Copyright
©2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Inc.
World J Clin Oncol. Dec 10, 2014; 5(5): 931-965
Published online Dec 10, 2014. doi: 10.5306/wjco.v5.i5.931
Published online Dec 10, 2014. doi: 10.5306/wjco.v5.i5.931
Table 1 Cytology and DNA Cytometry results from Ref[76]
Cytology1 | DNA Cytometry | ||
NILM | 18503 | Negative | 17855 |
ASCUS | 720 (0.40) | Equivocal | 1395 |
LSIL | 296 (0.89) | Positive | 371 |
HSIL | 59 (1.00) | ||
Total | 19621 | Total | 19621 |
Table 2 Biopsy results vs Cytology from Ref[76]
Cytology | |||||
Histology | Total | NILM/inflam | ASCUS | LSIL | HSIL |
Ca | 15 | 6 | 5 | 4 | |
CIN3 | 43 | 5 | 10 | 14 | 14 |
CIN2 | 66 | 12 | 15 | 23 | 16 |
CIN1 | 98 | 42 | 22 | 21 | 13 |
CC/Neg | 401 | 285 | 86 | 18 | 12 |
Total | 623 | 344 | 139 | 81 | 59 |
Table 3 Biopsy results vs DNA Cytometry from Ref[76]
DNA Cytometry | ||||
Histology | Total | Neg | Equiv | Pos |
Ca | 15 | 2 | 13 | |
CIN3 | 43 | 1 | 12 | 30 |
CIN2 | 66 | 3 | 19 | 44 |
CIN1 | 98 | 15 | 55 | 28 |
CC/Neg | 401 | 87 | 280 | 34 |
Total | 623 | 106 | 368 | 149 |
Table 4 2 × 2 Contingency Tables for Biopsy results vs Cytology and vs DNA Cytometry from Ref[76]
Cytology | DNA Cytometry | ||||
Histology | Total | LSIL+ | NILM/ASCUS | Pos | Neg/Equiv |
CIN2+ | 124 | 76 | 48 | 87 | 37 |
Neg/CIN1 | 499 | 64 | 435 | 62 | 437 |
Total | 623 | 140 | 483 | 149 | 474 |
Table 5 Cytology and Cytometry test performance based on data and analysis from Ref[76]
Cytology | DNA Cytometry | |
Sensitivity | 61.3% | 70.2% |
Specificity | 87.2% | 87.6% |
PPV | 54.3% | 58.4% |
NPV | 90.1% | 92.2% |
Table 6 3 × 3 Contingency Table for Biopsy results vs Cytology from Ref[76]
Cytology | ||||
Histology | Total | Positive (LSIL+) | Equivocal (ASCUS) | Negative |
Positive (CIN2+) | 124 | 76 | 31 | 17 |
Equivocal (CIN1) | 98 | 34 | 22 | 42 |
Negative | 18560 | 30 | 86 | 18444 |
Total | 18782 | 140 | 139 | 18503 |
Table 7 3 × 3 Contingency Table for Biopsy results vs DNA Cytometry from Ref[76]
DNA Cytometry | ||||
Histology | Total | Positive | Equivocal | Negative |
Positive (CIN2+) | 124 | 87 | 33 | 4 |
Equivocal (CIN1) | 98 | 28 | 55 | 15 |
Negative | 18150 | 34 | 280 | 17836 |
Total | 18372 | 149 | 368 | 17855 |
Table 8 Cytology and Cytometry test performance based on data from Ref[76] and revised analysis
Cytology | DNA Cytometry | |
Sensitivity | 73.4% | 91.4% |
Specificity | 99.4% | 98.3% |
PPV | 54.3% | 58.4% |
NPV | 99.68% | 99.89% |
Table 9 Descriptive summary of the data of Ref [76] as re-analyzed n (%)
Clinical result | Cytology number of cases | DNA Cytometry number of cases | Cytometry-Cytology number (%) | |
1 | Number of women immediately returned to routine screening | 18503 | 17855 | -648 (-3.5) |
2 | Number of CIN1+ cases (false negative cases) per 10000 women returned to routine screening | 32 | 11 | -21 (-66) |
3 | Number of women referred to immediate colposcopy | 140 | 149 | 9 (6) |
4 | Number of cases of invasive cancer immediately diagnosed | 9 | 13 | 4 (44) |
5 | Number of CIN3+ cases immediately diagnosed | 37 | 43 | 6 (16) |
6 | Number of clinically positive cases (CIN2+) immediately diagnosed by colposcopy | 76 | 87 | 11 (15) |
7 | Number of women requiring 6 mo follow-up due to equivocal result | 139 | 368 | 229 (165) |
8 | Number of women with potentially delayed clinically positive (CIN2+) diagnosis | 31 | 33 | 2 (6) |
9 | Number of CIN3+ cases missed | 5 | 1 | 4 (80) |
10 | Number of CIN2+ cases missed | 17 | 4 | 13 (76) |
Table 10 Definitions of the biopsy data required for comparison of two screening tests independent of simple verification bias, Ref[80]
Gold standard positive | Gold standard negative | |||||
Test 1+ | Test 1- | Total | Test 1+ | Test 1- | Total | |
Test 2+ | a | b | a + b | A | B | A + B |
Test 2- | c | [d] | [c + d] | C | [D] | [C + D] |
Total | a + c | [b + d] | [n] | A + C | [B + D] | [N] |
Table 11 Biopsy data from Ref[82] for simple verification bias free comparison of Cytology vs DNA cytometry
Biopsy + | Biopsy - | |||||
Cytology + | Cytology - | Total | Cytology + | Cytology - | Total | |
AQIC+ | 130 | 37 | 167 | 30 | 23 | 53 |
AQIC- | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Total | 131 | 37 | 168 | 30 | 23 | 53 |
Table 12 Alternative presentation of Biopsy data from Ref[82] for simple verification bias free comparison of Cytology vs DNA Cytometry
Cytology | DNA Cytometry | ||||||
Histology | Total | ASCUS+ | NILM | Histology | Total | Pos/equiv | Neg |
CIN1+ | 168 | 131 | 37 | CIN1+ | 127 | 167 | 1 |
Neg | 53 | 30 | 23 | Neg | 121 | 53 | 0 |
Total | 221 | 161 | 60 | Total | 221 | 220 | 1 |
Table 13 The test performance limits for the combination of two binary valued tests
Table 14 Crude cancer prevalence and other data from 36 published DNA Cytometry studies from China, 2005-2013
Ref. | Invasive cancer cases | CIN2+ cases | Total screened | Crude cancer prevalence (per 100000 persons) | Crude CIN2+ prevalence (%) | Follow-up ratio | Ca/CIN2+ (× 10) |
[110] | 3 | 14 | 500 | 600 | 2.8 | 2.14 | |
[82] | 7 | 100 | 23698 | 29.5 | 0.42 | 0.38 | 0.7 |
[111] | 48 | 103 | 4020 | 1194 | 2.56 | 0.78 | 4.66 |
[112] | 1 | 22 | 1200 | 83.3 | 1.83 | 0.45 | |
[113] | 2 | 17 | 673 | 297.2 | 2.53 | 1.18 | |
[114] | 4 | 12 | 3551 | 112.6 | 0.34 | 3.33 | |
[115] | 2 | 15 | 3162 | 63.3 | 0.47 | 0.39 | 1.33 |
[116] | 14 | 78 | 4109 | 340.7 | 1.9 | 0.93 | 1.79 |
[117] | 4 | 84 | 9261 | 43.2 | 0.91 | 0.36 | 0.48 |
[118] | 2 | 30 | 2599 | 77 | 1.15 | 0.67 | |
[119] | 3 | 65 | 1200 | 250 | 5.42 | 0.46 | |
[120] | 9 | 111 | 6793 | 132.5 | 1.63 | 1 | 0.81 |
[121] | 0 | 16 | 2003 | 0 | 0.8 | 0 | |
[122] | 4 | 87 | 2153 | 185.8 | 4.04 | 0.46 | |
[123] | 3 | 56 | 12079 | 24.8 | 0.46 | 0.54 | |
[124] | 5 | 26 | 3000 | 166.7 | 0.87 | 1.92 | |
[125] | 8 | 142 | 5886 | 135.9 | 2.41 | 1 | 0.56 |
[126] | 11 | 147 | 7735 | 142.2 | 1.9 | 1 | 0.75 |
[127] | 1 | 41 | 4598 | 21.7 | 0.89 | 0.24 | |
[128] | 4 | 34 | 12278 | 32.6 | 0.28 | 1.18 | |
[129] | 2 | 11 | 3589 | 55.7 | 0.31 | 1.82 | |
[130] | 3 | 17 | 1806 | 166.1 | 0.94 | 1.76 | |
[131] | 0 | 10 | 1206 | 0 | 0.83 | 0 | |
[132] | 8 | 51 | 3603 | 222 | 1.42 | 1 | 1.57 |
[133] | 106 | 168 | 23993 | 441.8 | 0.7 | 6.31 | |
[134] | 6 | 36 | 1220 | 491.8 | 2.95 | 1.67 | |
[76] | 15 | 124 | 19621 | 76.4 | 0.63 | 1.21 | |
[55] | 2 | 21 | 3070 | 65.1 | 0.68 | 0.95 | |
[135] | 1 | 15 | 2000 | 50 | 0.75 | 0.67 | |
[136] | 0 | 5 | 1256 | 0 | 0.4 | 0 | |
[137] | 30 | 172 | 18097 | 165.8 | 0.95 | 1.74 | |
[138] | 1 | 7 | 451 | 221.7 | 1.55 | 1.43 | |
[139] | 10 | 53 | 430 | 2325.6 | 12.33 | 1.89 | |
[140] | 6 | 12 | 2832 | 211.9 | 0.42 | 5 | |
[141] | 15 | 95 | 8670 | 173 | 1.1 | 1.58 | |
[142] | 30 | 187 | 22169 | 135.3 | 0.84 | 1.6 |
Table 15 Biopsy data for DNA Cytometry and hrHPV test results for 294 cases of Cytology ASCUS, from Ref[169]
hrHPV | Histology | |||
Neg | CIN1 | CIN2+ | ||
hrHPV Pos | 216 | |||
Ploidy Neg | 90 | 10 | 1 | |
Ploidy Equ | 22 | 25 | 8 | |
Ploidy Pos | 5 | 12 | 43 | |
hrHPV Neg | 78 | |||
Ploidy Neg | 35 | 0 | 1 | |
Ploidy Equ | 12 | 0 | 0 | |
Ploidy Pos | 14 | 16 | 0 |
Table 16 Test performance indicators for DNA Cytometry, hrHPV tests and combined DNA Cytometry and hrHPV tests, for Cytology ASCUS cases, Ref[169]
875 Cases (157 CIN2+) | 294 Cases (53 CIN2+) | |||
Performance indicator for CIN2+ (%) | DNA Ploidy | hrHPV | DNA Ploidy | DNA Ploidy and hrHPV |
bSensitivity | 98.8 | 98.1 | 96.2 | 96.2 |
bSpecificity | 47.5 | 32.0 | 56.0 | 73.4 |
bPPV | 29.1 | 24.1 | 32.5 | 44.3 |
bNPV | 99.4 | 98.7 | 98.5 | 98.9 |
875 Cases (157 CIN2+) | 294 Cases (53 CIN2+) | |||
Performance indicator for CIN2+ (%) | DNA Ploidy | hrHPV | DNA Ploidy | DNA Ploidy and hrHPV |
bSensitivity | 98.8 | 98.1 | 96.2 | 96.2 |
bSpecificity | 47.5 | 32.0 | 56.0 | 73.4 |
bPPV | 40.8 | 24.1 | 47.8 | 71.7 |
bNPV | 99.4 | 98.7 | 98.5 | 98.9 |
- Citation: Garner D. Clinical application of DNA ploidy to cervical cancer screening: A review. World J Clin Oncol 2014; 5(5): 931-965
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-4333/full/v5/i5/931.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5306/wjco.v5.i5.931