medigraphic.com
Federación Mexicana de Ginecología y Obstetricia, A.C.

2007, Number 10

<< Back Next >>

Ginecol Obstet Mex 2007; 75 (10)

Cervical biopsy: Is the histological diagnosis reliable and reproducible? Utility of p16INK4A in its achievement

Curiel VJJ

Language: Spanish
References: 11
Page: 615-620
PDF size: 242.86 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: Cervical biopsy is the gold standard method used for diagnosing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, however, it has being stated a very low diagnostic agreement. Klaes demonstrates that p16 immunohistochemical marker increases from 40 to 97% the diagnostic agreement in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; due to it, its reliability, sensitivity and specificity to detect any neoplasia variant is 100%.
Objective: To know the diagnostic agreement between Mexican pathologists during the study of two cervical intraepithelial neoplasia specimens stained with hematoxylin and eosin, and with p16, respectively.
Material and Methods: Two cervical biopsies, one stained with hematoxylin and eosin, and the other with p16, where shown to Mexican pathologists in order to express them diagnosis within the four neoplasia variants.
Results: When using hematoxylin and eosin, 52.5% of fragment 1 cases has a CIN 1 diagnosis agreement, and 17.8% of fragment 2 has a CIN 2 diagnosis agreement. In both fragments, almost 100% of biopsies processed with p16 has an agreement.
Conclusion: It is clear that in daily practice the diagnostic criteria are in theory known but not correctly applied among pathologists; p16 is a useful, reliable and reproducible technique to establish the right diagnosis.


REFERENCES

  1. Richart RM. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Pathol Annu 1973;8:301-328.

  2. Klaes R, Benner A, Friedrich T, Ridder R, et al. P16INK4A immunohistochemestry improves interobserver agreement in the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Sug Pathol 2002;26:1389-99.

  3. McCluggage WG, Walsh MY, Thornton CM, Hamilton PW, et al. Inter- and intra-observer variation in the histopathological reporting of cervical intraepithelial lesions using a modified bethesda grading system. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105:206-7.

  4. Girardi G, Heras A, Maldonado F, Cordova S, Arias SJ. Immunohistochemestry as diagnostic markers for cervical cancer. Mod Pathol 2003;16:192-6.

  5. Yashima K, Ashfaq R, Nowak J, Von-Grueniguen V, et al. Telomerase activity and expression of its RNA component in cervical lesions. Cancer 1998;82:1319-27.

  6. Werness BA, Levine AJ, Howley PM. Association of human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 E6 proteins with the p53. Science 1990;248:76-79.

  7. Keating JT, Cviko A, Riethdorf S, Riethdorf L, et al. Ki-67, cyclina E, p16INK4A are complimentary surrogate biomarkers for human papillomavirus-related cervical neoplasia. Am J Surg Pathol 2001;25;884-91.

  8. Nucci MR, Crum CP. Redefining early cervical neoplasia: recent progress. Adv Anat Pathol 2007;14:1-10.

  9. Kong CS, Balzer BL, Troxel ML, Patterson BK, Longacre TA. p16INK4A immunohistochemestry is superior to HPV in situ hibridization for the detection of high-risk HPV in atypical squamous metaplasia. Am J Surg Path 2007;31:33-43.

  10. Curiel-Valdés JJ. Trabajo de ingreso a la Academia Mexicana de Cirugía, presentado el 26 de julio 2005 y resumen en Memorias del Congreso EUROGY abril 2006.

  11. Kitchener HC, Castle PE, Cox JT. Chapter 7: Achivements and limitations of cervical cytology screening. Vaccine 2006;24(Suppl 3):S63-70.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com