» Articles » PMID: 37559589

Clinical Impact of Age‑specific Distribution of Combination Patterns of Cytology and High‑risk HPV Status on Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade 2 or More

Overview
Journal Oncol Lett
Specialty Oncology
Date 2023 Aug 10
PMID 37559589
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

To the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first to elucidate the significance of cytology and high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) status in different age groups for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)2, CIN3 and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). There were 12 combinations based on cytology and hrHPV status [cytology: Atypical squamous cells (ASC) of undetermined significance, low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, ASC not excluding high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) and HSIL; hrHPV status: HPV16/18-positive (16/18+), hrHPV positive for subtypes other than 16/18 (others+) and hrHPV-negative (hrHPV-)]. All patients were categorized into four groups based on age (18-29, 30-39, 40-49 and ≥50 years). For patients with CIN2, CIN3 and SCC (CIN2+) (n=107), the distribution of cytology and hrHPV was investigated in each age group. In addition, for all patients (n=446), the occurrence of CIN2+ in each of the 12 combinations was investigated in each age group. In the 18-29-year age group, the most common combination was HSIL and 16/18+, followed by HSIL and others+, which accounted for 73% of CIN2+ cases. The occurrence of HSIL and 16/18+ decreased with increasing age, and no cases occurred in the 50-year age group. In the 18-29-year age group, all patients with HSIL and 16/18+ were diagnosed with CIN2+. CIN2+ was predominantly detected in patients with HSIL in the 18-29-year age group, as well as hrHPV- and others+. This definite distinction was not observed in any other age group. For CIN2+, the distribution patterns of cytology and hrHPV status combinations varied significantly among different age groups. Accordingly, the clinical impact of the combination of cytological findings and hrHPV status can vary among age groups.

Citing Articles

Development of a clinical prediction model for pathological upgrading in low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions following cervical conization.

Peng X, Wan J, Wang Y, Wang L Cytojournal. 2024; 21:37.

PMID: 39563666 PMC: 11574685. DOI: 10.25259/Cytojournal_7_2024.


Predicting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and determining the follow-up period in high-risk human papillomavirus patients.

Gong L, Tang Y, Xie H, Zhang L, Sun Y Front Oncol. 2024; 13:1289030.

PMID: 38298438 PMC: 10827855. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1289030.

References
1.
Yagi A, Ueda Y, Nakagawa S, Ikeda S, Tanaka Y, Sekine M . Potential for cervical cancer incidence and death resulting from Japan's current policy of prolonged suspension of its governmental recommendation of the HPV vaccine. Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1):15945. PMC: 7524737. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-73106-z. View

2.
Vanska S, Luostarinen T, Lagheden C, Eklund C, Kleppe S, Andrae B . Differing Age-Specific Cervical Cancer Incidence Between Different Types of Human Papillomavirus: Implications for Predicting the Impact of Elimination Programs. Am J Epidemiol. 2020; 190(4):506-514. PMC: 8024050. DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwaa121. View

3.
Arbyn M, Kyrgiou M, Simoens C, Raifu A, Koliopoulos G, Martin-Hirsch P . Perinatal mortality and other severe adverse pregnancy outcomes associated with treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: meta-analysis. BMJ. 2008; 337:a1284. PMC: 2544379. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.a1284. View

4.
Yagi A, Ueda Y, Ikeda S, Miyagi E, Sekine M, Enomoto T . The looming health hazard: A wave of HPV-related cancers in Japan is becoming a reality due to the continued suspension of the governmental recommendation of HPV vaccine. Lancet Reg Health West Pac. 2022; 18:100327. PMC: 8669320. DOI: 10.1016/j.lanwpc.2021.100327. View

5.
Baasland I, Hagen B, Vogt C, Valla M, Romundstad P . Colposcopy and additive diagnostic value of biopsies from colposcopy-negative areas to detect cervical dysplasia. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2016; 95(11):1258-1263. PMC: 5129518. DOI: 10.1111/aogs.13009. View