Baseline inaccuracy rates for the comparison of cervical biopsy to loop electrosurgical excision histopathologic diagnoses

The concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in patients with known smear cytology and human papillomavirus results

Objective:

The objective of the study was to evaluate the concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) methods to diagnose cervical pre-invasive lesions and cervical cancer, and to calculate the low and high prediction rates of lesions for both methods.

Methods:

A total of 241 patients who underwent LEEP after colposcopic biopsy for different indications and also known cervical cytology and human papillomavirus test results were included in the study. Clinical variables such as age, gravida, parity, menopausal status, smoking, endocervical curettage results, and surgical margins were recorded.

Results:

The total concordance between colposcopic biopsy and LEEP was 41.9%. The rates of finding a more serious lesion than in colposcopic biopsy with LEEP (underestimation) for negative, Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia (CIN) 1, CIN 2, and CIN 3 were calculated as 100%, 12.8%, 14.8%, and 3.9%, respectively. Rates of finding a less serious lesion than detected in colposcopic biopsy with LEEP (overestimation) for CIN 1, CIN 2, and CIN 3, cervical carcinoma were calculated as 56.4%, 33.3%, 3.9%, and 0%, respectively. Underestimation was seen in a total of 28 patients, and overestimation was present in 113 patients. Parity was found to be the only associated factor that affected the final diagnosis for high-grade lesions in univariate logistic regression analysis (odds ratio=1.234, 95% confidence interval: 1.005–1.514).

Conclusion:

Discrepancies between colposcopically directed punch biopsy and subsequent histopathologic LEEP findings are common. New methods to reduce the inconsistency between colposcopic biopsy and LEEP are necessary to prevent patients from being under or over treated.

Precise Identification of Cell and Tissue Features Important for Histopathologic Diagnosis by a Whole Slide Imaging System

Background:

Previous studies have demonstrated the noninferiority of pathologists’ interpretation of whole slide images (WSIs) compared to microscopic slides in diagnostic surgical pathology; however, to our knowledge, no published studies have tested analytical precision of an entire WSI system.

Methods:

In this study, five pathologists at three locations tested intra-system, inter-system/site, and intra- and inter-pathologist precision of the Aperio AT2 DX System (Leica Biosystems, Vista, CA, USA). Sixty-nine microscopic slides containing 23 different morphologic features suggested by the Digital Pathology Association as important to diagnostic pathology were identified and scanned. Each of 202 unique fields of view (FOVs) had 1–3 defined morphologic features, and each feature was represented in three different tissues. For intra-system precision, each site scanned 23 slides at three different times and one pathologist interpreted all FOVs. For inter-system/site precision, all 69 slides were scanned once at each of three sites, and FOVs from each site were read by one pathologist. To test intra- and inter-pathologist precision, all 69 slides were scanned at one site, FOVs were saved in three different orientations, and the FOVs were transferred to a different site. Three different pathologists then interpreted FOVs from all 69 slides. Wildcard (unscored) slides and washout intervals were included in each study. Agreement estimates with 95% confidence intervals were calculated.

Results:

Combined precision from all three studies, representing 606 FOVs in each of the three studies, showed overall intra-system agreement of 97.9%; inter-system/site agreement was 96%, intra-pathologist agreement was 95%, and inter-pathologist agreement was 94.2%.

Conclusions:

Pathologists using the Aperio AT2 DX System identified histopathological features with high precision, providing increased confidence in using WSI for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology.

Clinical factors that affect diagnostic discrepancy between colposcopically directed biopsies and loop electrosurgical excision procedure conization of the uterine cervix

Objective

This study aimed to determine the factors affecting pathologic discrepancy and final diagnosis between colposcopic biopsy and pathology by loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP).

Methods

Between 2004 and 2016, 1,200 patients who underwent LEEP were enrolled for this study. 667 underwent cervical cytology, human papillomavirus (HPV) test, colposcopic biopsy, and LEEP. We analyzed patient's age, menopausal status, number of delivery, abortion times, cervical cytology, number of punch biopsies, HPV type, LEEP, and interval between colposcopic biopsy and LEEP.

Results

Logistic regression analysis of the final diagnosis showed that age 30-39 years and other high HPV group types were associated with cancer diagnosis, whereas atypical squamous cells cannot exclude high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (ASC-H), high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL), and HPV type 16 affected the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2. The overall concordance rate of histopathology between punch biopsy and LEEP was 43.3%. The rates of detecting a more severe lesion by LEEP than those by biopsy were 23.1%. The rates of a less severe lesion detected by LEEP than those by biopsy were 33.6%. Factors related with biopsy underestimation were as follows: <1 vaginal delivery, HSIL, number of punch biopsies and HPV type. Punch biopsy number is a unique factor of biopsy overestimation.

Conclusion

Patients with ASC-H, HSIL, and HPV type 16 may undergo conization immediately without colposcopic biopsy. We suggest that colposcopically directed 3 to 5 punch biopsies may be used to determine the need for conization.

Detection of cervical high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions from cytologic samples using a novel immunocytochemical assay (ProEx™ C)

BACKGROUND

Routine liquid-based cytology (LBC) provides excellent sensitivity for the detection of cervical high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL); however, its specificity is low. Consequently, many women who have atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) or low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) cytology undergo unnecessary colposcopy. The authors hypothesized that a novel immunocytochemical assay (ProEx C) that can be performed on LBC slides had a significantly higher positive predictive value (PPV) for biopsy-proven HSIL compared with routine LBC.

METHODS

The ProEx C immunocytochemical assay utilizes a cocktail of monoclonal antibodies directed against proteins associated with aberrant S-phase cell cycle induction (topoisomerase IIA, minichromosome maintenance protein 2). The ProEx C reagents were validated in the authors' laboratory for staining and scoring reproducibility, open-vial stability, and accuracy before a retrospective analysis using these reagents was performed on 317 residual cytology samples. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and negative predictive value (NPV) for the detection of biopsy-proven HSIL were determined.

RESULTS

The ProEx C assay was validated successfully in the authors' cytology laboratory. Using biopsy-proven HSIL as an endpoint, the ProEx C assay yielded a sensitivity of 85.3%, specificity of 71.7%, PPV of 44.6%, and NPV of 94.8%. Compared with the routine LBC results in the same cohort, the ProEx C sensitivity for biopsy-proven HSIL was 70.6% greater than HSIL+ cytology (50% vs. 85.3%). ProEx C also showed a 114% increase in PPV relative to ASC-US cytology (21.1% vs. 44.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

The ProEx C immunocytochemical assay can be integrated into a clinical cytology laboratory and may increase the PPV of LBC for biopsy-proven HSIL.

Colposcopy at a crossroads

New cervical cancer prevention strategies are arising from rapidly improving insight into human papillomavirus (HPV) natural history and cervical carcinogenesis, challenging the conventional roles of cytology and colposcopically directed biopsy as the reference standards of screening and diagnosis, respectively. HPV testing has high sensitivity but mediocre specificity and positive predictive value, making the role of colposcopy for the accurate identification of patients requiring treatment even more important. We believe that deficiencies of the colposcopically guided biopsy must be addressed, in particular, the inaccuracy of biopsy placement leading to low sensitivity for detection of CIN3. This opinion outlines our concerns and summarizes new data, suggesting possible steps that may lead to improvement in colposcopic accuracy.