DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20190576

Analysis of cervical liquid-based cytology results in Eskişehir, Turkey: correlation of cytology results with histology, immunocytocemical HPV Ab and HPV DNA results of 18404 women

Bahattin Erdoğan, Cengiz Bal, Binnur Önal

Abstract


Background: To analyze retrospectively the results of HPV DNA, immunocytochemical HPV antibody staining of gynecologic smear samples evaluated in a public hospital and to observe their compatibility with histologic diagnosis. At the same time, the contribution of ICC HPV Ab staining experience results to the morphological evaluation is discussed in this paper.

Methods: In this study, liquid-based cytology test results of patients who applied to the gynecology between 2014 and 2017 were analyzed. The Ultravision Quanto Detection System was modified for immunocytochemical staining. HPV DNA tests were performed with the Qiagen Hybrid Capture test.

Results: The 18404 test result was included in the research. The percentage of smear that epithelial cell atypia is seen was 3.4%, the rate of ASC/SIL was 1.89%. Compared to the first 3 years of the study, the increase in the rate of LSIL is seen with a partial decrease in ASCUS rate in year 2017 (p<0.05). The atypical positive test rate with histologic confirmation was 73.61%. Among 138 HPV Ab results, 58.7% of them were negative and 41.3% of them were positive. Sensitivity and specificity rates were determined 76.19% and 52.17% for SIL. Among 53 HPV DNA results (53% negative and 46.3% positive); sensitivity and specificity rates were determined 92.86% and 50% for SIL.

Conclusions: İmmunocytochemical HPV Ab staining provided statistically significant contribution to LSIL (p<0.05).  It is thought that it also will provide additional evidence for morphological findings while cytological evaluation and may help the clinician in managing the conditions for disease.

 


Keywords


Liquid-based cytology, HPV DNA, Immunocytochemistry, Turkey

Full Text:

PDF

References


Arbynm M, Castellsague X, de-Sanjose S, Bruni L, Saraiya M, Bray F,et al. Worldwide burden of cervical cancer in 2008. Annals Oncol. 2011;22:2675-86.

Directorate General of Public Health, Department of Cancer. Türkiye kanser istatistikleri, 2014. Avaible at: http://kanser.gov.tr/Dosya/ca_istatistik/2014-RAPOR._uzuuun.pdf. Accessed on 13 November 2018.

Nayar R, Wilbur DC. The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology: Hystorical Perspective. Acta Cytologyca. 2017;61:659-72.

Stoler MH, Schiffman M. İnterobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologyc and histologc interpretations: realistic estimates from the ASCUS-LSIL Trage Study. JAMA. 2001;285(11):1500-5.

Edebal Z, Akıncıoğlu E, Kiseli M, Doğan H, Gürsoy A Y, Ataoğlu Ö. ASC-US Tanılı Hastalarda tekrarlanabilirlik, Tanı Kriterlerinin Sevikal Biyopsiye Yansıması ve Servikal Biyopsilerde P16 Antikoru Araştırması. Acta Oncol tur. 2017;50(1):50-5.

Syrjänen K, Di Bonito L, Gonçalves L, Murjal L, Santamaria M, Mahovlic V, et al. Cervical cancer screening in Mediterranean countries: implications for the future. Cytopathology. 2010;21(6):359-67.

Pinto AP, Degen M, Villa LL, Cibas ES. Immunomarkers in Gynecologyc Cytology: Te Search for the Ideal “Biomolecular Papanicolaou Test”. Acta Cytologyca. 2012;56:109-21.

Katki HA, Wacholder S, Solomon D, Castle PE, Schiffman M. Risk estimation for the next generation of prevention programmes for cervical cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10(11):1022–3.

Katki H A, Kinney W K, Fetterman B, Lorey T, Poitras NE, Cheung L ant at. Cervical cancer Risk for 330000 women Undergoing Concurrent HPV Testing and Cervical Cytology in Routine Clinical Practice at a Large Managed Care Organization. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(7):663-72.

İlter E, Midi A, Haliloğlu B, Çelik A, Yener AN, Ulu İ, Bozkurt HS, Özekici Ü. Comparison of conventional and liquid-base cutology: do the diagnostic benefits outweigh the financial aspect? Tur J med Sci 2012;42(1):1200-1206.

Branca M, Longatto-Fiho A. Recommendadtions on Quality Control and Quality Assurance in Cervical Cytology. Acta Cytologyca. 2015;59:361-9.

Mario-Lucio C. Araujo Jr, Santana DA, Almeida LB, Shirley BS. Quintana, et al. Quality in cytopathology: an analysis of the internal quality monitoring indicators of the Instituto Nacional de Câncer. J Bras Patol Med Lab. 2015(51);102-7.

Smith B, Matisic J, Hayes M. Quality Assurance/Quality Control – Cervical Cytology and Histopathology. BC Cancer Agency. Vancouver, BC, Canada: 2016.

Renshaw AA, Elsheikh TM. Predicting screening sensitivity from workload in gynecologyc cytology: a review. Diagn Cytopathol. 2011;39(11):832-6.

Türkmen İÇ, Usubütün A, Çakır A, Aydın Ö, Bolat FA, Akbulut M. What does the Data of 354725 Patients from Turkey Tell Us About Cevical Smear Epithelial Cell Abnormalities? Turk patoloji Derg. 2017;33:134-43.

Arbyn M, Anttila A, Jordan J, Gonco G, Schenk U, Segnan N, et al. European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening - Second Edition. 2008: 84.

Turkish Cervical Cancer and Cervical Cytology Research Group. Prevalence of cervical cytological abnormalities in Turkey. J gynecol Obs. 2009;106(3):206-9.

Keskin HL, Seçen Eİ, Taş EE, Kaya S, Avşar AF.Servikal Smear Sitoljisi ile Kolposkopi Eşliğinde Servikal Biyopsi Korelasyonu. Türk Jinekoljik Onkoloji Dergisi. 2011;3:71-5.

Türkmen IÇ, Başsüllü N, Korkmaz P, Günenç B, Baykal CM, Güdücü N, et al. Patients with epithelial cell abnormality in PAP smears: Correlation of results with follow-up smears and cervical biopsies. Turk Patoloji Derg. 2013;29:179-84.

Mehmetoğlu HÇ, Sadikoğlu G, Özçakır A, Bilgel N. Pap smear screaning in the primary health care setting: A study from Turkey. N Am J med Sci. 2010;2(10):467-72.

Coşkun A, Köskü B, Kıran G, Arıkan DC, Analan A. Pap smear Screening Results in Kahramanmaraş Gynecol Obstet Reprod Med. 2008;14(3):182-5.

Desticioğlu R, Yıldırım M, Süngü N, Akyol M, Yavuz AF. The Evaluation of Cervical cytology results in a tertiary Health centre between 2006-2015. Ankara med J. 2007;(4):267-74.

Nermin KOC. Evaluation of 50,465 Cervical Smear results in Zeynep Kamil Maternity and Pediatric research and Training Hospital. Zeynep kamil Tıp Bülteni. 2016;47:3.

Durmuş ŞE, Özmen SA, Çalık İ, Kurt A, Balta H, Şener E at all. Epitelial cell abnormalities frequency in the Erzurum province’s cervical cancer screening and the evaluation of control smear of cases which are diagnosed as ASC-US. Med J SDU. 2016;23(1):16-19.

Nascimento AF, Cibas ES. The ASC/SIL ratio forcytopatologists as a quality control measure. A follow-up study. Am J Clin Pathol. 2007;128:653-6.

Yeşil C, Önder S, Boynukalın K, Ergül Ö, Fırat P, Kuzey GM, Usubütün A. Corelation Between Cytological and Histological Diagnosis in Premalignant Lesions of the Cervix. Turk Patoloji Dergisi. 2010;26(1):38-43.

Nanda K, McCrory DC, Myers E. Accuracy of the Papanicolaou test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytologic abnormalities: A systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2000;132:810–9.

Verdoodt F, Szarewski A, Halfon P, Cuschieri K, Arbyn M. Triage of women with minor abnormal cervical cytology: meta-analysis of the accuracy of an assay targeting messenger ribonucleic acid of 5 high-risk human papillomavirus types. Cancer Cytopathol. 2013;121(12):675-87.

Lorincz A, Castanon1 A, Lim WWA, Sasieni P. New strategies for human papillomavirus-based cervical screening. Women's Health. 2013;9(5):443–52.

Dursun P, Ayhan A, Mutlu L, Çağlar M, Haberal A, Güngör T, et al. HPV Types in Turkey: Multicenter Hospital based Evaluation of 6388 patients in Turkish Gynecologic Oncology group Centers. Türk Patoloji Derg. 2013;29:210-6.