Evaluation of CINtec PLUS® testing as an adjunctive test in ASC-US diagnosed SurePath® preparations

Diagnostic Cytopathology

Volumn 41, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 35-40

  Edgerton, Neil ^a   Cohen, Cynthia ^a   Siddiqui, Momin T ^a  

^a EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

CINtec; Ki 67 MIB1; p16; sensitivity; specificity; SurePath

Indexed keywords

CYCLIN DEPENDENT KINASE INHIBITOR 2A; KI 67 ANTIGEN; VIRUS DNA;

ARTICLE; COLPOSCOPY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HUMAN TISSUE; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PAPILLOMAVIRUS INFECTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVIX DYSPLASIA; WART VIRUS;

CYCLIN-DEPENDENT KINASE INHIBITOR P16; FEMALE; HUMAN PAPILLOMAVIRUS DNA TESTS; HUMANS; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; KI-67 ANTIGEN; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVICAL DYSPLASIA; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 84872867033     PISSN: 87551039     EISSN: 10970339     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/dc.21757     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, et al. The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002; 287: 2114-2119.
2. Wright TC, Jr, Massad LS, Dunton CJ, Spitzer M, Wilkinson EJ, Solomon D,. 2006 consensus guidelines for the management of women with abnormal cervical cancer screening tests. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 197: 346-355.
3. Edwards BK, Ward E, Kohler BA, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2006, featuring colorectal cancer trends and impact of interventions (risk factors, screening, and treatment) to reduce future rates. Cancer 2010; 116: 544-573.
4. Rust G, Satcher D, Fryer GE, Levine RS, Blumenthal DS,. Triangulating on success: Innovation, public health, medical care, and cause-specific US mortality rates over a half century (1950-2000). Am J Public Health 2010; 100 (Suppl 1): S95-S104.
5. Henley SJ, King JB, German RR, Richardson LC, Plescia M,. Surveillance of screening-detected cancers (colon and rectum, breast, and cervix)-United States, 2004-2006. MMWR Surveill Summ 2010; 59: 1-25.
6. Stoler MH, Schiffman M,. Interobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologic and histologic interpretations: Realistic estimates from the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study. JAMA 2001; 285: 1500-1505.
7. van Oortmarssen GJ, Habbema JD,. Duration of preclinical cervical cancer and reduction in incidence of invasive cancer following negative pap smears. Int J Epidemiol 1995; 24: 300-307.
8. Franco EL, Villa LL, Sobrinho JP, et al. Epidemiology of acquisition and clearance of cervical human papillomavirus infection in women from a high-risk area for cervical cancer. J Infect Dis 1999; 180: 1415-1423.
9. Ho GY, Bierman R, Beardsley L, Chang CJ, Burk RD,. Natural history of cervicovaginal papillomavirus infection in young women. N Engl J Med 1998; 338: 423-428.
10. Nasiell K, Nasiell M, Vaclavinkova V,. Behavior of moderate cervical dysplasia during long-term follow-up. Obstet Gynecol 1983; 61: 609-614.
11. Mantovani F, Banks L,. The human papillomavirus E6 protein and its contribution to malignant progression. Oncogene 2001; 20: 7874-7887.
12. Munger K, Phelps WC, Bubb V, Howley PM, Schlegel R,. The E6 and E7 genes of the human papillomavirus type 16 together are necessary and sufficient for transformation of primary human keratinocytes. J Virol 1989; 63: 4417-4421.
13. Khleif SN, DeGregori J, Yee CL, et al. Inhibition of cyclin D-CDK4/CDK6 activity is associated with an E2F-mediated induction of cyclin kinase inhibitor activity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1996; 93: 4350-4354.
14. Key G, Becker MH, Baron B, et al. New Ki-67-equivalent murine monoclonal antibodies (MIB 1-3) generated against bacterially expressed parts of the Ki-67 cDNA containing three 62 base pair repetitive elements encoding for the Ki-67 epitope. Lab Invest 1993; 68: 629-636.
15. Reuschenbach M, Clad A, von Knebel Doeberitz C, et al. Performance of p16INK4a-cytology. HPV mRNA, and HPV DNA testing to identify high grade cervical dysplasia in women with abnormal screening results. Gynecol Oncol 2010; 119: 98-105.
16. Dijkstra MG, Heideman DA, de Roy SC, et al. p16(INK4a) immunostaining as an alternative to histology review for reliable grading of cervical intraepithelial lesions. J Clin Pathol 2010; 63: 972-977.
17. Bergeron C, Ordi J, Schmidt D, Trunk MJ, Keller T, Ridder R,. Conjunctive p16INK4a testing significantly increases accuracy in diagnosing high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Clin Pathol 2010; 133: 395-406.
18. Wentzensen N, Bergeron C, Cas F, Vinokurova S, von Knebel Doeberitz M,. Triage of women with ASCUS and LSIL cytology: Use of qualitative assessment of p16INK4a positive cells to identify patients with high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Cancer 2007; 111: 58-66.
19. Tsoumpou I, Arbyn M, Kyrgiou M, et al. p16(INK4a) immunostaining in cytological and histological specimens from the uterine cervix: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Treat Rev 2009; 35: 210-220.
20. Denton KJ, Bergeron C, Klement P, Trunk MJ, Keller T, Ridder R,. The sensitivity and specificity of p16(INK4a) cytology vs HPV testing for detecting high-grade cervical disease in the triage of ASC-US and LSIL pap cytology results. Am J Clin Pathol 2010; 134: 12-21.
21. Szarewski A, Ambroisine L, Cadman L, et al. Comparison of predictors for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in women with abnormal smears. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008; 17: 3033-3042.
22. Carozzi F, Confortini M, Dalla Palma P, et al. Use of p16-INK4A overexpression to increase the specificity of human papillomavirus testing: A nested substudy of the NTCC randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2008; 9: 937-945.
23. Meyer JL, Hanlon DW, Andersen BT, Rasmussen OF, Bisgaard K,. Evaluation of p16INK4a expression in ThinPrep cervical specimens with the CINtec p16INK4a assay: Correlation with biopsy follow-up results. Cancer 2007; 111: 83-92.
24. Wentzensen N, Bergeron C, Cas F, Eschenbach D, Vinokurova S, von Knebel Doeberitz M,. Evaluation of a nuclear score for p16INK4a-stained cervical squamous cells in liquid-based cytology samples. Cancer 2005; 105: 461-467.
25. Kulasingam SL, Kim JJ, Lawrence WF, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis based on the atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance/low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion Triage Study (ALTS). J Natl Cancer Inst 2006; 98: 92-100.