Prospective One Year follow up of HIV infected women screened for cervical cancer using visual inspection with acetic acid, cytology and human papillomavirus testing in Johannesburg, South Africa

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is the most common cancer in Sub-Saharan Africa. There are little of HIV-infected women one-year after screening using visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), HPV or cytology in sub-Saharan Africa. METHODS: HIV-infected women in Johannesburg South Africa were screened one year later by Pap smear, VIA and human papillomavirus (HPV) testing. Women qualified for the 12 month follow-up visit if they had a negative or cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia (CIN) 1 results at the baseline visit. Modified Poisson regression was used to analyse associations between patient baseline characteristics and progression. RESULTS: A total of 688 of 1,202 enrolled at baseline study who were CIN-2+ negative and qualified for a 12 month follow-up visit. Progression to CIN-2+ was higher in women with positive VIA results (12.6%; 24/191) than those VIA-negative (4.4%; 19/432). HPV-positive women at baseline were more likely to progress to CIN-2+ (12.3%; 36/293) than those HPV-negative (2.1%; 7/329). Cytology-positive women at baseline were more likely to progress to CIN-2+ (9.6%; 37/384) than cytology-negative women (2.5%; 6/237). Approximately 10% (10.4%; 39/376) of women with CIN 1 at baseline progressed to CIN 2+. Women who were VIA or HPV positive at baseline were more likely to progress aIRR 1.85, CI 95% (1.46 to 2.36), aIRR 1.41 CI 95% (1.14 to 1.75) respectively. CONCLUSION: Progression to CIN-2+ in HIV-infected women is significant when measured by baseline positive VIA, HPV or Pap and yearly screening by any method should be considered in this population if possible

Validation of cervical cancer screening methods in HIV positive women from Johannesburg South Africa

BACKGROUND: HIV-infected women are at increased risk for developing cervical cancer. Women living in resource-limited countries are especially at risk due to poor access to cervical cancer screening and treatment. We evaluated three cervical cancer screening methods to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 and above (CIN 2+) in HIV-infected women in South Africa; Pap smear, visual inspection with 5% acetic acid (VIA) and human papillomavirus detection (HPV). METHODS: HIV-infected women aged 18-65 were recruited in Johannesburg. A cross-sectional study evaluating three screening methods for the detection of the histologically-defined gold standard CIN-2 + was performed. Women were screened for cervical abnormalities with the Digene HC2 assay (HPV), Pap smear and VIA. VIA was performed by clinic nurses, digital photographs taken and then later reviewed by specialist physicians. The sensitivity, specificity and predictive valves for CIN-2 + were calculated using maximum likelihood estimators. RESULTS: 1,202 HIV-infected women participated, with a median age of 38 years and CD4 counts of 394 cells/mm 3 . One third of women had a high grade lesion on cytology. VIA and HPV were positive in 45% and 61% of women respectively. Estimated sensitivity/specificity for HPV, Pap smear and VIA for CIN 2+ was 92%/51.4%, 75.8%/83.4% and 65.4/68.5% (nurse reading), respectively. Sensitivities were similar, and specificities appeared significantly lower for the HPV test, cytology and VIA among women with CD4 counts ≤200 cells/mm 3 as compared to CD4 counts >350 cells/mm 3 . CONCLUSIONS: Although HPV was the most sensitive screening method for detecting CIN 2+, it was less specific than conventional cytology and VIA with digital imaging review. Screening programs may need to be individualized in context of the resources and capacity in each area

Evaluation of a Cervicography-Based Program to Ensure Quality of Visual Inspection of the Cervix in HIV-Infected Women in Johannesburg, South Africa

Quality assurance with cervicography and specialist review significantly improved the sensitivity of visual inspection with acetic acid to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse.AbstractObjectiveTo determine whether a quality assurance (QA) program using digital cervicography improved the performance of a visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN 2+) in HIV-infected women in Johannesburg, South Africa.Materials and MethodsVisual inspection with acetic acid was performed among HIV-infected women, aged 18 to 65 years, in Johannesburg, South Africa. Nurses received 2 weeks of training on the VIA procedure. The VIA interpretation was performed in real time. The VIA results were then photographed using a retail available digital camera. A gynecologist and medical officer reviewed the VIA digital images within 2 weeks of the procedure. Colposcopic biopsy was performed on all women with positive VIA and 25% negative VIA results. Sensitivity and specificity of VIA for the detection of CIN 2+ were compared between the nurses and physicians at the beginning and at the end of the study.ResultsPositive VIA results were found in 541 (45%) of the 1,202 participating women. The sensitivity of VIA to predict CIN 2+ was improved from 65% to 75% (p = .001) with the addition of digital cervicography and specialist review. There was no statistical difference in the sensitivity of the VIA readings when comparing the first 600 participants to the final 593 participants between the nurses (p = .613) and physicians (p = .624).ConclusionsQuality assurance performed by specialists using digital cervicography improved the sensitivity of VIA. There was no difference in sensitivity in interpreting VIA between the beginning and the end of the study. Quality assurance should form a cornerstone of any VIA program to improve sensitivity in detecting CIN 2+ lesions

Performance of the Cellslide^® automated liquid-based cytology system amongst HIV-positive women

Background: Many women undergoing cervical screening as part of a national South African screening programme may be positive for HIV. The performance of liquid-based cytology (LBC) on samples from HIV-positive women needs to be determined. Objectives: The performance of the Cellslide® automated LBC system was evaluated as a possible alternative to conventional cytology in a national cervical cancer screening programme. Methods: Split samples from 348 HIV-positive women attending an HIV treatment clinic in Johannesburg, South Africa were examined by conventional cytology and monolayer LBC methods. All samples were stained, examined and reported in the same manner. Cytotechnologists were blinded to the conventional smear diagnosis if the LBC smear was screened and vice versa. Results: The same percentage of inadequate smears (1.4%) was obtained by conventional cytology and LBC. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance were observed in 5.2% of conventional smears and 4.0% of LBC smears. Low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions were found in 35.6% of conventional smears and 32.7% of LBC smears. Only one conventional smear was categorised as atypical squamous cells – cannot exclude a high-grade lesion, whereas five such cases were identified on LBC. High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions were seen in 21.6% of conventional smears and 23.3% LBC smears. No invasive carcinoma was identified. Conclusion: The performance of the Cellslide® LBC system was similar to that of conventional cytology in this population of high-risk HIV-positive women, indicating that it may be introduced successfully as part of a cervical cancer screening programme

Evaluation of a Cervicography-Based Program to Ensure Quality of Visual Inspection of the Cervix in HIV-Infected Women in Johannesburg, South Africa

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a quality assurance (QA) program using digital cervicography improved the performance of a visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN 2+) in HIV-infected women in Johannesburg, South Africa. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Visual inspection with acetic acid was performed among HIV-infected women, aged 18 to 65 years, in Johannesburg, South Africa. Nurses received 2 weeks of training on the VIA procedure. The VIA interpretation was performed in real time. The VIA results were then photographed using a retail available digital camera. A gynecologist and medical officer reviewed the VIA digital images within 2 weeks of the procedure. Colposcopic biopsy was performed on all women with positive VIA and 25% negative VIA results. Sensitivity and specificity of VIA for the detection of CIN 2+ were compared between the nurses and physicians at the beginning and at the end of the study. RESULTS: Positive VIA results were found in 541 (45%) of the 1,202 participating women. The sensitivity of VIA to predict CIN 2+ was improved from 65% to 75% (p = .001) with the addition of digital cervicography and specialist review. There was no statistical difference in the sensitivity of the VIA readings when comparing the first 600 participants to the final 593 participants between the nurses (p = .613) and physicians (p = .624). CONCLUSIONS: Quality assurance performed by specialists using digital cervicography improved the sensitivity of VIA. There was no difference in sensitivity in interpreting VIA between the beginning and the end of the study. Quality assurance should form a cornerstone of any VIA program to improve sensitivity in detecting CIN 2+ lesions

Validation of cervical cancer screening methods in HIV positive women from Johannesburg South Africa.

HIV-infected women are at increased risk for developing cervical cancer. Women living in resource-limited countries are especially at risk due to poor access to cervical cancer screening and treatment. We evaluated three cervical cancer screening methods to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 and above (CIN 2+) in HIV-infected women in South Africa; Pap smear, visual inspection with 5% acetic acid (VIA) and human papillomavirus detection (HPV).HIV-infected women aged 18-65 were recruited in Johannesburg. A cross-sectional study evaluating three screening methods for the detection of the histologically-defined gold standard CIN-2 + was performed. Women were screened for cervical abnormalities with the Digene HC2 assay (HPV), Pap smear and VIA. VIA was performed by clinic nurses, digital photographs taken and then later reviewed by specialist physicians. The sensitivity, specificity and predictive valves for CIN-2 + were calculated using maximum likelihood estimators.1,202 HIV-infected women participated, with a median age of 38 years and CD4 counts of 394 cells/mm(3). One third of women had a high grade lesion on cytology. VIA and HPV were positive in 45% and 61% of women respectively. Estimated sensitivity/specificity for HPV, Pap smear and VIA for CIN 2+ was 92%/51.4%, 75.8%/83.4% and 65.4/68.5% (nurse reading), respectively. Sensitivities were similar, and specificities appeared significantly lower for the HPV test, cytology and VIA among women with CD4 counts ≤200 cells/mm(3) as compared to CD4 counts >350 cells/mm(3).Although HPV was the most sensitive screening method for detecting CIN 2+, it was less specific than conventional cytology and VIA with digital imaging review. Screening programs may need to be individualized in context of the resources and capacity in each area

Sequential screening tests.

<p>Sequential screening tests.</p

Screening test performance for CIN2+: estimated corrected sensitivity and specificity by CD4 count (cells/mm3).

*<p>This is the p value comparing each group with the reference group (≤200 cells/mm³).</p>**<p>Cytology negative: normal/LSIL/ASCUS; positive: HSIL, ASC-H, SCC.</p

Screening test performance: estimated sensitivity and specificity.

§<p>94.4% (878/930) of women with abnormal Pap smear/VIA and 25% (63/272) women with negative VIA/Pap smear received a colposcopic biopsy.</p><p>CIN2+ = CIN2/CIN3/ICC, CIN3+ = CIN3/ICC, CI = Confidence interval, Cytology = Cytology Pap smear, HPV = HPV DNA, VIA = Visual inspection with 5% acetic acid.</p>*<p>Cytology negative: normal/LSIL/ASCUS; positive: HSIL, ASC-H, SCC.</p>**<p>Cytology negative: normal; positive: otherwise.</p><p>A combined test in “Combined (Or)” is positive if either/any of the tests is positive. A Combined test in “Combined (And)” is positive if both/all of the tests are positive.</p

Study Flow Chart.

<p>Study Flow Chart.</p