共 22 条
Discrepant HPV/Cytology Cotesting Results: Are There Differences Between Cytology-Negative Versus HPV-Negative Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia?
被引:11
作者:
Tracht, Jessica M.
[1
]
Davis, Antoinette D.
[1
]
Fasciano, Danielle N.
[1
]
Eltoum, Isam-Eldin A.
[1
]
机构:
[1] Univ Alabama Birmingham, Sch Med, Dept Pathol, 1802 6th Ave South,NP 3552, Birmingham, AL 35233 USA
关键词:
cervical cancer screening;
cotesting;
false-negative screening;
human papillomavirus (HPV) molecular testing;
Papanicolaou (Pap) smear;
primary HPV;
256,648 WOMEN;
CANCER;
PREVENTION;
INFECTION;
LESIONS;
ATHENA;
D O I:
10.1002/cncy.21905
中图分类号:
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号:
100214 ;
摘要:
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to compare cervical high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions sub-categorized as cervical intraepithelial neoplasia-3 (CIN-3)-positive after a negative cytology result but positive for high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing to those with a negative HR-HPV test but positive cytology (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance [ASCUS]-positive/HPV-negative) and to assess reasons for discrepancies. METHODS: The authors retrospectively analyzed women who underwent screening with cytology and HPV testing from 2010 through 2013. After a review of surgical specimens and cytology, discrepancies were classified as sampling or interpretation error. Clinical and pathologic findings were compared. RESULTS: In total, 15,173 women (age range, 25-95 years; 7.1% were aged < 30 years) underwent both HPV and cytologic testing, and 1184 (8.4%) underwent biopsy. Cytology was positive in 19.4% of specimens, and HPV was positive in 14.5%. Eighty-four CIN-3-positive specimens were detected, including 55 that tested ASCUS-positive/HPV-positive, 11 that tested negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy (NILM)/HPV-positive, 10 that tested ASCUS-positive/HPV-negative, 3 that tested NILM/HPV-negative, and 5 tests that were unsatisfactory. There was no significant difference between NILM/HPV-positive and ASCUS-positive/HPV-negative CIN-3 in terms of size, time to occurrence, the presence of a cytopathic effect, screening history, race, or age. Six of 11 NILM/HPV-positive cases were reclassified as ASCUS, indicating an interpreting error of 55% and a sampling error of 45%. No ASCUS-positive/HPV-negative cases were reclassified. Seven cases of CIN-3 with positive cytology were HPV-negative. CONCLUSIONS: There are no significant clinical or pathologic differences between NILM/HPV-positive and ASCUS-positive/HPV-negative CIN-3-positive specimens. Cytologic sampling or interpretation remains the main reason for discrepancies. However, HPV-negative CIN-3 with positive cytology exists and may be missed by primary HPV screening. (C) 2017 American Cancer Society.
引用
收藏
页码:795 / 805
页数:11
相关论文