Interobserver reproducibility of cytologic p16INK4a/Ki-67 dual immunostaining in human papillomavirus-positive women

BACKGROUND: The accumulation of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (p16(ink4a)) protein in a cell is associated with neoplastic progression in precancerous cervical lesions. Dual staining for p16(ink4a) and Ki-67 has been proposed as a triage test in cervical cancer screening for women who test positive for human papillomavirus DNA. In this study, interobserver reproducibility of the interpretation of this test was assessed. METHODS: Forty-two immunostained, liquid-based cytology slides were divided into 2 sets and were interpreted by 17 to 21 readers from 9 different laboratories, yielding a total of 816 reports. Immunostaining results were classified as positive, negative, inconclusive, or inadequate. After evaluation of the first set of slides and before circulation of the second set, the results were discussed in a plenary meeting. The 10 slides with the most discordant results were evaluated again by selected expert cytopathologists. RESULTS: The overall kappa value was 0.612 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.523-0.701), it was higher for the positive and negative categories (kappa=0.692 and kappa=0.641, respectively), and it was almost null for the inconclusive category (kappa=0.058). Considering only readers from laboratories with documented experience, the kappa value was higher (kappa=0.747; 95% CI, 0.643-0.839) compared with nonexperienced centers (kappa=0.498; 95% CI, 0.388-0.616). The results were similar in both sets of slides (kappa=0.505 [95% CI, 0.358-0.642] and kappa=0.521 [95% CI, 0.240-0.698] for the first and second sets, respectively). Reinterpretation of the slides with the most discordant results did not provide any improvement (first evaluation, kappa=0.616 [95% CI, 0.384-0.866]; second evaluation, kappa=0.403 [95% CI, 0.182-0.643]). CONCLUSIONS: Dual staining for p16(ink4a) and Ki-67 demonstrated good reproducibility, confirming its robustness, which is a necessary prerequisite for its adoption as a triage test in cervical cancer screening programs that use human papillomavirus DNA as a primary test. Cancer Cytopathol 2017; 125:212-20. (C) 2016 American Cancer Society

Efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety of a quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in children aged 6-35 months: A multi-season randomised placebo-controlled trial in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres

Background: A quadrivalent split-virion inactivated influenza vaccine (VaxigripTetre (TM), Sanofi Pasteur; IIV4) containing two A strains (H1N1 and H3N2) and B strains from both lineages (Victoria and Yamagata) was approved in Europe in 2016 for individuals aged >= 3 years. This study examined the efficacy and safety of IIV4 in children aged 6-35 months. Methods: This was a phase III randomised controlled trial conducted in Latin America, Asia, Africa, and Europe during the Northern Hemisphere 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 and Southern Hemisphere 2014 and 2015 influenza seasons. Healthy children aged 6-35 months not previously vaccinated against influenza were randomised to receive two full doses 28 days apart of IIV4, placebo, the licensed trivalent splitvirion inactivated vaccine (IIV3), an investigational IIV3 containing a B strain from the alternate lineage. The primary objective was to demonstrate efficacy against influenza illness caused by any strain or vaccine-similar strains. Results: The study enrolled 5806 participants. Efficacy, assessed in 4980 participants completing the study according to protocol, was demonstrated for IIV4. Vaccine efficacy was 50.98% (97% CI, 37.36-61.86%) against influenza caused by any A or B type and 68.40% (97% CI, 47.07-81.92%) against influenza caused by vaccine-like strains. Safety profiles were similar for IIV4, placebo, and the IIV3s, although injection-site reactions were slightly more frequent for IIV4 than placebo. Conclusions: IIV4 was safe and effective for protecting children aged 6-35 months against influenza illness caused by vaccine-similar or any circulating strains. (C) 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd