Could liquid based cytology associated with hybrid capture II assay for HPV-DNA optimize the cytological diagnosis?
pdf (Português (Brasil))

Keywords

Papanicolaou method
ASCUS
hybrid capture
liquid based cytology
reflex testing

How to Cite

1.
Utagawa ML, Pereira SMM, Longatto Filho A, Martins CR-, Aguiar LS, Pittoli J Érika, Di Loreto C, Maeda MYS, Martins L, Galvane JO, Syrjänen K. Could liquid based cytology associated with hybrid capture II assay for HPV-DNA optimize the cytological diagnosis?. Rev Inst Adolfo Lutz [Internet]. 2004 Dec. 30 [cited 2024 Jul. 22];63(1):100-3. Available from: https://periodicos.saude.sp.gov.br/RIAL/article/view/34801

Abstract

Liquid based cytology and hybrid capture II assay (HC2) are thought to improve the cytological diagnosis
chiefly those from undetermined origin (ASCUS/AGUS). We studied cervical samples collected with DNA
CITOLIQ® System (DIGENE-Brazil) from patients referred to the Hospital Leonor Mendes de Barros, São Paulo - SP. HC2 for HPV-DNA was performed in samples from 842 women. Sixty four (7.6%) samples
showed ASCUS. HC2 for high risk HPV-DNA was positive in 16 (25%) ASCUS and 4 (6.2%) AGUS. Among
748 samples, 88.8% were cytologically negative, and from these cases 97 (11.5%) were positive for high risk HPV-DNA. Consequently, women presenting negative cytology but HPV-DNA test positive, should be carefully observed, because they represent a high risk group , and their samples should be referred to a peer revision. We concluded that liquid-based cytology associated with HC2 for HPV-DNA assay may improve the sensitivity of Papanicolaou testing.

https://doi.org/10.53393/rial.2004.63.34801
pdf (Português (Brasil))

References

1. Bernstein, SJ; Sanchez-Ramos, L; Ndubisi, B. Liquid-based cervical cytology smear study and conventional papanicolaou smears: A metaanalysis of prospective studies comparing cytologic diagnosis and sample adequacy. Am J Obstet Gynecol , 185: 308-317, 2001.

2. Biscotti, CV et al. Thin-layer Pap test vs. Conventioanl pap smear. Analysis of 400 split-samples. J Reprod Med , 47: 9-13, 2002.

3. Bishop JW. Comparison of the CytoRich system with conventional cervical cytology. Preliminary data on 2032 cases from a clinical trial site. 41: 15-23, 1997.

4. Bishop, JW et al. Multicenter masked evaluation of Autocyte PREP thin layer with matched conventional smears. Including initial biopsy results. Acta cytol ,42: 189-197, 1998.

5. Bolick, DR; Hellman, DJ. Laboratory implementation and efficacy assessment of the ThinPrep cervical cancer screening system. Acta Cytol, 42: 209-213, 1998.

6. Castle, PE et al. Absolute risk of a subsequent abnormal Pap among oncogenic human papillomavirus DNA-positive, cytologically negative women. Cancer, 95: 2145-2151, 2002.

7. Cohn, DE; Herzog, TJ New innovations in cervical cancer screening. Gynecologic Surgery and Oncology , 44: 538-549, 2001.

8. FDA News. FDA approves expanded use of HPV test. http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2003/new00890.html.

9. Ferenczy, A; Franco, E. Cervical-cancer screening beyond the year 2000. Lancet-Oncology , 2: 27-32, 2001.

10. Hessling JI et al. Effectiveness of thin layer preparations vs. Conventional pap smear in a blinded, split-sample study. Extended cytologic evaluation. J Reprod Med , 46: 880-886, 2001.

11. Manos, MM et al. Identifying women with cervical neoplasia using human papillomavirus DNA testing for equivocal Papanicolaou results. JAMA, 281: 1605-1610, 1999.

12. Marino, JF; Fremont-Smith, M. Direct-to-vial experience with AutoCyte PREP in a small New England regional cytology practice. J Reprod Med, 46: 353-358, 2001.

13. McCrory, D et al. Evaluation of cervical cytology. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment Number 5. Duke University, 290-97-0014; Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 99-E010. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 1999.

14. Minge, L et al. Autocyte Prep System vs conventional cervical cytology. Comparison based on 2,156 cases. J Reprod Med, 45: 179-184, 2000.

15. Monsonego, J et al. Liquid-based cytology for primary cervical cancer screening: a multi-center study. Br J Cancer, 84: 360-366, 2001.

16. Petry, KU et al. Inclusion of HPV testing in routine cervical cancer screening for women above 29 years in Germany: results for 8,466 patients. Br J Cancer, 88: 1570-1577, 2003.

17. Saslow, D et al. American cancer society guideline for the early detection of cervical neoplasia and cancer. CA Cancer J Clin , 52: 342-362, 2002.

18. Solomon, D et al. The 2001 Bethesda System. Terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA , 287: 2114-2119, 2002.

19. Sulik, SM et al. Are flui-based cytologies superior to the conventional Papanicolaou test?. A systematic review. J Fam Pract , 50: 1040-1046, 2001.

20. Quddus, MR et al. Utility of HPV DNA Detection in thin-layer, liquidbased tests with atypical squamous metaplasia. Acta Cytol, 46: 808-812, 2002.

21. Vassilakos, P et al. CytoRich liquid-based cervical cytologic test. Screening results in a routine cytopathology service. Acta Cytol, 42: 198-202, 1998.

22. Vassilakos, P et al. Biopsy-based comparison of liquid-based, thin layer preparations to conventional Pap smears. J Reprod Med, 45: 11-16, 2000.

23. Wright Jr, TC et al. 2001 Consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA , 287: 2120-2129, 2000.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2004 Revista do Instituto Adolfo Lutz

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.