MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women underwent self-sampling followed by gynecologist sampling during screening at two primary health clinics. Pap cytology of cervical specimens was evaluated for specimen adequacy, presence of endocervical cells or transformation zone cells and cytological interpretation for cells abnormalities. Cervical specimens were also extracted and tested for HPV DNA detection. Positive HPV smears underwent gene sequencing and HPV genotyping by referring to the online NCBI gene bank. Results were compared between samplings by Kappa agreement and McNemar test.
RESULTS: For Pap specimen adequacy, KSSD showed 100% agreement with gynecologist sampling but had only 32.3% agreement for presence of endocervical cells. Both sampling showed 100% agreement with only 1 case detected HSIL favouring CIN2 for cytology result. HPV DNA detection showed 86.2%agreement (K=0.64, 95% CI 0.524-0.756, p=0.001) between samplings. KSSD and gynaecologist sampling identified high risk HPV in 17.3% and 23.9% respectively (p= 0.014).
CONCLUSION: The self-sampling using Kato device can serve as a tool in Pap cytology and HPV DNA detection in low resource settings in Malaysia. Self-sampling devices such as KSSD can be used as an alternative technique to gynaecologist sampling for cervical cancer screening among rural populations in Malaysia.
METHODS: Liquid based cervico-vaginal cytology specimens with squamous abnormalities and corresponding histology from 97 women with subsequent colposcopy and biopsy were included. The specimens were then subjected to the dual stain and Roche Cobas 4800 multiplex real time PCR HPV DNA testing. The sensitivity and specificity of the dual stain and HPV testing were calculated using CIN 2+ on histology as a reference standard.
RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of the dual stain in detecting histology proven CIN 2+ was 93.7% and 76.5% while HPV testing was 85.7% and 14.7% respectively. Of the 44 women with ASCUS or LSIL on cytology, the dual stain also reduced the number of unnecessary colposcopy referrals from 27 to 7 when used as a triage marker compared to HPV testing.
CONCLUSION: p16/Ki-67 dual stain was more sensitive and specific than HPV testing in determining the presence of CIN 2+ on histology. It could triage low grade cervico-vaginal specimens more effectively and potentially help women avoid unnecessary colposcopies. Future studies are needed to further evaluate its role in cervical cancer screening programmes.
OBJECTIVE: We determined the agreement of cytological diagnoses made on samples collected by women themselves (selfsampling) versus samples collected by physicians (Physician sampling).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We invited women volunteers to undergo two procedures; cervical selfsampling using the Evalyn brush and physician sampling using a Cervex brush. The women were shown a video presentation on how to take their own cervical samples before the procedure. The samples taken by physicians were taken as per routine testing (Gold Standard). All samples were subjected to Thin Prep monolayer smears. The diagnoses made were according to the Bethesda classification. The results from these two sampling methods were analysed and compared.
RESULTS: A total of 367 women were recruited into the study, ranging from 22 to 65 years age. There was a significant good agreement of the cytological diagnoses made on the samples from the two sampling methods with the Kappa value of 0.568 (p=0.040). Using the cytological smears taken by physicians as the gold standard, the sensitivity of selfsampling was 71.9% (95% CI:70.972.8), the specificity was 86.6% (95% CI:85.7 87.5), the positive predictive value was 74.2% (95% CI:73.375.1) and the negative predictive value was 85.1% (95% CI: 84.286.0). Selfsampling smears (22.9%) allowed detection of microorganisms better than physicians samples (18.5%).
CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that samples taken by women themselves (selfsampling) and physicians have good diagnostic agreement. Selfsampling could be the method of choice in countries in which the coverage of women attending clinics for screening for cervical cancer is poor.
METHODOLOGY: MCM2, 4, 5 and 7 genes expression profiles were evaluated in three cervical tissue samples each of normal cervix, human papillomavirus (HPV)-infected low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL), high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), using Human Transcriptome Array 2.0 and validated by nCounter® PanCancer Pathway NanoString Array. Immunohistochemical expression of MCM2 protein was semi-quantitatively assessed by histoscore in tissue microarrays containing 9 cases of normal cervix, 10 LSIL, 10 HSIL and 42 cases of SCC.
RESULTS: MCM2, 4, 5 and 7 genes expressions were upregulated with increasing fold change during the progression from LSIL to HSIL and the highest in SCC. MCM2 gene had the highest fold change in SCC compared to normal cervix. Immunohistochemically, MCM2 protein was localised in the nuclei of basal cells of normal cervical epithelium and dysplastic-neoplastic cells of CIN and SCC. There was a significant difference in MCM2 protein expression between the histological groups (P = 0.039), and histoscore was the highest in HSIL compared to normal cervix (P = 0.010).
CONCLUSION: The upregulation of MCM genes expressions in cervical carcinogenesis reaffirms MCM as a proliferative marker in DNA replication pathway, whereby proliferation of dysplastic and cancer cells become increasingly dysregulated and uncontrolled. A strong expression of MCM2 protein in HSIL may aid as a concatenated screening tool in detecting pre-cancerous cervical lesions.