Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2015
Laboratory audit as part of the quality assessment of a primary HPV-screening program.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hortlund Maria, Sundström Karin, Lamin Helena, Hjerpe Anders, Dillner Joakim
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: As primary HPV screening programs are rolled out, methods are needed for routine quality assurance of HPV laboratory analyzes.
OBJECTIVE: To explore the use of similar design for audit as currently used in cytology-based screening, to estimate the clinical sensitivity to identify women at risk for CIN 3 or worse (CIN3+).
STUDY DESIGN: Population-based cohort study conducted within the cervical screening program in Stockholm, Sweden, in 2011-2012. All women with histopathologically confirmed CIN3+ in the following two years were identified by registry analysis. Primary HPV and cytology screening results were collected. For women who had not been HPV tested, biobanked cytology samples were HPV-tested. If the original HPV result had been negative, the sample and subsequent biopsies were analyzed with broad HPV typing (general primer PCR and Luminex).
RESULTS: 154 women had a biobanked prediagnostic cytology sample taken up to 2 years before a histopathologically confirmed CIN3+. The high-risk HPV-positivity was 97% (148/154 women), whereas 143/154 (94%) women had had a cytological abnormality. Among the six HPV-negative samples, one sample was HPV 33 positive in repeat testing whereas the other five cases were HPV-negative also on repeat testing, but HPV-positive in the subsequent tumor tissue.
CONCLUSIONS: A sensitivity of the HPV test that is higher than the sensitivity of cytology suggests adequate quality of the testing. Regular audits of clinical sensitivity, similar to those of cytology-based screening, should be used also in HPV-based screening programs, in order to continuously monitor the performance of the analyzes.
OBJECTIVE: To explore the use of similar design for audit as currently used in cytology-based screening, to estimate the clinical sensitivity to identify women at risk for CIN 3 or worse (CIN3+).
STUDY DESIGN: Population-based cohort study conducted within the cervical screening program in Stockholm, Sweden, in 2011-2012. All women with histopathologically confirmed CIN3+ in the following two years were identified by registry analysis. Primary HPV and cytology screening results were collected. For women who had not been HPV tested, biobanked cytology samples were HPV-tested. If the original HPV result had been negative, the sample and subsequent biopsies were analyzed with broad HPV typing (general primer PCR and Luminex).
RESULTS: 154 women had a biobanked prediagnostic cytology sample taken up to 2 years before a histopathologically confirmed CIN3+. The high-risk HPV-positivity was 97% (148/154 women), whereas 143/154 (94%) women had had a cytological abnormality. Among the six HPV-negative samples, one sample was HPV 33 positive in repeat testing whereas the other five cases were HPV-negative also on repeat testing, but HPV-positive in the subsequent tumor tissue.
CONCLUSIONS: A sensitivity of the HPV test that is higher than the sensitivity of cytology suggests adequate quality of the testing. Regular audits of clinical sensitivity, similar to those of cytology-based screening, should be used also in HPV-based screening programs, in order to continuously monitor the performance of the analyzes.