Comparison of primary cytology, primary HPV testing and co-testing as cervical cancer screening for Chinese women: a population-based screening cohort

被引:6
|
作者
Li, Zhi-Fang [1 ,2 ]
Jia, Xin-Hua [1 ,3 ]
Feng, Xiangxian [2 ]
Zhang, Shaokai [4 ,5 ]
Zhang, Xun [1 ]
Pan, Qin-Jing [1 ]
Zou, Xun-Wen [6 ]
Hao, Yue-Qing [2 ]
Sun, Xi-Bin [4 ,5 ]
Qiao, You-Lin [1 ]
机构
[1] Chinese Acad Med Sci & Peking Union Med Coll, Dept Epidemiol, Natl Canc Ctr, Natl Clin Res Ctr Canc,Canc Hosp, Beijing, Peoples R China
[2] Changzhi Med Coll, Dept Prevent Med, Changzhi, Shanxi, Peoples R China
[3] Xiamen Univ, Collaborat Innovat Ctr Biol Prod, Natl Inst Diagnost & Vaccine Dev Infect Dis, State Key Lab Mol Vaccinol & Mol Diagnost, Xiamen, Fujian, Peoples R China
[4] Zhengzhou Univ, Dept Canc Epidemiol, Affiliated Canc Hosp, Zhengzhou, Henan, Peoples R China
[5] Henan Canc Hosp, Zhengzhou, Henan, Peoples R China
[6] Macalester Coll, St Paul, MN 55105 USA
来源
BMJ OPEN | 2022年 / 12卷 / 10期
关键词
epidemiology; public health; infection control; HUMAN-PAPILLOMAVIRUS PREVALENCE; LIQUID-BASED CYTOLOGY; POOLED ANALYSIS; RISK; ACCURACY; DNA; PREVENTION; NEOPLASIA; BIOPSIES; LESIONS;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2022-063622
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objectives We compared clinical performance of three strategies of primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, primary cytology and co-testing for cervical cancer screening. Design A population-based prospective cohort study of clinical performance of screening strategy. Setting Patients recruited from community in Changzhi County, Shanxi Province, China. Patient 3209 women aged 30-64 years without gynaecological issues. Primary and secondary outcome measures The performance of different screening strategies for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe (CIN2+). Results A total of 53 CIN2+ and 31 CIN3+ cases are detected. For CIN2+, sensitivity of primary HPV (95.9%) and co-testing (98.0%) are not statistically different, but significantly higher than primary cytology (48.0%). Specificity (86.8%), colposcopy referral rate (7.8%) and number of colposcopies required to detect one case (9.8) for primary HPV are better than co-testing (79.8%, 11.9%, 14.3%, respectively). For CIN3+, primary HPV, co-testing have 100% of sensitivity and specificity, which is significantly higher than primary cytology (56.7% and 90.2%). Number of colposcopies required to detect one case for primary HPV (15.9) is better than co-testing (23.8). Conclusions Compared with co-testing, HPV primary screening had comparable sensitivity and higher specificity for CIN2+ detection, and both of them showed better performance than cytology primary screening in cervical cancer screening.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Uptake of co-testing with HPV and cytology for cervical screening: A population-based evaluation in the United States
    Cuzick, Jack
    Du, Ruofei
    Adcock, Rachael
    Kinney, Walter
    Joste, Nancy
    McDonald, Ruth M.
    English, Kevin
    Torres, Salina M.
    Saslow, Debbie
    Wheeler, Cosette M.
    GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2021, 162 (03) : 555 - 559
  • [2] Primary HPV testing: a proposal for co-testing in initial rounds of screening to optimise sensitivity of cervical cancer screening
    Herbert, A.
    CYTOPATHOLOGY, 2017, 28 (01) : 9 - 15
  • [3] The Clinical and Economic Benefits of Co-Testing Versus Primary HPV Testing for Cervical Cancer Screening: A Modeling Analysis
    Felix, Juan C.
    Lacey, Michael J.
    Miller, Jeffrey D.
    Lenhart, Gregory M.
    Spitzer, Mark
    Kulkarni, Rucha
    JOURNAL OF WOMENS HEALTH, 2016, 25 (06) : 606 - 616
  • [4] Cost-Effectiveness of Primary HPV Testing, Cytology and Co-testing as Cervical Cancer Screening for Women Above Age 30 Years
    Jin, Xian Wen
    Lipold, Laura
    Foucher, Julie
    Sikon, Andrea
    Brainard, Jennifer
    Belinson, Jerome
    Schramm, Sarah
    Nottingham, Kelly
    Hu, Bo
    Rothberg, Michael B.
    JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2016, 31 (11) : 1338 - 1344
  • [5] Population-based primary HPV mRNA cervical screening compared with cytology screening
    Lindroth, Ylva
    Borgfeldt, Christer
    Thorn, Gunilla
    Bodelsson, Gunilla
    Forslund, Ola
    PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, 2019, 124 : 61 - 66
  • [6] Primary HPV testing with cytology versus cytology alone in cervical screening-A prospective randomized controlled trial with two rounds of screening in a Chinese population
    Chan, Karen K. L.
    Liu, Stephanie S.
    Wei, Na
    Ngu, Siew F.
    Chu, Mandy M. Y.
    Tse, Ka Y.
    Lau, Lesley S. K.
    Cheung, Annie N. Y.
    Ngan, Hextan Y. S.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2020, 147 (04) : 1152 - 1162
  • [7] Efficacy of HPV DNA Testing With Cytology Triage and/or Repeat HPV DNA Testing in Primary Cervical Cancer Screening
    Naucler, Pontus
    Ryd, Walter
    Tornberg, Sven
    Strand, Anders
    Wadell, Goran
    Elfgren, Kristina
    Radberg, Thomas
    Strander, Bjorn
    Forslund, Ola
    Hansson, Bengt-Goran
    Hagmar, Bjorn
    Johansson, Bo
    Rylander, Eva
    Dillner, Joakim
    JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2009, 101 (02): : 88 - 99
  • [8] Cytology versus HPV testing for cervical cancer screening in the general population
    Koliopoulos, George
    Nyaga, Victoria N.
    Santesso, Nancy
    Bryant, Andrew
    Martin-Hirsch, Pierre P. L.
    Mustafa, Reem A.
    Schnemann, Holger
    Paraskevaidis, Evangelos
    Arbyn, Marc
    COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2017, (08):
  • [9] Impact of HPV testing in opportunistic cervical screening: Support for primary HPV screening in the United States
    Cuzick, Jack
    Adcock, Rachael
    Kinney, Walter E.
    Castle, Philip E.
    Robertson, Michael M.
    McDonald, Ruth M. H.
    Stoler, Mark H.
    Du, Ruofei M.
    Wheeler, Cosette M.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2023, 153 (01) : 83 - 93
  • [10] Adoption of HPV testing as an adjunct to conventional cytology in cervical cancer screening in Japan
    Inoue, Masaki
    Okamura, Makoto
    Hashimoto, Shigeru
    Tango, Masahiro
    Ukita, Toshihiko
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGY & OBSTETRICS, 2010, 111 (02) : 110 - 114