Recently, DNA methylation analysis of FAM19A4 in cervical scrapes has been shown to adequately detect high‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cervical cancer (≥CIN3) in high‐risk HPV (hrHPV)‐positive women. Here, we compared the clinical performance of FAM19A4 methylation analysis to cytology and HPV16/18 genotyping, separately and in combination, for ≥CIN3 detection in hrHPV‐positive women participating in a prospective observational multi‐center cohort study. The study population comprised hrHPV‐positive women aged 18–66 years, visiting a gynecological outpatient clinic. From these women, cervical scrapes and colposcopy‐directed biopsies (for histological confirmation) were obtained. Cervical scrapes were analyzed for FAM19A4 gene promoter methylation, cytology and HPV16/18 genotyping. Methylation analysis was performed by quantitative methylation‐specific PCR (qMSP). Sensitivities and specificities for ≥CIN3 were compared between tests. Stratified analyses were performed for variables that potentially influence marker performance. Of all 508 hrHPV‐positive women, the sensitivities for ≥CIN3 of cytology, FAM19A4 methylation analysis, and cytology combined with HPV16/18 genotyping were 85.6, 75.6 and 92.2%, respectively, with corresponding specificities of 49.8, 71.1 and 29.4%, respectively. Both sensitivity and specificity of FAM19A4 methylation analysis were associated with age (p ≤ 0.001 each). In women ≥30 years (n = 287), ≥CIN3 sensitivity of FAM19A4 methylation analysis was 88.3% (95%CI: 80.2–96.5) which was noninferior to that of cytology [85.5% (95%CI: 76.0–94.0)], at a significantly higher specificity [62.1% (95%CI: 55.8–68.4) compared to 47.6% (95%CI: 41.1–54.1)]. In conclusion, among hrHPV‐positive women from an outpatient population aged ≥30 years, methylation analysis of FAM19A4 is an attractive marker for the identification of women with ≥CIN3.
Vulval conditions may present to a variety of clinicians, such as dermatologists, gynaecologists and general practitioners.Women with these conditions are best managed by a multidisciplinary approach, which includes clear referral pathways between disciplines or access to a specialist multidisciplinary vulval service. Informed consent is a prerequisite for all examinations, investigations and treatments. Consent is particularly important for intimate examinations of the anogenital area, and a chaperone should be offered in all cases. All efforts should be made to maintain a patient's dignity. Depending on symptoms and risk factors, screening for sexually transmitted infections (STI) should be considered. If the patient presents with vulval itch, particularly if also complaining of increased vaginal discharge, vulvaginal candidiasis should be excluded. Sexual dysfunction should be considered in all patients with vulval complaints, either as the cause of the symptoms or secondary to symptoms, and assessed if appropriate. This guideline covers several aspects, such as diagnosis and treatment, of the more common vulval conditions (relatively) often encountered at vulval clinics, i.e. vulval dermatitis (eczema), psoriasis, lichen simplex chronicus, lichen sclerosus, lichen planus, vulvodynia and vulval intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN).
Objective To validate the dynamic spectral imaging (DSI) colposcope's colour-coded map in discriminating high-from low-grade cervical lesions and non-neoplastic tissue.Design Prospective, comparative, multicentre clinical trial.Setting The colposcopy clinics of three Dutch hospitals.Population Women of 18 years or over with an intact cervix, referred for colposcopy.Methods During a 3-minute image acquisition phase, the DSI colposcope was used as a regular video colposcope: the colposcopist located and graded potential lesions based on conventional colposcopic criteria. Subsequently, a colour-coded map was calculated and displayed, representing localisation and severity of the cervical lesion. Biopsies were collected from all atypical sites, as identified by digital mapping and/or conventional colposcopy. Furthermore, one additional biopsy was taken. Main outcome measures Histologically confirmed high-grade cervical disease (CIN2+).Results In total 275 women were included in the study: 183 women were analysed in the 'according-to-protocol' (ATP) cohort and 239 women in the 'intention-to-treat' (ITT) cohort. In the ATP cohort, the sensitivity of DSI colposcopy to identify women with high-grade (CIN2+) lesions was 79% (95% CI 70-88) and the sensitivity of conventional colposcopy was 55% (95% CI 44-65) (P = 0.0006, asymptotic McNemar test). When the DSI colour-coded map was combined with conventional colposcopy, the sensitivity was 88% (95% CI 82-95).Conclusions DSI colposcopy has a significantly higher sensitivity to detect cervical lesions than conventional colposcopy. If the colour-coded map is combined with conventional colposcopic examination, the sensitivity increases further.
Background:High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)-positive women require triage to identify those with cervical high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia and cancer (⩾CIN3 (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3)). FAM19A4 methylation analysis, which detects advanced CIN and cancer, is applicable to different sample types. However, studies comparing the performance of FAM19A4 methylation analysis in hrHPV-positive self-samples and paired physician-taken scrapes are lacking.Methods:We compared the performance of FAM19A4 methylation analysis (and/or HPV16/18 genotyping) in self-samples and paired physician-taken scrapes for ⩾CIN3 detection in hrHPV-positive women (n=450,18–66 years).Results:Overall FAM19A4 methylation levels between sample types were significantly correlated, with strongest correlation in women with ⩾CIN3 (Spearman's ρ 0.697, P<0.001). The performance of FAM19A4 methylation analysis and/or HPV16/18 genotyping did not differ significantly between sample types. In women ⩾30 years, ⩾CIN3 sensitivity of FAM19A4 methylation analysis was 78.4% in self-samples and 88.2% in scrapes (ratio 0.89; CI: 0.75–1.05). In women <30 years, ⩾CIN3 sensitivities were 37.5% and 45.8%, respectively (ratio 0.82; CI: 0.55–1.21). In both groups, ⩾CIN3 specificity of FAM19A4 methylation analysis was significantly higher in self-samples compared with scrapes.Conclusions:FAM19A4 methylation analysis in hrHPV-positive self-samples had a slightly lower sensitivity and a higher specificity for ⩾CIN3 compared with paired physician-taken scrapes. With a similarly good clinical performance in both sample types, combined FAM19A4 methylation analysis and HPV16/18 genotyping provides a feasible triage strategy for hrHPV-positive women, with direct applicability on self-samples.
Women who test positive for a high-risk type of the human papillomavirus (HPV) require triage testing to identify those women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or cancer (≥ CIN3). Although Pap cytology is considered an attractive triage test, its applicability is hampered by its subjective nature. This study prospectively compared the clinical performance of p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology to that of Pap cytology, with or without HPV16/18 genotyping, in high-risk HPV-positive women visiting gynecologic outpatient clinics (n = 446 and age 18-66 years). From all women, cervical scrapes (for Pap cytology, HPV16/18 genotyping, and p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology) and colposcopy-directed biopsies were obtained. The sensitivity of p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology for ≥ CIN3 (93.8%) did neither differ significantly from that of Pap cytology (87.7%; ratio 1.07 and 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.97-1.18) nor from that of Pap cytology combined with HPV16/18 genotyping (95.1%; ratio 0.99 and 95% CI: 0.91-1.07). However, the specificity of p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology for ≥ CIN3 (51.2%) was significantly higher than that of Pap cytology (44.9%; ratio 1.14 and 95% CI: 1.01-1.29) and Pap cytology combined with HPV16/18 genotyping (25.8%; ratio 1.99 and 95% CI: 1.68-2.35). After exclusion of women who had been referred because of abnormal Pap cytology, the specificity of p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology for ≥ CIN3 (56.7%) remained the same, whereas that of Pap cytology (60.3%) increased substantially, resulting in a similar specificity of both assays (ratio 0.94 and 95% CI: 0.83-1.07) in this sub-cohort. In summary, p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology has a good clinical performance and is an interesting objective microscopybased triage tool for high-risk HPV-positive women. Persistent infection with a high-risk type of the human papillomavirus (HPV) is essential for the development of almost all cervical cancers. 1,2 Testing for high-risk HPV has been shown to provide superior protection against cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 and cervical cancer (together referred to as ≥ CIN3) compared with cervical cytology (Pap cytology). 3 However, most women who test positive for high-risk HPV clear the virus spontaneously and do not develop clinically relevant cervical disease. Therefore, additional triage testing is required to identify the subgroup of high-risk HPVpositive women who actually have ≥ CIN3, thereby Correspondence: Professor CJLM Meijer, MD PhD,
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.