The clinical performance of computer‐assisted liquid‐based cytology, primary hrHPV screening, and cotesting at a Turkish Tertiary Care Hospital. Issue 1 (12th October 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Kir, Gozde; Seneldir, Hatice; Cosan Sarbay, Billur
• Is Part Of: Diagnostic cytopathology. Volume 46:Issue 1(2018)
• Page Start: 3
• Page End: 8
• Publication Date: 2017-10-12
• Subjects: cotesting -- human papillomavirus (HPV) -- liquid‐based cytology; Cytodiagnosis -- Periodicals; Pathology, Cellular -- Periodicals; Cytology -- Periodicals; 616.07582
• DOI: 10.1002/dc.23836
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 8755-1039

Abstract

Abstract : Background: We aimed to compare the performance of computer‐assisted liquid‐based cytology, primary high‐risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) screening, and cytology‐hrHPV cotesting with regards to the detection rate of cervical cancer precursor lesions. Methods: A total of 22, 653 computer‐assisted liquid‐based cytology specimens interpreted between 2013 and 2015 were included in the study. We compared the false‐negative rates and sensitivities for computer‐assisted liquid‐based cytology, primary hrHPV screening and cytology‐hrHPV cotesting among women with normal and abnormal cytologies. Among 1, 748 women who had undergone cotesting, 249 underwent follow‐up biopsies. Results: For detecting biopsy‐confirmed high‐grade lesions, the sensitivities of using hrHPV, Pap tests, and cytology‐hrHPV cotesting were 90.67%, 88%, and 98.67%, respectively, while the false‐negative rates for hrHPV and Pap tests were 9.3% and 12%, respectively. The false negative rate for cotesting was only 1.3%. Conclusion: Based on the significantly high sensitivity and lower false‐negative rates achieved, we conclude that the combination of cytologic screening with hrHPV testing is the best preferred strategy for detection of cervical precursor lesions in our country's conditions.