RESUMO
Objective:To investigate the screening values of immunocytochemical P16/Ki-67 double staining, P16 INK4α single staining and high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing for high-grade cervical lesions. Methods:The clinical data of 622 patients who underwent cervical thin-layer liquid-based cytology (TCT) and HR-HPV testing in General Hospital of Taiyuan Iron and Steel (Group) Co., Ltd. from March 2019 to July 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. The remaining cytological specimens were detected by P16/Ki-67 double staining and P16 INK4α single staining. Among them, 334 patients with TCT results suggesting atypical squamous cell of undetermined significance (ASCUS) and above and HPV-positive underwent colposcopy pathological biopsy. Using pathological results as reference, the positive predictive value, sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of P16/Ki-67 double staining, P16 INK4α single staining and HR-HPV testing for screening of high-grade squamous intraepithelial neoplasia (HSIL) and cervical cancer were compared. Results:Taking the results of histopathology as references, combined with the results of TCT, 31 of 622 patients were HSIL, of which 22 (71.0%) were positive for P16/Ki-67 double staining, 23 (74.2%) were positive for P16 INK4α single staining, and 25 (80.6%) were positive for HR-HPV testing; 4 cases were cervical cancer, and the positive rates of the three detection methods were all 100.0% (4/4). Among 622 patients, the positive rates of P16/Ki-67 double staining, P16 INK4α single staining and HR-HPV testing for screening of HSIL and cervical cancer were 13.99% (87/622), 25.40% (158/622) and 21.38% (133/622); the positive predictive values were 29.89%, 17.09% and 21.08%; the accuracies were 91.19%, 78.94% and 83.28%; the specificities were 89.77%, 77.98% and 82.46%; the sensitivities were 74.29%, 77.14% and 82.86%. The positive rate, positive predictive value, specificity and accuracy of P16/Ki-67 double staining were higher than those of P16 INK4α single staining and HR-HPV testing, and the differences were statistically significant ( z values were -5.062 and -3.418, 2.328 and 2.450, 5.436 and 3.570, 6.043 and 4.161, all P < 0.05); the sensitivity of HR-HPV testing was higher than that of P16/Ki-67 double staining and P16 INK4α single staining, but the differences were not statistically significant ( z values were -0.890 and 1.017, both P > 0.05). Conclusions:HR-HPV testing is more suitable for primary cervical lesion screening; P16/Ki-67 double staining can be used as a potential combined cell screening tool or an effective triage tool; P16 INK4α single staining has certain limitations.
RESUMO
Carcinogens in food are an important issue that threat people's health right now. Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) strains as well-known probiotics have shown numerous perspectives in being used as a good food additive to confront cancerogenic compounds in recent years. Some LAB strains can remove cancerogenic compounds from medium environment via direct physical binding and avoid re-pollution of poisonous secondary metabolites which are generated from degradation of cancerogenic compounds. This article presents a whole overview of the physical-binding of LAB strains to such common cancerogenic compounds existed in food and feed environments as mycotoxins, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), heterocyclic amines (HAs) and pthalic acid esters (PAEs).In most cases, summaries of these published researches show that the binding of LAB strains to cancerogenic compounds is a physical process. Binding sites generally take place in cell wall, and peptidoglycan from LAB cells is the chief binding site. The adsorption of lactic acid bacteria to cancerogenic compounds is strain-specific. Specially, the strains from the two genera Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium show a better potential in binding cancerogenic compounds. Moreover, we firstly used molecular dynamic computer model as a highly potential tool to simulate the binding behavior of peptidoglycan from Lactobacillus acidophilus to DBP, one of pthalic acid esters with genetic toxicity. It was seen that the theoretical data were quite consistent with the experimental results in terms of the ability of this bacterium to bind DBP. Also, the toxicity reduction of cancerogenic compounds by LAB strains could be achieved either in gastrointestinal model or animal tests and clinical researches as well. In conclusion, carefully selected LAB strains should be a good solution as one of safety strategies to reduce potential risk of cancerogenic compounds from food-based products.