scholarly journals Clinical study on primary screening of oral cancer and precancerous lesions by oral cytology

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shintaro Sukegawa ◽  
Sawako Ono ◽  
Keisuke Nakano ◽  
Kiyofumi Takabatake ◽  
Hotaka Kawai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Conventional Method ◽  
False Positive ◽  
Precancerous Lesions ◽  
False Positive Rate ◽  
False Negative ◽  
False Negative Rate ◽  
Intraepithelial Neoplasia ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion ◽  
Intraepithelial Lesion

Abstract Background This study was conducted to compare histological diagnostic accuracy between conventional method and liquid-based cytology (LBC) method and to clarify the effectiveness of cytology. Methods Histological diagnoses of 251 cases were classified as negative (no malignancy lesion, inflammation, and mild/moderate dysplasia) and positive [oral intraepithelial neoplasia/carcinoma in situ (OIN/CIS) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC)]. Cytological diagnoses were classified as negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy (NILM), oral low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (OLSIL), oral high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (OHSIL), or SCC. Cytological diagnostic results were compared with histology results. Results Of NILM cytology cases, the most frequent case was negative [LBC n = 50 (90.9%), conventional n = 22 (95.7%)]. Among OLSIL cytodiagnoses, the most common was negative (LBC n = 34; 75.6%, conventional n = 14; 70.0%). Among OHSIL cytodiagnoses (LBC n = 51, conventional n = 23), SCC was the most frequent (LBC n = 31; 60.8%, conventional n = 7; 30.4%). Negative cases were common (LBC n = 13; 25.5%, conventional n = 14; 60.9%). Among SCC cytodiagnoses SCC was the most common (LBC n = 16; 88.9%, conventional n = 14; 87.5%). Regarding the diagnostic results of cytology, assuming HSIL and SCC as cytologically positive, the LBC method/conventional method showed a sensitivity of 79.4%/76.7%, specificity of 85.1%/69.2%, false positive rate of 14.9%/30.7%, and false negative rate of 20.6%/23.3%. Conclusions LBC method was superior to conventional method in cytodiagnosis. It was especially superior for LSIL and HSIL. Because of the false positive and false negative cytodiagnoses, it is necessary to make a comprehensive diagnosis considering the clinical findings.

scholarly journals Clinical study on primary screening of oral cancer and precancerous lesions by oral cytology

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shintaro Sukegawa ◽  
Sawako Ono ◽  
Keisuke Nakano ◽  
Kiyofumi Takabatake ◽  
Hotaka Kawai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
False Positive ◽  
Precancerous Lesions ◽  
False Positive Rate ◽  
False Negative ◽  
False Negative Rate ◽  
Clinical Findings ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Severe Dysplasia ◽  
Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion ◽  
Intraepithelial Lesion

Abstract Background This study was conducted to compare the histological diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral-based cytology and liquid-based cytology (LBC) methods. Methods Histological diagnoses of 251 cases were classified as negative (no malignancy lesion, inflammation, or mild/moderate dysplasia) and positive [severe dysplasia/carcinoma in situ (CIS) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC)]. Cytological diagnoses were classified as negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy (NILM), oral low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (OLSIL), oral high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (OHSIL), or SCC. Cytological diagnostic results were compared with histology results. Results Of NILM cytology cases, the most frequent case was negative [LBC n = 50 (90.9%), conventional n = 22 (95.7%)]. Among OLSIL cytodiagnoses, the most common was negative (LBC n = 34; 75.6%, conventional n = 14; 70.0%). Among OHSIL cytodiagnoses (LBC n = 51, conventional n = 23), SCC was the most frequent (LBC n = 31; 60.8%, conventional n = 7; 30.4%). Negative cases were common (LBC n = 13; 25.5%, conventional n = 14; 60.9%). Among SCC cytodiagnoses SCC was the most common (LBC n = 16; 88.9%, conventional n = 14; 87.5%). Regarding the diagnostic results of cytology, assuming OHSIL and SCC as cytologically positive, the LBC method/conventional method showed a sensitivity of 79.4%/76.7%, specificity of 85.1%/69.2%, false-positive rate of 14.9%/30.7%, and false-negative rate of 20.6%/23.3%. Conclusions LBC method was superior to conventional cytodiagnosis methods. It was especially superior for OLSIL and OHSIL. Because of the false-positive and false-negative cytodiagnoses, it is necessary to make a comprehensive diagnosis considering the clinical findings.

scholarly journals Clinical study on primary screening of oral cancer and precancerous lesions by oral cytology

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shintaro Sukegawa ◽  
Sawako Ono ◽  
Keisuke Nakano ◽  
Kiyofumi Takabatake ◽  
Hotaka Kawai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
False Positive ◽  
Precancerous Lesions ◽  
False Positive Rate ◽  
False Negative ◽  
False Negative Rate ◽  
Clinical Findings ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Severe Dysplasia ◽  
Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion ◽  
Intraepithelial Lesion

Abstract BackgroundThis study was conducted to compare the histological diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral-based cytology and liquid-based cytology (LBC) methods.MethodsHistological diagnoses of 251 cases were classified as negative (no malignancy lesion, inflammation, or mild/moderate dysplasia) and positive [severe dysplasia/carcinoma in situ (CIS) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC)]. Cytological diagnoses were classified as negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy (NILM), oral low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (OLSIL), oral high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (OHSIL), or SCC. Cytological diagnostic results were compared with histology results.ResultsOf NILM cytology cases, the most frequent case was negative [LBC n = 50 (90.9%), conventional n = 22 (95.7%)]. Among OLSIL cytodiagnoses, the most common was negative (LBC n = 34; 75.6%, conventional n = 14; 70.0%). Among OHSIL cytodiagnoses (LBC n = 51, conventional n = 23), SCC was the most frequent (LBC n = 31; 60.8%, conventional n = 7; 30.4%). Negative cases were common (LBC n = 13; 25.5%, conventional n = 14; 60.9%). Among SCC cytodiagnoses SCC was the most common (LBC n = 16; 88.9%, conventional n = 14; 87.5%). Regarding the diagnostic results of cytology, assuming OHSIL and SCC as cytologically positive, the LBC method/conventional method showed a sensitivity of 79.4%/76.7%, specificity of 85.1%/69.2%, false-positive rate of 14.9%/30.7%, and false-negative rate of 20.6%/23.3%.ConclusionsLBC method was superior to conventional cytodiagnosis methods. It was especially superior for OLSIL and OHSIL. Because of the false-positive and false-negative cytodiagnoses, it is necessary to make a comprehensive diagnosis considering the clinical findings.

scholarly journals Misinterpretation Rates of High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion in the College of American Pathologists Gynecologic PAP Education and PAP Proficiency Test Program

2016 ◽  
Vol 140 (11) ◽  
pp. 1221-1224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chengquan Zhao ◽  
Barbara A. Crothers ◽  
Mohiedean Ghofrani ◽  
Zaibo Li ◽  
Rhona J. Souers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Proficiency Test ◽  
False Negative ◽  
False Negative Rate ◽  
Daily Practice ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Test Taking ◽  
Intraepithelial Lesion

Context.— Misinterpretation of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) is an important problem in daily practice and in the College of American Pathologists (CAP) PAP Proficiency Test (PAP-PT). Objective.— To investigate factors related to misinterpretation of HSIL through responses in a proficiency test versus an educational environment. Design.— We retrospectively evaluated 28 000 responses in the PAP Education Program (PAP-Edu) and 59 140 responses in PAP-PT from 1147 field-validated HSIL slides from 2007 to 2014. The related factors, such as program types, preparation types, participant types, and program years, were evaluated. Results.— Overall, 4.0% (2379 of 59 140) of responses for HSIL slides from PAP-PT were misinterpreted as either low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) or negative, significantly more than those from PAP-Edu (3.2%; 898 of 28 000). However, the false-negative rate (misinterpreted as negative) was 0.9% (519 of 59 140) for PAP-PT, lower than that for PAP-Edu (1.0%; 266 of 28 000). The misinterpretation rates in PAP-PT trended down with time. Misinterpretation rates did not vary significantly by preparation methods. The misinterpretation rate for HSIL in the pathologists' responses was lower than that in cytotechnologists' responses in PAP-PT. More HSIL was misinterpreted as LSIL than as benign in both programs. Cytotechnologists interpreted HSIL as LSIL twice as much as pathologists. The most common false-negative misinterpretations were negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy and reparative change. Conclusions.— The higher LSIL misinterpretation rate by cytotechnologists may be related to the differences in reporting responsibilities and proficiency test grading criteria. The trend of gradually decreasing misinterpretation rates of a reference diagnosis of HSIL in the PAP-PT program may be related to higher test-taking confidence and better preparation through educational programs. The fact that pathologists performed better than cytotechnologists in PAP-PT, but not in PAP-Edu, may reflect a heightened approach and attentiveness in the test-taking environment for pathologists.

scholarly journals Clinical application of the 2011 IFCPC colposcope terminology

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bei Zhang ◽  
Shuhui Hong ◽  
Guihui Zhang ◽  
Fengnian Rong
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Precancerous Lesions ◽  
High Specificity ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion ◽  
Diagnostic Significance ◽  
Cervical Precancerous Lesions ◽  
Intraepithelial Lesion ◽  
Common Sign

Abstract Background Colposcopy offers an accurate way to the diagnose of cervical precancerous lesions. However, the diagnostic accuracy of colposcopy is unsatisfied. This study was to evaluate colposcopic accuracy according to the 2011 International Federation of Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy (IFCPC) terminology. Methods A retrospective cohort study was performed in 1,838 patients who underwent colposcopy in Shandong Qianfoshan Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University from October 2013 to April 2018. Using conization or cervical biopsy pathology as the gold standard, the agreement between colposcopic diagnosis and pathologic diagnosis was calculated, and correlations between variables were analyzed. Results As an authoritative and widely used terminology for colposcopy diagnosis, the 2011 IFCPC terminology has certain clinical practicality and diagnostic accuracy. However, some signs such as mosaic, punctation, sharp border, inner border sign and ridge sign had high specificity but unsatisfactory sensitivity, which limited the diagnostic value. Therefore, we discussed the Lugol’s staining, a very common sign in colposcopy, and analyzed the diagnostic significance of bright yellow staining in low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) and mustard yellow staining in high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL). The results showed that mustard yellow may be a valuable indicator in the diagnosis of HSIL. Conclusion The 2011 IFCPC colposcope terminology has standardized interpretations of the colposcopic findings and improved the accuracy of colposcopy diagnosis. The aceto-white epithelium still has important diagnostic value; however, the value of a few signs is needed to be discussed and new signs are expected to be discovered. Although the significance of Lugol’s staining was diminishing, mustard yellow might be a valuable indicator for the diagnosis of HSIL.

scholarly journals Preliminary Results of MyCog, a Brief Assessment for the Detection of Cognitive Impairment in Primary Care

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 259-260
Author(s):  
Laura Curtis ◽  
Lauren Opsasnick ◽  
Julia Yoshino Benavente ◽  
Cindy Nowinski ◽  
Rachel O’Conor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Cognitive Aging ◽  
False Positive ◽  
False Positive Rate ◽  
False Negative ◽  
False Negative Rate ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Card Sorting ◽  
Primary Care Settings

Abstract Early detection of Cognitive impairment (CI) is imperative to identify potentially treatable underlying conditions or provide supportive services when due to progressive conditions such as Alzheimer’s Disease. While primary care settings are ideal for identifying CI, it frequently goes undetected. We developed ‘MyCog’, a brief technology-enabled, 2-step assessment to detect CI and dementia in primary care settings. We piloted MyCog in 80 participants 65 and older recruited from an ongoing cognitive aging study. Cases were identified either by a documented diagnosis of dementia or mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or based on a comprehensive cognitive battery. Administered via an iPad, Step 1 consists of a single self-report item indicating concern about memory or other thinking problems and Step 2 includes two cognitive assessments from the NIH Toolbox: Picture Sequence Memory (PSM) and Dimensional Change Card Sorting (DCCS). 39%(31/80) participants were considered cognitively impaired. Those who expressed concern in Step 1 (n=52, 66%) resulted in a 37% false positive and 3% false negative rate. With the addition of the PSM and DCCS assessments in Step 2, the paradigm demonstrated 91% sensitivity, 75% specificity and an area under the ROC curve (AUC)=0.82. Steps 1 and 2 had an average administration time of <7 minutes. We continue to optimize MyCog by 1) examining additional items for Step 1 to reduce the false positive rate and 2) creating a self-administered version to optimize use in clinical settings. With further validation, MyCog offers a practical, scalable paradigm for the routine detection of cognitive impairment and dementia.

scholarly journals Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion or High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion? Concordance Between the Interpretation of Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion and High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion in Papanicolaou Tests: Results From the College of American Pathologists PAP Education Program

2018 ◽  
Vol 143 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara A. Crothers ◽  
Mohiedean Ghofrani ◽  
Chengquan Zhao ◽  
Leslie G. Dodd ◽  
Kelly Goodrich ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Education Program ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Misclassification Rate ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Intraepithelial Lesion ◽  
Diagnostic Concordance

Context.— Obtaining diagnostic concordance for squamous intraepithelial lesions in cytology can be challenging. Objective.— To determine diagnostic concordance for biopsy-proven low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) Papanicolaou test slides in the College of American Pathologists PAP Education program. Design.— We analyzed 121 059 responses from 4251 LSIL and HSIL slides for the interval 2004 to 2013 using a nonlinear mixed-model fit for reference diagnosis, preparation type, and participant type. We evaluated interactions between the reference diagnosis and the other 2 factors in addition to a repeated-measures component to adjust for slide-specific performance. Results.— There was a statistically significant difference between misclassification of LSIL (2.4%; 1384 of 57 664) and HSIL (4.4%; 2762 of 63 395). There was no performance difference between pathologists and cytotechnologists for LSIL, but cytotechnologists had a significantly higher HSIL misclassification rate than pathologists (5.5%; 1437 of 27 534 versus 4.0%; 1032 of 25 630; P = .01), and both were more likely to misrepresent HSIL as LSIL (P < .001) than the reverse. ThinPrep LSIL slides were more likely to be misclassified as HSIL (2.4%; 920 of 38 582) than SurePath LSIL slides (1.5%; 198 of 13 196), but conventional slides were the most likely to be misclassified in both categories (4.5%; 266 of 5886 for LSIL, and 6.5%; 573 of 8825 for HSIL). Conclusions.— More participants undercalled HSIL as LSIL (false-negative) than overcalled LSIL as HSIL (false-positive) in the PAP Education program, with conventional slides more likely to be misclassified than ThinPrep or SurePath slides. Pathologists and cytotechnologists classify LSIL equally well, but cytotechnologists are significantly more likely to undercall HSIL as LSIL than are pathologists.

scholarly journals A new criterion for the alarm point using a combination of waveform amplitude and onset latency in Br(E)-MsEP monitoring in spine surgery

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 435-441 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kazuyoshi Kobayashi ◽  
Kei Ando ◽  
Ryuichi Shinjo ◽  
Kenyu Ito ◽  
Mikito Tsushima ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
False Positive ◽  
Roc Analysis ◽  
False Positive Rate ◽  
False Negative ◽  
False Negative Rate ◽  
High Rate ◽  
Motor Deficit ◽  
Onset Latency

OBJECTIVEMonitoring of brain evoked muscle-action potentials (Br[E]-MsEPs) is a sensitive method that provides accurate periodic assessment of neurological status. However, occasionally this method gives a relatively high rate of false-positives, and thus hinders surgery. The alarm point is often defined based on a particular decrease in amplitude of a Br(E)-MsEP waveform, but waveform latency has not been widely examined. The purpose of this study was to evaluate onset latency in Br(E)-MsEP monitoring in spinal surgery and to examine the efficacy of an alarm point using a combination of amplitude and latency.METHODSA single-center, retrospective study was performed in 83 patients who underwent spine surgery using intraoperative Br(E)-MsEP monitoring. A total of 1726 muscles in extremities were chosen for monitoring, and acceptable baseline Br(E)-MsEP responses were obtained from 1640 (95%). Onset latency was defined as the period from stimulation until the waveform was detected. Relationships of postoperative motor deficit with onset latency alone and in combination with a decrease in amplitude of ≥ 70% from baseline were examined.RESULTSNine of the 83 patients had postoperative motor deficits. The delay of onset latency compared to the control waveform differed significantly between patients with and without these deficits (1.09% ± 0.06% vs 1.31% ± 0.14%, p < 0.01). In ROC analysis, an intraoperative 15% delay in latency from baseline had a sensitivity of 78% and a specificity of 96% for prediction of postoperative motor deficit. In further ROC analysis, a combination of a decrease in amplitude of ≥ 70% and delay of onset latency of ≥ 10% from baseline had sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 93%, a false positive rate of 7%, a false negative rate of 0%, a positive predictive value of 64%, and a negative predictive value of 100% for this prediction.CONCLUSIONSIn spinal cord monitoring with intraoperative Br(E)-MsEP, an alarm point using a decrease in amplitude of ≥ 70% and delay in onset latency of ≥ 10% from baseline has high specificity that reduces false positive results.

Pathologic Assessment of Computerized Tomography Accuracy for the Evaluation of the Laryngeal Cartilaginous Frame Work in Laryngopharyngeal Carcinomas

1989 ◽  
Vol 75 (2) ◽  
pp. 156-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandro Sulfaro ◽  
Francesco Querin ◽  
Luigi Barzan ◽  
Mario Lutman ◽  
Roberto Comoretto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computerized Tomography ◽  
False Positive ◽  
False Positive Rate ◽  
False Negative ◽  
False Negative Rate ◽  
Cartilage Destruction ◽  
High False Negative Rate ◽  
Positive Rate ◽  
Pathologic Assessment ◽  
Low Sensitivity

Sixty-six whole-organ sectioned laryngopharyngectomy specimens removed for cancer during a seven-year period were uniformly examined to determine the accuracy of preoperative high resolution computerized tomography (CT) for detection of cartilaginous involvement. Our results indicate that CT has a high overall specificity (88.2%) but a low sensitivity (47.1 %); we observed a high false-negative rate (26.5%) and a fairly low false-positive rate (5.9%). Massive cartilage destruction was easily assessed by CT, whereas both small macroscopic and microscopic neoplastic foci of cartilaginous invasion were missed on CT scans. Moreover, false-positive cases were mainly due to proximity of the tumor to the cartilage. Clinical implications of these results are discussed.

scholarly journals Separation of Normal and Premalignant Cervical Epithelial Cells Using Confocal Light Absorption and Scattering Spectroscopic MicroscopyEx Vivo

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ling Yang ◽  
Wen-Tao Liu ◽  
Hao Wu ◽  
Cheng Wang ◽  
Bo Ping ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Light Absorption ◽  
Pap Smear ◽  
Precancerous Lesions ◽  
Scattered Light ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion ◽  
Cervical Lesions ◽  
Pap Smear Test ◽  
Intraepithelial Lesion ◽  
Cervical Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion

Confocal light absorption and scattering spectroscopic (CLASS) microscopy can detect changes in biochemicals and the morphology of cells. It is therefore used to detect high-grade cervical squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) cells in the diagnosis of premalignant cervical lesions. Forty cervical samples from women with abnormal Pap smear test results were collected, and twenty cases were diagnosed as HSIL; the rest were normal or low-grade cervical squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL). The enlarged and condensed nuclei of HSIL cells as viewed under CLASS microscopy were much brighter and bigger than those of non-HSIL cells. Cytological elastic scattered light data was then collected at wavelengths between 400 and 1000 nm. Between 600 nm to 800 nm, the relative elastic scattered light intensity of HSIL cells was higher than that of the non-HSIL. Relative intensity peaks occurred at 700 nm and 800 nm. CLASS sensitivity and specificity results for HSIL and non-HSIL compared to cytology diagnoses were 80% and 90%, respectively. This study demonstrated that CLASS microscopy could effectively detect cervical precancerous lesions. Further study will verify this conclusion before the method is used in clinic for early detection of cervical cancer.

Evaluation of the LC-1000 Flow Cytometry Screening System for Cervical Cancer Screening in Routine Health Checkups

2018 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 279-287
Author(s):  
Ilyeong Heo ◽  
Hyoung-Jung Kwak ◽  
Eun-Hee Nah ◽  
Seon Cho ◽  
Suyoung Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Flow Cytometry ◽  
Precancerous Lesions ◽  
Cervical Cytology ◽  
Proliferation Index ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion ◽  
Normal Cytology ◽  
Cervical Precancerous Lesions ◽  
Intraepithelial Lesion ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

Objective: This study evaluated the performance of a flow cytometry system (LC-1000) in screening cervical precancerous lesions at routine health checkups. Study design: In total, 928 health examinees were enrolled at 16 health promotion centers in 13 Korean cities between 2016 and 2017. All participants underwent liquid-based cervical cytology and flow cytometry testing to determine the cell proliferation index (CPIx). Results: The positivity rate of the LC-1000 system increased with the severity of the cervical cytology findings (p for trend < 0.001). When low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) or higher (including LSIL, high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion [HSIL], and atypical squamous cells without excluding HSIL [ASC-H]) was defined as gold-standard positivity, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of LC-1000 were 75.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 66.8–83.7), 58.5% (95% CI, 55.2–61.9), 18.1% (95% CI, 14.5–21.8), and 95.1% [95% CI, 93.2–97.0], respectively. The median CPIx increased significantly from normal cytology to HSIL (p < 0.001). The median CPIx was higher in high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV)-positive cases than in HR-HPV-negative cases (0.23 vs. 0.17, p < 0.001), while it did not differ between HR-HPV-positive and HR-HPV-negative cases with normal cytology findings (0.16 vs. 0.16, p = 0.700). Conclusion: The LC-1000 system is potentially useful for screening cervical precancer and cancer, especially when excluding normal or ASC of undetermined significance cases in routinely screened populations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document