Browsing by Subject "Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    A randomized trial comparing the diagnostic accuracy of visual inspection with acetic acid to Visual Inspection with Lugol's Iodine for cervical cancer screening in HIV-infected women.
    (PLoS One, 2015) Huchko, Megan J; Sneden, Jennifer; Zakaras, Jennifer M; Smith-McCune, Karen; Sawaya, George; Maloba, May; Bukusi, Elizabeth Ann; Cohen, Craig R
    Visual inspection with Acetic Acid (VIA) and Visual Inspection with Lugol’s Iodine (VILI) are increasingly recommended in various cervical cancer screening protocols in low-resource settings. Although VIA is more widely used, VILI has been advocated as an easier and more specific screening test. VILI has not been well-validated as a stand-alone screening test, compared to VIA or validated for use in HIV-infected women. We carried out a randomized clinical trial to compare the diagnostic accuracy of VIA and VILI among HIV-infected women. Women attending the Family AIDS Care and Education Services (FACES) clinic in western Kenya were enrolled and randomized to undergo either VIA or VILI with colposcopy. Lesions suspicious for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or greater (CIN2+) were biopsied. Between October 2011 and June 2012, 654 were randomized to undergo VIA or VILI. The test positivity rates were 26.2% for VIA and 30.6% for VILI (p = 0.22). The rate of detection of CIN2+ was 7.7% in the VIA arm and 11.5% in the VILI arm (p = 0.10). There was no significant difference in the diagnostic performance of VIA and VILI for the detection of CIN2+. Sensitivity and specificity were 84.0% and 78.6%, respectively, for VIA and 84.2% and 76.4% for VILI. The positive and negative predictive values were 24.7% and 98.3% for VIA, and 31.7% and 97.4% for VILI. Among women with CD4+ count < 350, VILI had a significantly decreased specificity (66.2%) compared to VIA in the same group (83.9%, p = 0.02) and compared to VILI performed among women with CD4+ count ≥ 350 (79.7%, p = 0.02). VIA and VILI had similar diagnostic accuracy and rates of CIN2+ detection among HIV-infected women.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Bacterial vaginosis as a risk factor for high-grade cervical lesions and cancer in HIV-seropositive women.
    (Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2011-09) Denslow, Sheri A; Westreich, Daniel J; Firnhaber, Cynthia; Michelow, Pam; Williams, Sophie; Smith, Jennifer S
    OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of bacterial vaginosis (BV) on the risk of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) among HIV-seropositive women. METHODS: A hospital-based prospective cohort study of HIV-seropositive women was conducted in Johannesburg, South Africa from January 2005 to September 2009. Multivariate log-binomial and Poisson regressions were used to estimate prevalence and rate ratios, respectively. RESULTS: Among 1954 HIV-seropositive women, the baseline prevalence of HSIL was 17%. BV prevalence was high (54%) and showed no association with prevalence of HSIL (adjusted prevalence ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 0.92-1.35) nor with cervical lesion progression at follow-up visit (n=503) (adjusted rate ratio: 1.00; 95% CI, 0.65-1.53). CONCLUSION: Among HIV-seropositive women, BV was not associated with an increased risk of HSIL or cervical lesion progression.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    ItemOpen Access
    Vaginal Self-Sampling for Human Papillomavirus Infection as a Primary Cervical Cancer Screening Tool in a Haitian Population.
    (Sex Transm Dis, 2015-11) Boggan, Joel C; Walmer, David K; Henderson, Gregory; Chakhtoura, Nahida; McCarthy, Schatzi H; Beauvais, Harry J; Smith, Jennifer S
    BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing as primary cervical cancer screening has not been studied in Caribbean women. We tested vaginal self-collection versus physician cervical sampling in a population of Haitian women. METHODS: Participants were screened for high-risk HPV with self-performed vaginal and clinician-collected cervical samples using Hybrid Capture 2 assays (Qiagen, Gaithersburg, MD). Women positive by either method then underwent colposcopy with biopsy of all visible lesions. Sensitivity and positive predictive value were calculated for each sample method compared with biopsy results, with κ statistics performed for agreement. McNemar tests were performed for differences in sensitivity at ≥cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)-I and ≥CIN-II. RESULTS: Of 1845 women screened, 446 (24.3%) were HPV positive by either method, including 105 (5.7%) only by vaginal swab and 53 (2.9%) only by cervical swab. Vaginal and cervical samples were 91.4% concordant (κ = 0.73 [95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.77], P < 0.001). Overall, 133 HPV-positive women (29.9%) had CIN-I, whereas 32 (7.2%) had ≥CIN-II. The sensitivity of vaginal swabs was similar to cervical swabs for detecting ≥CIN-I (89.1% vs. 87.9%, respectively; P = 0.75) lesions and ≥CIN-II disease (87.5% vs. 96.9%, P = 0.18). Eighteen of 19 cases of CIN-III and invasive cancer were found by both methods. CONCLUSIONS: Human papillomavirus screening via self-collected vaginal swabs or physician-collected cervical swabs are feasible options in this Haitian population. The agreement between cervical and vaginal samples was high, suggesting that vaginal sample-only algorithms for screening could be effective for improving screening rates in this underscreened population.