Lucanus Gynaecology

 

We acknowledge that the article reproduced here is the intellectual property of Drs McGoogan and Linder. We append it to our colposcopy information because its relevance in confirming the value of Liquid Based Cytology.

This paper is presented from the 2003 Eurogin meeting held April 2003 in Paris, France.

 

CONCLUSIONS: CERVICAL CANCER CONTROL, PRIORITIES AND NEW DIRECTIONS INTERNATIONAL CHARTER

Leaders: E McGoogan, J Linder
Session: PS7 14/04/03
Title: Cytopathology

 

Rationale


The Pap test is significant from its historical perspective, its impact on the incidence of cervical cancer, and its position as the most widely used cancer screening test in the world. Throughout most of its history the Pap test was viewed as a relatively simple laboratory procedure that was not subjected to the rigor that accompanies the development of a medical device. In the last 15 years, however, concern about false-negative Pap smear testing, and a desire to improve Pap testing (e.g. computer imaging, molecular testing) has led to the development of new technologies. These efforts have been most significantly manifested through testing that involves the collection of the cervical sample in a liquid preservative solution, a so-called "Liquid-based Pap" or LBP. The rational of this approach is that an accurate Pap diagnosis requires that diagnostic cells are collected from the cervix and transferred to the glass microscope slide for review by the cytologist. A failure in either of the first two steps is termed a sampling error; while a failure in the laboratory examination is termed a screening error. Combined, sampling and screening errors lower the sensitivity of the Pap test. Recent publications suggest that the sensitivity of the Pap smear is 50-60%, with the relative proportion of sampling to screening errors being about 2:1. Smears may be further complicated by high unsatisfactory rates, preparation artifacts that hinder computer analysis, and the inability to pursue additional testing. Some liquid-based preparations address these limitations, particularly the potential to reduce both sampling and screening errors. Because the cervical collection device(s) are rinsed in a preservative solution, more cells are potentially captured for evaluation than when the device is smeared against a glass slide. And, because the cells are rapidly fixed, then deposited onto the slide in a thin layer, morphologic features are better preserved, and clearly presented to the cytologist. Different technical approaches can be used to prepare a "LBP". Pathologists and gynecologists must understand, however, different liquid-based techniques will yield different results (e.g. detection of HSIL) depending on the type of collection device, the type of fixative, the method of dispersing cells in liquid, and the manner of collecting cells and depositing them onto a slide. All liquid-based methods are not necessarily equal in their performance, simply because they are "liquid based." This requires the potential user to be familiar with the published literature, labeling claims from regulatory bodies, and other studies.
Because liquid-based cytology allows deposition of cells onto a thin-layer on a microscope slide, computer-assisted imaging is facilitated, because cell overlap and obscuring debris are mitigated. Devices have been developed or proposed that either identify slides not requiring cytotechnologist review (sorting), or identify cells on the slide that merit review (computer-assisted screening). These technologies have the potential to revolutionize cytology, because they can decrease the fatigue of the user, allow more slides to be reviewed, decrease the screening error rate, and, with appropriate decision support, identify morphologic features that are not apparent in routine human review.

Finally, an advantage of liquid based cell collection is that sample that is not taken for morphologic review can be used for adjunctive molecular analysis.

 

Current evidence-based medicine


Evidence-based medicine is described as the "conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of the individual patient. It means integrating individual clinical expertise with the best available external clinical evidence from systematic research.". There is an enormous breadth of experience documenting the utility of morphologic cytology in identifying precursors to cervical cancer, which permit clinical intervention. Most of the current research has not been directed in validating cytology, but assessing new approaches, such as liquid-based, to determine if the benefits of these technologies justify added costs. This is not a simple science, the outcomes of the analysis will be affected by the thresholds of evidence that is deemed acceptable, the cost assumptions, the interval that testing is performed, compliance with testing, the potential of combining multiple technologies and the benefits assigned to improved quality of life. Needless to say, the complexity of this analysis has led to divergent results. Analyses that exclude the bulk of the literature for spurious reasons (e.g. not performing biopsy on women with normal cytology) are not able to reach definitive conclusions. Recent government sponsored reviews by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence in the United Kingdom and the Agency for Health Care Policy Research in United States conclude that liquid-based cytology is a cost-effective alternative to conventional smear-based cytology, and should be adopted. Again, as mentioned above, the ability of the "Liquid-based" Pap, to detect cervical cancer precursors, must be considered in this statement, since different methods may perform differently.

 

Recommendations


Morphologic review of a cervical cell sample, a Pap test, is the cornerstone of cervical cancer control. The Pap smear technique is most widely used worldwide, and has the advantage of simplicity and familiarity. Liquid-based Pap techniques address limitations of the smear method, improve detection of cervical lesions, and facilitate technologies such as imaging and ancillary testing). Screening programs can be improved by the adoption of certain liquid based techniques that have demonstrated improved detection of cervical precursor lesions (i.e.. ThinPrep Pap Test, Cytyc Corporation, Boxborough MA, USA).

Direction of further research
The two immediate areas of research are in areas of computer-assisted imaging, and molecular testing. As mentioned above, computer assisted imaging of the Pap sample may significantly improve the laboratory workflow and the ability of abnormalities to be detected by screening. The identification of additional features by imaging methods may further enhance the Pap examination. Data presented at the meeting showed the ThinPrep Imaging System to improve cytotechnologist screening rates, with improved accuracy. The ability to perform molecular testing on the liquid cytology sample (e.g. HPV testing of ASCUS Paps, or combined cytology and concurrent HPV testing) is attractive since it may draw on strengths of either approach. Further research is also needed in understanding the interrelationship between morphologic examination and the presence of HPV within cells, or the molecular alterations in the cell that arise from HPV infection.

Clinical perspectives
The goal of cervical cancer control is attainable, but requires coordination of resources and sharing of information. Screening programs require compliance by the patient, trained professionals to perform testing, and clinicians who are capable of acting on the information that results from the screening. As new technologies are evaluate for adoption, appropriate consideration is required on how they will improve the cervical screening programs, in terms of traditional measures (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values) and cost effectiveness, including analysis of quality of life issues.


References

Austin RM: The Detection of Precancerous Cervical Lesions Can Be Significantly Increased. Who Cares and Who Should Know? Arch Pathol Lab Med 2003;127(2):143-145.

Belinson J, Qiao YL, Pretorius R, Zhang WH, Elson P, Li L, Pan QJ, Fischer C, Lorincz A, Zahniser D. Shanxi Province Cervical Cancer Screening Study: a cross-sectional comparative trial of multiple techniques to detect cervical neoplasia. Gynecol Oncol. 2001 Nov;83(2):439-44.

Bernstein SJ, Sanchez-Ramos L & Ndubisi B (2001). Liquid-based cervical cytologic smear study and conventional Papanicolaou smears: a metaanalysis of prospective studies comparing cytologic diagnosis sample adequacy. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 185: 308-317.

Limaye A, Connor AJ, Huang X, Luff R: Comparative analysis of conventional Papanicolaou tests and a fluid-based thin-layer method. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2003;127(2):200-4

National Institute for Clinical Excellence report on Liquid Based Cytology. www.nice.org.uk