Challenges in the diagmosis of cervical pathologies
D. Y. Chernov,
O. A. Tikhonovskaya,
S. V. Logvinov,
I. A. Petrov,
Y. S. Yuriev,
A. A. Zhdankina,
A. V. Gerasimov,
I. V. Zingalyuk,
G. A. Mikheenko https://doi.org/10.20538/1682-0363-2023-4-201-209
Abstract
This review deals with the current state of affairs in the diagnosis of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions. Transformation of classifications of cervical pathologies is considered. The role of cytological (liquid-based and conventional cytology), molecular biological (Digene Hybrid Capture test), immunohistochemical (p16INK4α, Ki-67), and histologic methods in the diagnosis of cervical lesions is discussed. Particular attention is paid to the diagnosis of human papillomavirus infection. Performance indicators of screening programs based on primary determination of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA in comparison with common cytological methods are presented. Tropism of HPV to various parts of the cervix, which predisposes to the formation of deep multifocal lesions, as well as the influence of the physical status of HPV on the treatment strategy and risks of relapse are considered.
About the Authors
D. Y. Chernov
Siberian State Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
2, Moscow Trakt, Tomsk, 634050
O. A. Tikhonovskaya
Siberian State Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
2, Moscow Trakt, Tomsk, 634050
S. V. Logvinov
Siberian State Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
2, Moscow Trakt, Tomsk, 634050
I. A. Petrov
Siberian State Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
2, Moscow Trakt, Tomsk, 634050
Y. S. Yuriev
Siberian State Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
2, Moscow Trakt, Tomsk, 634050
A. A. Zhdankina
Siberian State Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
2, Moscow Trakt, Tomsk, 634050
A. V. Gerasimov
Siberian State Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
2, Moscow Trakt, Tomsk, 634050
I. V. Zingalyuk
Siberian State Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
2, Moscow Trakt, Tomsk, 634050
G. A. Mikheenko
Siberian State Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
2, Moscow Trakt, Tomsk, 634050
References
1. Reagan J.W., Hamonic M.J. Dysplasia of the uterine cervix. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1956;63(6):1236–1244. DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1956.tb32133.x.
2. Fu Y.S., Reagan J.W., Richart R.M. Definition of precursors. Gyn. Oncol. 1981;12(2 Pt 2):S220–231. DOI: 10.1016/0090-8258(81)90076-7.
3. Richart R.M. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Pathol. Annu. 1973;8:301–328.
4. Zur Hausen H. Papillomaviruses and cancer: from basic studies to clinical application. Nat. Rev. Cancer. 2002;2(5):342–350. DOI: 10.1038/nrc798.
5. Solomon D., Davey D., Kurman R., Moriarty A., O’Connor D., Prey M. еt al. The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA. 2002;287(16):2114–2119. DOI: 10.1001/jama.287.16.2114.
6. Alrajjal A., Pansare V., Choudhury M.S.R., Khan M.Y.A., Shidham V.B. Squamous intraepithelial lesions (SIL: LSIL, HSIL, ASCUS, ASC-H, LSIL-H) of Uterine Cervix and Bethesda System. Cytojournal. 2021;18:16. DOI: 10.25259/Cytojournal_24_2021.
7. Давыдов А.И., Лебедев В.А., Шахламова М.Н., Чилова Р.А., Соколенова И.И., Пашков В.М. Изменения в классификациях ВОЗ в отношении плоскоклеточных интраэпителиальных поражений шейки матки. Как они повлияли на тактику лечения? Вопросы гинекологии, акушерства и перинатологии. 2022;21(6):93–98. DOI: 10.20953/1726-1678-2022-6-93-98.
8. Bruni L., Albero G., Serrano B., Mena M., Collado J.J., Gómez D. et al. ICO/IARC Information Centre on HPV and Cancer (HPV Information Centre). Human Papillomavirus and Related Diseases in the World. Summary Report 10 March 2023.
9. Egemen D., Cheung L.C., Chen X., Demarco M., Perkins R.B., Kinney W. et al. Risk Estimates Supporting the 2019 ASCCP Risk-Based Management Consensus Guidelines. J. Low Genit. Tract Dis. 2020;24(2):132–143. DOI: 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000529.
10. Bruni L., Albero G., Serrano B., Mena M., Collado J.J., Gómez D. et al. ICO/IARC Information Centre on HPV and Cancer (HPV Information Centre). Human Papillomavirus and Related Diseases in Russian Federation. Summary Report 22 October 2021.
11. Faizuloev E.B., Kaira A.N., Uzbekov T.R., Volynskaya E.A., Svitich O.A., Zverev V.V. The prevalence of high- and low-risk human papillomaviruses in the Russian Federation. Mol. Genet. Microbiol. Virol. 2021;36:192–200. DOI: 10.17116/molgen20213904139.
12. Sanad A.S., Kamel H.H., Hasan M.M. Prevalence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) in patients attending Minia Maternity University Hospital. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2014;289(6):1211–1217. DOI: 10.1007/s00404-013-3109-0.
13. Benard V.B., Castle P.E., Jenison S.A., Hunt W.C., Kim J.J., Cuzick J. et al. New Mexico HPV Pap Registry Steering Committee. Population-Based Incidence Rates of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia in the Human Papillomavirus Vaccine Era. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3(6):833–837. DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.3609.
14. Shahida S.M., Lipi L.B., Rifat J.A., Kutubi A., Haq K., Afroz R. et al. Prevalence of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia in four Upazila of Dhaka Division. Mymensingh Med. J. 2019;28(3):655–661.
15. Медведева Ж.Н., Подгорная А.С., Захарко А.Ю., Мурашко О.В. Цервикальные интраэпителиальные неоплазии: практическое пособие. Гомель: ГУ «РНПЦ РМиЭЧ», 2021:40.
16. Chen J.Y., Wang Z.L., Wang Z.Y., Yang X.S. The risk factors of residual lesions and recurrence of the high-grade cervical intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) patients with positive-margin after conization. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018;97(41):e12792. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000012792.
17. Короленкова Л.И. Влияние морфологических особенностей цервикального канцерогенеза на эффективность диагностики и лечения CIN III и микроинвазивного рака шейки матки. Opinion Leader. 2018;S1:80–85.
18. Chen W., Dong Y., Liu L., Jia L., Meng L., Liu H. et al. Practical Model for Residual/Recurrent Cervical Intraepithelial Lesions in Patients with Negative Margins after Cold-Knife Conization. J. Clin. Med. 2022;11(19):5634. DOI: 10.3390/jcm11195634.
19. Arbyn M., Redman C.W.E., Verdoodt F., Kyrgiou M., Tzafetas M., Ghaem-Maghami S. et al. Incomplete excision of cervical precancer as a predictor of treatment failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(12):1665– 1679. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30700-3.
20. Alder S., Megyessi D., Sundström K., Östensson E., Mints M., Belkić K. et al. Incomplete excision of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia as a predictor of the risk of recurrent disease-a 16-year follow-up study. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2020;222(2):172.e1–172.e12. DOI: 0.1016/j.ajog.2019.08.042.
21. Kang M., Ha S.Y., Cho H.Y., Chung D.H., Kim N.R., An J. et al. Comparison of papanicolaou smear and human papillomavirus (HPV) test as cervical screening tools: can we rely on HPV test alone as a screening method? An 11-year retrospective experience at a single institution. J. Pathol. Transl. Med. 2020;54(1):112–118. DOI: 10.4132/jptm.2019.11.29.
22. Kyrgiou M., Arbyn M., Bergeron C., Bosch F.X., Dillner J., Jitet M. et al. Cervical screening: ESGO-EFC position paper of the European Society of Gynaecologic Oncology (ESGO) and the European Federation of Colposcopy (EFC). Br. J. Cancer. 2020;123(4):510–517. DOI: 10.1038/s41416-020-0920-9.
23. Khakwani M., Parveen R., Azhar M. Comparison of PAP smear and liquid based cytology as a screening method for cervical carcinoma. Pak. J. Med. Sci. 2022;38(7):1827–1831. DOI: 10.12669/pjms.38.7.5742
24. Armstrong S.F., Guest J.F. Cost-effectiveness and сost-benefit of сervical сancer screening with liquid based cytology compared with conventional cytology in Germany. Clin. Out. Res. 2020;12:153–166. DOI:10.2147/CEOR.S234385.
25. Елгина С.И., Золоторевская О.С., Захаров И.С., Мозес В.Г., Рудаева Е.В., Разумова В.А. и др. Цитологический скрининг в диагностике рака шейки матки. Мать и дитя в Кузбассе. 2019;(3):37–40.
26. Arbyn M., Bergeron C., Klinkhamer P., Martin-Hirsch P., Siebers A.G., Bulten J. Liquid compared with conventional cervical cytology: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet. Gynecol. 2008;111(1):167–177. DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000296488.85807.b3.
27. Malagón T., Volesky K.D., Bouten S., Laprise C., El-Zein M., Franco E.L. Cumulative risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia for women with normal cytology but positive for human papillomavirus: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Cancer. 2020;147(10):2695–2707. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.33035.
28. Волоченко Н.Н., Борисова О.В. Ошибки цитологической диагностики заболеваний шейки матки. Новости клинической цитологии России. 2020;24(1):17–22. DOI: 10.24411/1562-4943-2020-10103.
29. Черенков В.Г., Петров А.Б., Иванченко О.Г., Александров А.С. От территориального скрининга к контролю лечения HSIL и снижению заболеваемости и смертности от рака шейки матки. Вестник Новгородского государственного университета им. Ярослава Мудрого. 2019;1(113): 94–97. DOI: 10.34680/2076-8052.2019.1(113).94-97.
30. Papoutsis D., Underwood M., Williams J., Parry-Smith W., Panikkar J. Expansile еndocervical сrypt involvement by CIN2 - 3 as a risk factor for high grade cytology recurrence after cold coagulation cervical treatment. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2020;80(9):941–948. DOI: 10.1055/a-1202-2157.
31. Шумейкина А.О., Красильников С.Э., Кедрова А.Г., Мансурова А.С., Чернышова А.Л., Качесов И.В. и др. Риски и лечение рецидивов интраэпителиальных повреждений шейки матки. Опухоли женской репродуктивной системы. 2022;18(3):100–106. DOI: 10.17650/1994-4098-2022-18-3-100-106.
32. Asotic A., Taric S., Asotic J. Correlation of cervical smear and pathohistological findings. Med. Arch. 2014;68(2):106–109. DOI: 10.5455/medarh.2014.68.106-109.
33. Mandić A., Stevanović N., Gutic B., Maričić S., Nikin Z., Šolajić N. Histopathological correlation of cervical biopsy and tissue after excision in patientstwith precancerous lesions of the cervix. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2021;304(1):223–230. DOI: 10.1007/s00404-020-05911-w.
34. Derbie A., Mekonnen D., Woldeamanuel Y., Van Ostade X., Abebe T. HPV E6/E7 mRNA test for the detection of high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+): a systematic review. Infect. Agent. Cancer. 2020;15:9. DOI: 10.1186/s13027-020-0278-x.
35. Nam E.J., Kim J.W., Hong J.W., Jang H.S., Lee S.Y., Jang S.Y. et al. Expression of the p16 and Ki-67 in relation to the grade of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and highrisk human papillomavirus infection. J. Gynecol. Oncol. 2008;19(3):162–168. DOI: 10.3802/jgo.2008.19.3.162.
36. Piri R., Ghaffari A., Azami-Aghdash S., Ali-Akbar Y.P., Saleh P. et al. Ki-67/MIB-1 as a Prognostic Marker in Cervical Cancer – a Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 2015;16(16):6997–7002. DOI: 10.7314/apjcp.2015.16.16.6997.
37. Sarma U., Das G.C., Sarmah B. Predictive value of marker of proliferation Ki-67 and cell cycle dependent protein kinase inhibitor P16INK4a in cervical biopsy to determine its biological behaviour. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 2021;22(7):2237– 2241. DOI: 10.31557/APJCP.2021.22.7.2237.
38. Hosseini M.S., Talayeh M., Afshar Moghaddam N., Arab M., Farzaneh F., Ashrafganjoei T. Comparison of Ki67 index and P16 expression in different grades of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions. Caspian J. Intern. Med. 2023;14(1):69– 75. DOI: 10.22088/cjim.14.1.69.
39. Kamal M. Cervical pre-cancers: biopsy and immunohistochemistry. Cytojournal. 2022;19:38. DOI: 10.25259/CMAS_03_13_2021.
40. Pereira P.P., Zanine R.M. Diagnostic value of p16 and Ki-67 expression in cervical glandular intraepithelial disease: A review. Ann. Diagn. Pathol. 2023;62:152054. DOI: 10.1016/j.anndiagpath.2022.152054.
41. Wright T.C. Jr., Stoler M.H., Ranger-Moore J., Fanf Q., Volkir P., Safaeian M. et al. Clinical validation of p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology triage of HPV-positive women: Results from the IMPACT trial. Int. J. Cancer. 2022;150(3):461–471. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.33812.
42. Клинышкова Т.В., Самосудова И.Б., Буян М.С. Сравнительная оценка результатов иммуноцитохимического исследования коэкспрессии р16/Ki-67 среди больных с цервикальными интраэпителиальными неоплазиями, ассоциированными с вирусом папилломы человека. Гинекология. 2021;23(4):341– 345. DOI: 10.26442/20795696.2021.4.200949.
43. Роговская С.И., Бадалова Л.А. Оценка клинической и экономической эффективности методов диагностики цервикальных неоплазий. Российский вестник акушера-гинеколога. 2011;11(4):39–44.
44. Perkins R.B., Guido R.S., Castle P.E., Chelmow D., Einstein M.H., Garcia F. et al. 2019 ASCCP Risk-based management consensus guidelines for abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors. J. Low Genit. Tract. Dis. 2020;24(2):102–131. DOI: 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000525.
45. Cancer Council Australia Cervical Cancer Screening Guidelines Working Party. National Cervical Screening Program: Guidelines for the management of screen-detected abnormalities, screening in specific populations and investigation of abnormal vaginal bleeding. Sydney: Cancer Council Australia; 2022.
46. Public Health England. Cervical screening: implementation guide for primary HPV screening. London: Public Health England; 201940.
47. Rodríguez-Carunchio L., Soveral I., Steenbergen R.D., Torné A., Martinez S., Fusté P. et al. HPV-negative carcinoma of the uterine cervix: a distinct type of cervical cancer with poor prognosis. BJOG. 2015;122(1):119–127. DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.13071.
48. Koliopoulos G., Nyaga V.N., Santesso N., Bryant A., Martin-Hirsch P.P., Mustafa R.A. et al. Cytology versus HPV testing for cervical cancer screening in the general population. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2017;8(8):CD008587. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008587.pub2.
49. Pirtea L., Grigoraş D., Matusz P., Pirtea M., Moleriu L., Tudor A. et al. Age and HPV type as risk factors for HPV persistence after loop excision in patients with high grade cervical lesions: an observational study. BMC Surg. 2016;16(1):70. DOI: 10.1186/s12893-016-0185-7.
50. Shipitsyna E., Zolotoverkhaya E., Kuevda D., Nasonova V., Romanyuk T., Khachaturyan A. et al. Prevalence of high-risk human papillomavirus types and cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions in women over 30 years of age in St. Petersburg, Russia. Cancer Epidemiol. 2011;35(2):160–164. DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2010.08.010.
51. Caixeta R.C.A., Ribeiro A.A., Segatti K.D., Saddi V.A., Alves R.R.F., Carneiro M.A.S. et al. Association between the human papillomavirus, bacterial vaginosis and cervicitis and the detection of abnormalities in cervical smears from teenage girls and young women. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2015;43(10):780– 785. DOI: 10.1002/dc.23301.
52. Feldstein O., Gali-Zamir H., Schejter E., Feinberg T., Yehuda-Shnaidman E., Bornstein J. et al. High-risk HPV testing vs liquid-based cytology for cervical cancer screening among 25- to 30-year-old women: A historical cohort study. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2023;102(2):226–233. DOI: 10.1111/aogs.14482.
53. Tai Y.J., Chen Y.Y., Hsu H.C., Chiang C.J., You S.L., Chen H.C. et al. Clinical management and risk reduction in women with low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion cytology: A population-based cohort study. PLoS One. 2017;12(12):e0188203. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0188203.
54. Firnhaber C., Swarts A., Goeieman B., Rakhombe N., Mulongo M., Williamson A. et al. Cryotherapy Reduces Progression of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade 1 in South African HIV-Infected Women: A Randomized, Controlled Trial. J. Acquir. Immune. Defic. Syndr. 2017;76(5):532–538. DOI: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000001539.
55. St.-Martin G., Thamsborg L.H., Andersen B., Christensen J., Ejersbo D., Jochumsen K. et al. Management of lowgrade cervical cytology in young women. Cohort study from Denmark. Acta. Oncol. 2021;60(4):444–451. DOI: 10.1080/0284186X.2020.1831061.
56. Buick C., Jembere N., Wang L., Kupets R. Cervical screening and colposcopy management of women age 24 and under. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Can. 2020;42(12):1518–1524. DOI: 10.1016/j.jogc.2020.06.013.
57. Min C.J., Massad L.S., Dick R., Powell M.A., Kuroki L.M. Assessing Physician Adherence to Guidelines for Cervical Cancer Screening and Management of Abnormal Screening Results. J. Low Genit. Tract. Dis. 2020;24(4):337–342. DOI: 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000558.
Review
For citations:
Chernov D.Y., Tikhonovskaya O.A., Logvinov S.V., Petrov I.A., Yuriev Y.S., Zhdankina A.A., Gerasimov A.V., Zingalyuk I.V., Mikheenko G.A. Challenges in the diagmosis of cervical pathologies. Bulletin of Siberian Medicine. 2023;22(4):201-209. https://doi.org/10.20538/1682-0363-2023-4-201-209
Views:
433
Email this article 