Multicancer screening test based on the detection of circulating non haematological proliferating atypical cells.

BACKGROUND: the problem in early diagnosis of sporadic cancer is understanding the individual's risk to develop disease. In response to this need, global scientific research is focusing on developing predictive models based on non-invasive screening tests. A tentative solution to the problem may be a cancer screening blood-based test able to discover those cell requirements triggering subclinical and clinical onset latency, at the stage when the cell disorder, i.e. atypical epithelial hyperplasia, is still in a subclinical stage of proliferative dysregulation. METHODS: a well-established procedure to identify proliferating circulating tumor cells was deployed to measure the cell proliferation of circulating non-haematological cells which may suggest tumor pathology. Moreover, the data collected were processed by a supervised machine learning model to make the prediction. RESULTS: the developed test combining circulating non-haematological cell proliferation data and artificial intelligence shows 98.8% of accuracy, 100% sensitivity, and 95% specificity. CONCLUSION: this proof of concept study demonstrates that integration of innovative non invasive methods and predictive-models can be decisive in assessing the health status of an individual, and achieve cutting-edge results in cancer prevention and management.

HPV testing is an efficient management choice for women with inadequate liquid-based cytology in cervical cancer screening.

This study compares colposcopy referrals of 2 management strategies: oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV)-DNA testing (Hybrid Capture 2 assay, Qiagen, Germantown, MD) and repeat cytology. In the New Technology in Cervical Cancer Trial, 22,708 subjects were randomly assigned to undergo both HPV and liquid-based cytologic testing. Women aged 35 to 60 years old with unsatisfactory cytologic findings were directly referred for colposcopy if the HPV test result was positive, and were referred for repeat cytologic examination if the HPV test result was negative; women aged 25 to 35 years old were referred for repeat cytologic examination independent of HPV test results. A positive or a second unsatisfactory cytologic examination referred women for colposcopy. Five hundred sixty women had unsatisfactory cytologic findings. Colposcopy referral was not significant and slightly higher with HPV testing than repeat cytologic test (9.8% vs 6.8%, P = .11). When cytologic testing was repeated 36.8% were unavailable for follow-up and most of the colposcopies were performed in HPV-negative women. For unsatisfactory cytologic findings, HPV triage is a more logical and efficient management strategy than a repeat cytologic test.

Accuracy of liquid-based cytology: comparison of the results obtained within a randomized controlled trial (the New Technologies for Cervical Cancer Screening Study) and an external group of experts.

BACKGROUND: In the New Technologies for Cervical Cancer Screening (NTCC) randomized controlled trial, no significant increase in the sensitivity of liquid-based cytology (LBC) was observed compared with conventional cytology. Both were interpreted by cytologists who had limited previous LBC experience. The objective of the current study was to assess whether different results could be expected with experienced LBC interpreters. METHODS: A stratified, random sample of 818 LBC slides from the NTCC study was obtained. These slides were reviewed blindly and independently by 3 international experts who did not participate in the NTCC. The sensitivity and specificity of external experts were estimated for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or greater (CIN2+) and for CIN3+ histology, and the differences were compared with the sensitivity and specificity of the original cytologic interpretation using cutoffs of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL). RESULTS: With the endpoint of CIN2+ histology, the difference in sensitivity between external experts and the original interpretation was -5.3 (95% confidence interval [CI], -16.0 to 5.4) with ASCUS as the cutoff and 3.8 (95% CI, -8.2 to 15.8) with LSIL as the cutoff. External experts had slightly lower specificity using ASCUS as the cutoff (-3.4; 95% CI, -3.9 to -2.9) and LSIL as the cutoff (-0.7; 95% CI, -1.0 to -0.4). CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of the external experts' interpretation was similar to that of the original interpretation. Therefore, the current results indicated that LBC is not expected to increase sensitivity even if it is used by interpreters who have extensive experience with this technique.

Reproducibility of HPV DNA Testing by Hybrid Capture 2 in a Screening Setting.

Within a large Italian randomized trial on new technologies for cervical cancer screening involving 7 laboratories with different levels of experience, an intralaboratory and interlaboratory quality control program for human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing by Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2; Digene, Gaithersburg, MD) was implemented. To monitor the hybridization and detection steps, target samples containing purified, concentration-defined, HPV DNA were introduced in each test run. Only 3 of 1,024 showed a mistake in a positive vs negative classification with a 1 relative light unit (RLU)/positive control specimen (PC) ratio cutoff. To monitor the preanalytic steps (particularly denaturation), blinded specimens (33 collected in PreservCyt (Cytyc, Boxborough, MA) and 36 in Specimen Transport Medium (STM, Digene) were centrally prepared, divided into aliquots, and sent to each laboratory. The multiple-rater scores for negative (<1 RLU/PC), low-positive (1 to <11 RLU/PC), and high-positive (> or =11 RLU/PC) samples, respectively, were 0.91, 0.60, and 0.69 with PreservCyt and 0.93, 0.87, and 0.90 with STM. Our data showed high reliability and reproducibility with HC2, with values higher for STM than ThinPrep (Cytyc) samples.