Efficacy assessment of CellSlide in liquid-based gynecologic cytology

A Study on the Evaluation of Polyenoic Vegetable Oils and Their Female Health Benefits Based on Time Series Analysis Model: The Case of Peony Seed Oil

Polyenoic vegetable oils mainly contain polyenoic acids such as linoleic acid and linolenic acid, as well as active ingredients such as VE, phytosterols, mineral elements, and squalene. Among them, schisandra oil, kiwi seed oil, grape seed oil, maitake fruit oil, and evening primrose seed oil all contain up to 80% or more polyenoic acids. Studies have shown that polygenic vegetable oils have the effects of assisting in lowering blood lipids, antioxidation, delaying ageing, anti-inflammation, sun protection, moisturizing, slimming and weight loss, etc. They can be widely used in nutritional and healthy edible oils, health food, skin care, and cosmetic products and have great prospects for development and utilization. This paper explores the application of artificial neural networks in the analysis of data. A nonlinear time series prediction method based on the BP algorithm is proposed. The prediction accuracy is much higher than that of the traditional method.

Diagnostic Test Accuracy Review of Cytology for Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion and Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Uterine Cervix

BACKGROUND

Even though cervico-vaginal smears have been used as a primary screening test for cervical carcinoma, the diagnostic accuracy has been controversial. The present study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of cytology for squamous intraepithelial lesion (SIL) and squamous cell carcinoma (SqCC) of the uterine cervix through a diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) review.

METHODS

A DTA review was performed using 38 eligible studies that showed concordance between cytology and histology. In the DTA review, sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (OR), and the area under the curve (AUC) on the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve were calculated.

RESULTS

In the comparison between abnormal cytology and histology, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 93.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93.7%-94.1%) and 77.6% (95% CI, 77.4-77.8%), respectively. The diagnostic OR and AUC on the SROC curve were 8.90 (95% CI, 5.57-14.23) and 0.8148, respectively. High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) cytology had a higher sensitivity (97.6%; 95% CI, 94.7%-97.8%) for predicting HSIL or worse histology. In the comparison between SqCC identified on cytology and on histological analysis, the pooled sensitivity and specificity, diagnostic OR, and AUC were 92.7% (95% CI, 87.3%-96.3%), 87.5% (95% CI, 87.2%-87.8%), 865.81 (95% CI, 68.61-10,925.12), and 0.9855, respectively. Geographic locations with well-organized screening programs had higher sensitivity than areas with insufficient screening programs.

CONCLUSION

These results indicate that cytology had a higher sensitivity and specificity for detecting SIL and SqCC of the uterine cervix during primary screening.

Performance of the Cellslide® automated liquid-based cytology system amongst HIV-positive women

Background

Many women undergoing cervical screening as part of a national South African screening programme may be positive for HIV. The performance of liquid-based cytology (LBC) on samples from HIV-positive women needs to be determined.

Objectives

The performance of the Cellslide^® automated LBC system was evaluated as a possible alternative to conventional cytology in a national cervical cancer screening programme.

Methods

Split samples from 348 HIV-positive women attending an HIV treatment clinic in Johannesburg, South Africa were examined by conventional cytology and monolayer LBC methods. All samples were stained, examined and reported in the same manner. Cytotechnologists were blinded to the conventional smear diagnosis if the LBC smear was screened and vice versa.

Results

The same percentage of inadequate smears (1.4%) was obtained by conventional cytology and LBC. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance were observed in 5.2% of conventional smears and 4.0% of LBC smears. Low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions were found in 35.6% of conventional smears and 32.7% of LBC smears. Only one conventional smear was categorised as atypical squamous cells – cannot exclude a high-grade lesion, whereas five such cases were identified on LBC. High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions were seen in 21.6% of conventional smears and 23.3% LBC smears. No invasive carcinoma was identified.

Conclusion

The performance of the Cellslide^® LBC system was similar to that of conventional cytology in this population of high-risk HIV-positive women, indicating that it may be introduced successfully as part of a cervical cancer screening programme.

Relative accuracy of cervical and anal cytology for detection of high grade lesions by colposcope guided biopsy: a cut-point meta-analytic comparison

Background

We recently reported, using a receiver operating characteristic area metric, the first meta-analytic comparison of the relative accuracy of cervical and anal cytology in detecting moderate or severe histopathologic lesions by magnification directed punch biopsy. The aim of the present research was to meta-analytically examine cut-point specific operating characteristics (sensitivity, specificity) of cervical and anal cytology in detecting high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) histopathology by colposcope directed punch biopsy.

Methodology/Principal Findings

The primary eligibility requirement was availability of tabulated cytology (normal, atypical cells of unclear significance [ASCUS], low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, HSIL or atypical squamous cells cannot rule out high grade [ASC-H]) and biopsy (<HSIL, ≥ HSIL) counts. Meta-analysis and meta-regression of diagnostic accuracy was performed with examination of study quality criteria and heterogeneity. Thirty-three cervical and 11 anal publications were eligible between 1990 and 2010. Meta-analytically cut-point analysis showed that using a cut-point of ASCUS the sensitivity in both settings is similar while anal cytology is less specific than cervical cytology (specificity [95% confidence interval] 0.33 [0.20–0.49] vs. 0.53[0.40–0.66], p = 0.04) for the detection of HSIL histopathology by colposcope directed punch biopsy.

Conclusions/Significance

Using a cytology cut-point of HSIL or ASC-H, anal cytology is less sensitive but comparably specific to cervical cytology. However, using a cut-point of ASCUS, differences in accuracy were of borderline significance.

Comparative accuracy of anal and cervical cytology in screening for moderate to severe dysplasia by magnification guided punch biopsy: a meta-analysis

Background

The accuracy of screening for anal cancer precursors relative to screening for cervical cancer precursors has not been systematically examined. The aim of the current meta-analysis was to compare the relative accuracy of anal cytology to cervical cytology in discriminating between histopathologic high grade and lesser grades of dysplasia when the reference standard biopsy is obtained using colposcope magnification.

Methods and Findings

The outcome metric of discrimination was the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve area. Random effects meta-analysis of eligible studies was performed with examination of sources of heterogeneity that included QUADAS criteria and selected covariates, in meta-regression models. Thirty three cervical and eleven anal screening studies were found to be eligible. The primary meta-analytic comparison suggested that anal cytologic screening is somewhat less discriminating than cervical cytologic screening (ROC area [95% confidence interval (C.I.)]: 0.834 [0.809–0.859] vs. 0.700 [0.664–0.735] for cervical and anal screening, respectively). This finding was robust when examined in meta-regression models of covariates differentially distributed by screening setting (anal, cervical).

Conclusions

Anal cytologic screening is somewhat less discriminating than cervical cytologic screening. Heterogeneity of estimates within each screening setting suggests that other factors influence estimates of screening accuracy. Among these are sampling and interpretation errors involving both cytology and biopsy as well as operator skill and experience.