La CIN 2 merite-t-elle la même prise en charge que la CIN 3 ?

Conservative management of CIN2: National Audit of British Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology members' opinion

There is no doubt that organised cervical screening programmes have significantly reduced the rates of cervical cancer by detection and treatment of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2, CIN3). National UK guidelines do not differentiate between CIN2 and CIN3 as separate entities and recommend treatment for both, although a degree of uncertainty exists regarding the natural history of CIN2. This national survey of British Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology members aimed to assess attitudes towards conservative management (CM) of CIN2 in the UK and identify potential selection criteria. In total, 511 members responded (response rate 32%); 55.6% offered CM for selective cases; 12.4% for all cases; 16.4% had formal guidelines. Most agreed age group was >40yrs (83%), HPV 16/18 positive (51.4%), smoking (60%), immuno-compromise (74.2%), and large lesion size (80.8%) were relative contraindications for CM. 75.9% favoured six-monthly monitoring, with 80.2% preferring excisional treatment for persistent high-grade disease. Many UK colposcopists manage CIN2 conservatively without formal guidelines. Potential selection criteria should be investigated by a multicentre study. Impact statement Although anecdotally some colposcopists manage many women with CIN2 conservatively, this National Audit of British Society for Colposcopy and Cytopathology members, we believe, is the first time this has been formally recorded. The survey assesses current attitudes towards conservative management (CM) of CIN2 and seeks to identify potential selection criteria that could be used to identify suitable women. It received over 500 responses and significantly, identified many colposcopists recommending CM of CIN2 for patients despite the lack of any formal guidance regarding this approach. The greater majority of respondents were keen to consider participating in a multicentre trial on CM of CIN2 targeting the UK screening population (25-64 years). The paper has international relevance as ACOG and ASCCP have recently changed their guidance for the management of CIN2 in younger women and now recommend CM with monitoring rather than first line ablative or excisional treatment due to concerns regarding overtreatment, especially in women who have not yet completed their family.

[Nomenclature of squamous cell precursor lesions of the lower female genital tract : Current aspects]

The majority of precancerous lesions of the lower female genital tract (intraepithelial neoplasia, IN) are caused by human papillomavirus (HPV) infections resulting in cellular atypia and in turn an altered tissue architecture. Depending on the pathogenesis, a distinction is made between vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) classified as classical VIN associated with high-risk HPV infections (u-VIN) and differentiated VIN (d-VIN), which is associated with lichen sclerosus et atrophicus and p53 alterations. In the current World Health Organization (WHO) classification a novel grading system for squamous cell precancerous lesions of the lower female genital tract has been proposed, differentiating low grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (L-SIL) including condyloma and HPV-associated alterations plus VIN 1, vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia (VaIN 1) and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 1) from high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (H-SIL) with VIN 2 and 3, VaIN 2 and 3 as well as CIN 2 and 3. The use of p16 immunohistochemistry can assist the differentiation. The new binary classification, however, contradicts the German cytological nomenclature (Munich nomenclature III), which differentiated three grades of dysplasia in order to avoid overtreatment of patients with moderate IN. The individual nomenclatures are compared to each other. It is recommended to report the grade of precancerous lesions in addition to the SIL classification of the WHO.

Small lesion size measured by colposcopy may predict absence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in a large loop excision of the transformation zone specimen

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether colposcopic measurement of the lesion size at diagnosis and/or human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping can predict the absence of dysplasia in a large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) specimen in women treated for squamous intraepithelial lesions/cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (SIL/CIN).

DESIGN

Prospective observational study.

SETTING

Tertiary university hospital.

POPULATION

A cohort of 116 women who underwent LLETZ because of biopsy-proven low-grade SIL/CIN that had persisted for 2 years, or because of a high-grade SIL/CIN diagnosed in the referral visit and squamocolumnar junction completely visible (types 1 or 2, according to the International Federation of Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy, IFCPC).

METHODS

After LLETZ the women were classified by histology into the study group (absence of SIL/CIN in the surgical specimen, 28/116, 24.1%) and the control group (SIL/CIN in the LLETZ specimen, 88/116, 75.9%).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The size of the lesion determined in the diagnostic colposcopy and the HPV genotype were evaluated in all women.

RESULTS

The lesion size was significantly smaller in the study group (25.7 ± 37.8 versus 84.5 ± 81.7 mm² ; P < 0.001). A lesion size of ≤12 mm² and HPV types other than 16 or 18 were associated with an absence of SIL/CIN in the LLETZ specimen (P < 0.001 and P = 0.016, respectively). On multivariate analysis only a lesion size of ≤12 mm² predicted the absence of SIL/CIN (odds ratio, OR 10.6; 95% confidence interval, 95% CI 3.6-30.6; P < 0.001). A lesion size of ≤12 mm² had a specificity of 90.9% (95% CI 83.0-95.3%) and a negative predictive value of 86.0% (95% CI 77.5-91.6%) to predict the absence of SIL/CIN in the surgical specimen.

CONCLUSIONS

Small lesion size in diagnostic colposcopy could predict the absence of SIL/CIN in the LLETZ specimen. Colposcopy measurement of lesion size prior to LLETZ may avoid unnecessary treatment.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Small lesion size in colposcopic evaluation might predict the absence of SIL/CIN in an LLETZ specimen.

Quality evaluation of cone biopsy specimens obtained by large loop excision of the transformation zone

Background

Large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) has been used for the diagnosis and treatment of precancerous cervical lesions, and it is the first choice of treatment in the majority of cervical pathology services. The aim of this study was to evaluate the presence of thermal artifacts, the need for serial sections, the percentage of clear and involved resection margins and the relationship between endocervical gland involvement and the severity of the lesion in samples resected using LLETZ.

Methods

A retrospective study was performed at Santa Casa de Misericordia School of Science (HSCMV), Vitoria, Espirito Santo, Brazil with a sample of 52 histopathology slides from patients submitted to conization because of abnormal cytology findings and a biopsy result of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2, CIN 3 and adenocarcinoma in situ. Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t-test.

Results

Serial sections were required to confirm diagnosis in four of 52 cases. Thermal artifacts were present in all cases, with grade I being the most common (94.2% of cases). Clear margins were found in 96.2% of cases. No association was found between glandular involvement and CIN 1 (P > 0.05); however, there was an association with CIN 2 and CIN 3 (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

The amount of excised tissue was sufficient, thermal artifacts were slight, resection margins were clear in most of cases, and a possible association was found between glandular involvement and the severity of the lesion.

Prediction of clinical outcome using p16INK4a immunocytochemical expression in low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and high-risk HPV-positive atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance in patients with and without colposcopic evident cervical disease

p16INK4a as a diagnostic marker of a cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2+ (CIN2+) in atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) cytological samples has been analyzed, but has not yet been included in clinical routine practice. One hundred and ninety-one patients with an abnormal Pap test (84 ASC-US and 107 LSILs) who underwent colposcopy were selected for this study. At enrollment, 96 patients (Group 1) had a positive colposcopy and therefore underwent a cervical biopsy, while 95 (Group 2) had a negative colposcopy and were followed up for up to 1 year. Both groups were tested for p16INK4a using immunocytochemical methods, and the p16INK4a results were correlated with histology or follow-up outcome. In Group 1 ASC-US cases, 82% of lesions less than CIN2 were p16INK4a-negative and all CIN2 cases were p16INK4a-positive (p=0.00044). In Group 1 LSIL cases, 71% of lesions less than CIN2 were p16INK4a-negative and 87% of CIN2/3 were p16INK4a-positive (p=0.00033). Seventy-seven percent of Group 2 ASC-US patients with a negative 1-year follow-up (NF-U) were p16INK4a-negative at enrollment, while all patients with positive follow-up (PF-U) were p16INK4a-positive (p=0.00113). In Group 2 LSIL cases, 83% of patients with NF-U were p16INK4a-negative, while 65% of patients with PF-U were p16INK4a-positive at enrollment (p=0.0014). In fact, 39% of the positive p16INK4a LSIL patients had CIN2+ histological lesions. The positive predictive value of p16INK4a for CIN2+ was 50% in ASC-US and 52% in LSIL cases; the negative predictive value was 100 and 94%, respectively. In conclusion, in our patients, a negative p16INK4a appears to be a marker of the absence of CIN3, while a positive p16INK4a can be correlated with the presence of histological CIN2+ found at enrollment or during the subsequent follow-up. Thus, its clinical predictive value is independent from the colposcopic aspect at enrollment.