Cytology compared with Hybrid Capture 2 human papilloma virus cervical cancer screening in HIV positive and HIV negative South African women.

OBJECTIVES: Cervical cancer is preventable and caused by persistent infection with oncogenic human papilloma virus (HPV) types. HPV screening is more sensitive and is the preferred screening test. HPV screening data are mainly from developed settings, and the purpose of this study was to investigate the performance of HPV screening in previously unscreened HIV positive and negative women. METHODS: In this cross sectional multicenter study, liquid based cytology and HPV testing were performed on women attending different clinics. Patients with positive screening tests had colposcopy and biopsy or large loop excision of the transformation zone. Some women with normal screening had colposcopy and biopsy. Data of women with histology results, and data of HIV positive and negative women were analyzed for comparison. For women without histology results, data were imputed using a statistical model. RESULTS: In 903 women with known HIV status, 683 (75.6%) had negative cytology, 202 women (22.4%) had abnormal cytology, and in 18 patients (2.0%) the results were uncertain. Mean age was 41.4 years (range 25-65). HPV tests were negative in 621 women (68.8%). In HIV positive women, 54.5% tested negative compared with 79.7% HIV negative women (p<0.0001). HPV screening had higher sensitivity (60.9%), but lower specificity (82.4%), compared with cytology (48.6% and 86.7%) for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2+ in all women. For detection of CIN 3+, HPV screening had higher sensitivity (70.4%) compared with cytology (62.9%), and specificity (75.5%) was lower compared with cytology at a threshold of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS+) (82.4%). CONCLUSION: HPV screening was more sensitive than cytology in HIV positive and HIV negative women, but specificity was lower. Although HPV screening should be the preferred screening test, cytology is a suitable screening test in HIV positive women in low resource settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02956031.

Current South African clinical Practice in Debulking Surgery for Ovarian Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to assess practice patterns and rationale with regard to debulking surgery for advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma among South African Gynaecological oncologists. METHODS: A survey was distributed to all practicing gynecological oncologists in South Africa. It was structured to assess definitions of optimal debulking, procedures used to achieve optimal debulking, and reasons for not performing specific procedures. Respondents were also asked to report on experience and additional surgical training to improve skill in performing ultra-radical debulking surgery. RESULTS: Eighty percent of gynecological oncologists completed the survey. Sixty percent of respondents reported that they view optimal debulking as no visible disease, and this was achieved in 63% of surgical cases. The most common barriers to optimal debulking were medical comorbidities (85%), followed by lack of expertise in ultra-radical debulking surgery (55%) and advanced patient age (40%). At operation, the most common disease findings precluding optimal debulking were large volume confluent peritoneal disease and confluent diaphragmatic disease. All of the surgeons perform excision of bulky pelvic and lower paraaortic nodes themselves. Bowel resections are often performed with the help of a colleague, but more than half of the respondents never perform diaphragmatic stripping, resection of liver metastases, distal pancreatic resection, or ablation of peritoneal metastases. Overall, most participants seem to regularly perform debulking procedures in the pelvis but are less comfortable with resection of upper abdominal or peritoneal disease. Most common reasons for not performing procedures were concerns about patient morbidity and concerns regarding benefit. Fifty percent of respondents also reported a lack of personal expertise in performing ultra-radical debulking procedures. CONCLUSIONS: The progression of South African Gynaecological Oncologist towards more aggressive debulking surgery is following international trends, but many of the surgeons report a lack of experience in ultra-radical debulking surgery, especially in the upper abdomen.