportion for HSIL and ASC-H (combined) in this study was 5.76%. No squamous cell carcinomas were diagnosed on rapid review but one patient with HSIL/ASC-H on review had squamous cell carcinoma on biopsy. Three cytotechnologists had a lower sensitivity of primary screening and required retraining. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid review is beneficial as an internal quality assurance modality in an unscreened high-risk population and increases the detection of women with significant cervical lesions requiring treatment. The relatively low cost of rapid review compared with other rescreening modalities makes this an attractive option in low resource settings.     

Human papillomavirus in invasive cervical cancer and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 and 3 in Venezuela: A cross-sectional study

BackgroundThis study investigated the distribution of human papillomavirus (HPV) types in invasive cervical cancer (ICC), cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 (CIN2) and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3 (CIN3) in Venezuela.MethodsParaffin-embedded samples from 329 women from 29 medical centers of the 24 states of Venezuela were analyzed to determine the distribution of HPV types for ICC, CIN2, and CIN3, the prevalence of single and multiple infection, and the association of HPV types with severity of lesion, comparing CIN2 versus CIN3+ (CIN3 and ICC). The samples were analyzed with the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) followed by reverse hybridization for the identification of HPV types.ResultsHPV was identified in 95/96 ICC specimens (98.9%), in 142/149 CIN3 (95.3%) and in 78/84 CIN2 samples (92.8%). The most common types for ICC and CIN3 were: HPV16, 18, 31, and 33, and for CIN2 were HPV16, 31, 51, 52, and 18. HPV single infection was found in 82.1% of ICC cases, in 79.4% of CIN2 cases, and in 77.4% of CIN3 cases. HPV16 was identified as a single infection more frequently in women with CIN3+ than in those with CIN2 (68.6% versus 46.7%, P = 0.002), and HPV16 or HPV18 types were more prevalent in CIN3+ than in CIN2 (73.4% versus 50%, P = 0.0006).Conclusionthis is the first study of the distribution of HPV types in ICC, CIN2, and CIN3 conducted throughout the territory of Venezuela. HPV16 and HPV18 were the most frequent HPV types identified in single and multiple infections in both ICC and CIN3 groups, and are associated with severity of lesion. The knowledge of the distribution of HPV types would allow organization of an HPV-DNA-based screening test, and consideration of the implementation of prophylactic vaccination in Venezuela.     

Rapid Cervical Cytology Screening

2030 Papanicolaou-stained cervical smears were submitted for rapid screening prior to routine screening; 30 seconds were allowed for each slide, and those thought to be abnormal were identified. The results were compared with those of conventional screening. All severe and moderately dyskaryotic cases were detected by the rapid technique, as were the majority of mild dyskaryosis and borderline cases. When a laboratory has a backlog it may be worth rapid-screening all slides in addition to routine screening, so that patients most at risk can receive prompt treatment.     

Atypical glandular cells in cervical smears: histological correlation and a suggested plan of management based on age of the patient in a low-resource setting

Objectives:  To perform an audit of all smears reported as atypical glandular cells (AGC) using the Bethesda system (TBS) 2001.
Methods:  A total of 18 376 cervical smears were screened from January 2005 to June 2007, of which 65 cases were reported as AGC. Follow-up histology was available in 31 cases (47.7%), in whom a detailed cytological/histological correlation was carried out.
Results:  AGC constituted 0.35% of all Pap smears. Follow-up histology was normal or benign in 20 cases, whereas a squamous or glandular abnormality was seen in 11 cases. Squamous abnormalities included one case each of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)1, CIN2 and CIN3 and five cases of squamous cell carcinoma. All glandular epithelial abnormalities were endometrial in origin and included two endometrial adenocarcinomas and one uterine serous carcinoma. Neither in situ nor invasive adenocarcinoma of the endocervix was observed. Review of smears and reclassification as AGC, not otherwise specified and favour neoplasia revealed a higher proportion of abnormality in the latter group, reaffirming the utility of subtyping. The median age of women with AGC was 41 years. The outcome was analysed with respect to the median age. In women aged equal or more than 40 years, AGC reflected a high-grade squamous or glandular epithelial abnormality in 50% of cases compared with none in those less than 40 years old ( P  = 0.010).
Conclusion:  The age of the woman as well as the subtype of atypical glandular cells influences outcome and hence must be taken into consideration while formulating an acceptable management strategy in these women in a low-resource setting.     

Rapid (partial) prescreening of cervical smears: the quality control method of choice?

Rapid rescreening of all negative and inadequate smears is the quality control method of choice in the UK. The sensitivity of primary screening of laboratory and individual screeners are major indicators of screening quality and are dependent on the number of false negative smears found by rapid screening for their calculation. High sensitivity may indicate good quality primary screening or poor quality rapid review. Quantifiably high quality rapid rescreening is essential if these sensitivity figures are to be meaningful. A 12-month study was undertaken in routine practice using the prescreening mode to ascertain the sensitivity of rapid (partial) screening in our department. The final results of smears were compared with those of rapid prescreening. The calculated sensitivity ranged from 92-54% for high-grade abnormalities and 75-33% for all grades, revealing a wide range of performance between individual prescreeners. Rapid prescreening can identify individuals best suited to rapid screening in routine practice. By using these prescreeners only, the sensitivity of cervical screening could be raised. Rapid (partial) prescreening should be considered as the quality control method of choice.     

Analysis of the performance of 100% rapid review using an average time of 1 and 2 minutes according to the quality of cervical cytology specimens

E. J. C. Manrique, N. L. A. Souza, S. B. N. Tavares, Z. B. P. Albuquerque, L. C. Zeferino and R. G. Amaral Analysis of the performance of 100% rapid review using an average time of 1 and 2 minutes according to the quality of cervical cytology specimens Objectives: To compare the performance of the 100% rapid review method carried out in a mean time of either 1 or 2 minutes according to cytological final result, and to assess whether the presence of obscuring factors in cervical smear samples affects the frequency of false‐negative results. Methods: A total of 5 235 smears classified as negative (93.0%) or unsatisfactory (2.1%) at routine screening were submitted to 100% rapid review using mean times of 1 and 2 minutes. Results: Of the 5 235 smears submitted to 1‐minute rapid review, 88 were considered suspect and of these, 45 were confirmed as abnormal in the cytological final result. When the time used was 2 minutes, 67 smears were considered suspect, 44 of which were confirmed as abnormal. Sensitivity and specificity were similar in the 1‐ and 2‐minute reviews. In smears in which samples were satisfactory and had no obscuring factors, sensitivity and specificity were 64.2% and 98.9% and 61.5% and 99.5% for the 1‐ and 2‐minute reviews, respectively. In comparison, in smears in which the sample was satisfactory for analysis but partially obscured (50–75%), sensitivity and specificity were 64.7% and 99.9% and 70.6% and 99.8% for the 1‐ and 2‐minute reviews, respectively. Conclusions: The method of rapid review of 100% showed no difference in the detection of false‐negative results using the time of 1 or 2 minutes. The quality of the sample did not influence the detection of false‐negatives.