Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
1.
Future Oncol ; 19(37): 2493-2504, 2023 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38054304

RESUMO

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of TruScreen (TS) for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) in women with abnormal ThinPrep cytologic test (TCT) results. Methods: 466 women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) were enrolled and underwent TS, colposcopy and biopsy examination. Results: Compared with the high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) test for CIN2+, significantly higher specificity of TS, combined TS and hrHPV (69.6 and 75.0 vs 36.8% in ASCUS; 59.0 and 69.9 vs 30.1% in LSIL), significantly higher positive predictive value of combined TS and hrHPV were observed (32.7 vs 24.6% in ASCUS; 47.9 vs 35.6% in LSIL). Conclusion: TS combined with hrHPV showed better performance in diagnosing CIN2+ in ASCUS/LSIL.


Assuntos
Células Escamosas Atípicas do Colo do Útero , Infecções por Papillomavirus , Lesões Intraepiteliais Escamosas , Displasia do Colo do Útero , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero , Feminino , Humanos , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/patologia , Esfregaço Vaginal , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Displasia do Colo do Útero/diagnóstico , Lesões Intraepiteliais Escamosas/diagnóstico , Infecções por Papillomavirus/diagnóstico , Papillomaviridae/genética
2.
Future Oncol ; 17(10): 1197-1207, 2021 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33331168

RESUMO

Aims: To evaluate the efficacy of TruScreen (TS01) for high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) women compared with other methods in reducing colposcopy referral rates in hospitals. Methods: A single-center, prospective, case-control study was conducted from December 2019 to June 2020. Results: Among 139 (46.2%) HR-HPV-positive patients, 58 were CIN1, 52 were CIN2-3 and 29 had cervical cancer (n = 29). The sensitivity and specificity of detecting CIN2+ by TS01, colposcopy and HPV16/18 testing were 96.3% and 46.4%, 85.2% and 40.5% and 59.3% and 74.1%, respectively. The highest sensitivity was 96.3% at HPV16/18 and TS01 (each positive results), and the highest specificity was 83.6% at HPV16/18 and TS01 (both positive) for CIN2+ compared with the other methods. Conclusion: TS01 is a noninvasive screening method and can be used to diagnose cervical lesions quickly. It is especially suitable as triage tool for HR-HPV-positive women facing SARS-CoV-2 exposure and infection risks in hospital.


Assuntos
COVID-19/epidemiologia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Infecções por Papillomavirus/complicações , SARS-CoV-2 , Displasia do Colo do Útero/diagnóstico , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/diagnóstico , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Colposcopia , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Triagem/métodos , Adulto Jovem
3.
J Cancer ; 15(11): 3612-3624, 2024.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38817879

RESUMO

Background: Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer among women worldwide. Cervical cancer usually develops from human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, which leads to cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN1/2/3) and eventually invasive cervical cancer. Therefore, early-screening and detection of cervical lesions are crucial for preventing and treating cervical cancer. However, different regions have different levels of medical resources and availability of diagnostic methods. There is a need to compare the efficiency of different methods and combinations for detecting cervical lesions and provide recommendations for the optimal screening and detection strategies. Methods: The current clinical methods for screening and detection of cervical lesions mainly include TruScreen (TS), Thinprep cytologic test (TCT), HPV testing, and colposcopy, but their sensitivity and specificity vary and there is no standard protocol recommended. In this study, we retrospectively reviewed 2286 female samples that underwent cervical biopsy and compared the efficiency of different methods and combinations for detecting cervical lesions. Results: HPV screening showed the highest sensitivity for identifying women with CIN2+ cervical lesions compared with other single methods. Our results also showed the importance and necessary of the secondary diagnostic test like TCT and TS as a triage method before colposcopy examination and guided biopsy. Conclusions: Our study provides recommendations for the optimal screening and detection strategies for cervical lesions in different regions with different levels of development. As a non-invasive, easily operated, and portable device, TS is a promising tool to replace TCT for detecting cervical lesions in the health care center with insufficient medical resources.

4.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol ; 266: 182-186, 2021 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34625339

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Early screening and intervention are crucial for the prevention and treatment of cervical cancer. TruScreen is a real-time, intelligent, pathological diagnostic technology designed for cervical cancer screening. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical value of TruScreen in screening for cervical lesions. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 458 women aged between 25 and 65 years were recruited to receive cervical cancer screening, including human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, cytological testing using the ThinPrep cytology test (TCT), and TruScreen from December 2018 to January 2020. The clinical performance of TruScreen, alone and in combination with HPV testing, was evaluated to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+ or CIN3+). RESULTS: For detection of CIN2+, the sensitivity and specificity of TruScreen were 83.78% and 78.86%, respectively. The specificity of TruScreen was significantly higher than those of HPV testing (50.59%, P < 0.001) and TCT (55.58%, P < 0.001). In high-risk HPV-positive women, the specificity of HPV testing combined with TruScreen was significantly higher than that of HPV testing combined with TCT (50% vs 39.9%, P = 0.004). The sensitivity of HPV testing combined with TruScreen was comparable to that of HPV testing combined with TCT (93.94% vs 87.88%, P = 0.625). Similar patterns were also observed for CIN3+ cases. CONCLUSION: TruScreen has the potential for screening high-grade cervical precancerous lesions and may replace cytological tests as a cervical cancer screening method in China to avoid subjectivity in the interpretation of cytological tests and requirements by pathologists.


Assuntos
Infecções por Papillomavirus , Displasia do Colo do Útero , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero , Adulto , Idoso , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Feminino , Humanos , Programas de Rastreamento , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Papillomaviridae , Infecções por Papillomavirus/diagnóstico , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/diagnóstico , Esfregaço Vaginal , Displasia do Colo do Útero/diagnóstico
5.
J Cytol ; 35(3): 143-148, 2018.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30089942

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Cervicouterine cancer (CC) is a health problem worldwide and is the fourth most common cancer in women, with a greater proportion of individuals affected by advanced stages of the disease in developing countries. OBJECTIVE: To determine the sensitivity and specificity of the TruScreen™ opto-electronic device vs. conventional cytology in CC screenings. METHODOLOGY: This is a prospective observational study that included individuals who presented for the first time at the Dysplasia Clinic of the Instituto Nacional de Cancerología from March 1 through April 30, 2016, and those referred due to abnormal conventional cytology. The patients were evaluated with the TruScreen™ device, conventional cytology, colposcopy and, if necessary, cervical biopsy. The results were analyzed by descriptive statistics as well as the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of the TruScreen™, using conventional cytology as the standard. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were included who met the inclusion criteria. The average age of the patients was 40 years (range, 23-61 years). For the diagnosis of high-grade intraepithelial lesions, the TruScreen™ device showed a 43% sensitivity, a 92% specificity, a PPV of 60%, and a NPV of 85%, whereas evaluation via cervical biopsy exhibited a 33% sensitivity, an 86% specificity, a 33% PPV, and an 86% NPV. The Kappa agreement index of the TruScreen™ with the colposcopies was 0.70. CONCLUSIONS: TruScreen™ demonstrated low sensitivity and high specificity compared with conventional cytology, which had a high NPV.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA