scholarly journals The Trained Sniffer Dog Could Accurately Detect the Urine Samples from the Patients with Cervical Cancer, and Even Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade 3: A Pilot Study

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (11) ◽  
pp. 3291
Author(s):  
Akihito Yamamoto ◽  
Seiryu Kamoi ◽  
Keisuke Kurose ◽  
Marie Ito ◽  
Toshiyuki Takeshita ◽  
...  

(1) Background: Previous reports have indicated that cancers of the stomach, lung, and pancreas can be detected by dog sniffing, but results have been varied. Here, a highly trained dog was used to determine whether urine from patients with cervical premalignant lesions and malignant tumors have a cancer-specific scent. (2) Methods: A total of 195 urine samples were collected from patients with cervical cancer, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN3), benign uterine diseases, and healthy volunteers. Each test was performed using one urine sample from a cancer patient and four samples from different controls. Each of the five urine samples was placed in a separate box. When the cancer sniffing dog stopped and sat in front of the box with a sample from a cancer patient, the test was considered as positive. (3) Results: 83 patients with cervical cancer (34 cases of cervical cancer and 49 cases of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3), 49 patients with uterine benign diseases, and 63 healthy volunteers were enrolled, and their urine samples were collected. In 83 times out of 83 runs in a double-blind test, the trained dog could correctly identify urine samples of cervical cancer patients. (4) Conclusion: A trained dog could accurately distinguish the urine of all patients with cervical cancer or CIN3, regardless of the degree of cancer progression.

2020 ◽  
Vol 157 (1) ◽  
pp. 195-201
Author(s):  
Diede L. Loopik ◽  
Joanna IntHout ◽  
Renée M.F. Ebisch ◽  
Willem J.G. Melchers ◽  
Leon F.A.G. Massuger ◽  
...  

BMJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. l240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matejka Rebolj ◽  
Janet Rimmer ◽  
Karin Denton ◽  
John Tidy ◽  
Christopher Mathews ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectiveTo provide the first report on the main outcomes from the prevalence and incidence rounds of a large pilot of routine primary high risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing in England, compared with contemporaneous primary liquid based cytology screening.DesignObservational study.SettingThe English Cervical Screening Programme.Participants578 547 women undergoing cervical screening in primary care between May 2013 and December 2014, with follow-up until May 2017; 183 970 (32%) were screened with hrHPV testing.InterventionsRoutine cervical screening with hrHPV testing with liquid based cytology triage and two early recalls for women who were hrHPV positive and cytology negative, following the national screening age and interval recommendations.Main outcome measuresFrequency of referral for a colposcopy; adherence to early recall; and relative detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse from hrHPV testing compared with liquid based cytology in two consecutive screening rounds.ResultsBaseline hrHPV testing and early recall required approximately 80% more colposcopies, (adjusted odds ratio 1.77, 95% confidence interval 1.73 to 1.82), but detected substantially more cervical intraepithelial neoplasia than liquid based cytology (1.49 for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse, 1.43 to 1.55; 1.44 for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse, 1.36 to 1.51) and for cervical cancer (1.27, 0.99 to 1.63). Attendance at early recall and colposcopy referral were 80% and 95%, respectively. At the incidence screen, the 33 506 women screened with hrHPV testing had substantially less cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse than the 77 017 women screened with liquid based cytology (0.14, 0.09 to 0.23).ConclusionsIn England, routine primary hrHPV screening increased the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse and cervical cancer by approximately 40% and 30%, respectively, compared with liquid based cytology. The very low incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse after three years supports extending the screening interval.


BMJ ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 335 (7629) ◽  
pp. 1077 ◽  
Author(s):  
Björn Strander ◽  
Agneta Andersson-Ellström ◽  
Ian Milsom ◽  
Pär Sparén

Objective To study the long term risk of invasive cancer of the cervix or vagina after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3. Design Prospective cohort study. Setting Swedish cancer registry. Participants All women in Sweden with severe dysplasia or cervical carcinoma in situ (equivalent to cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3) treated during 1958-2002 (n=132 493) contributing 2 315 724 woman years. Main outcome measures Standardised incidence ratios with risk of cancer in the Swedish general female population as reference, and relative risks in multivariable log-linear regression model, with internal references. Results Women with previous cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 had an increased risk of invasive cervical cancer compared with the general female population (standardised incidence ratio 2.34, 95% confidence interval 2.18 to 2.50). The increased risk showed a decreasing trend with time since diagnosis for women treated later than 1970 but the risk was still increased after 25 years. An effect of age was found, with an accentuated increase in risk for women aged more than 50. The excess risk for cervical cancer associated with previous cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 has steadily increased since 1958. For vaginal cancer the standardised incidence ratio was 6.82 (5.61 to 8.21) but this decreased to 2.65 after 25 years. Adjustments in the multivariable log-linear regression model did not substantially alter these results. Conclusions Women previously treated for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 are at an increased risk of developing invasive cervical cancer and vaginal cancer. This risk has increased since the 1960s and is accentuated in women aged more than 50. The risk is still increased 25 years after treatment.


2020 ◽  
Vol 75 (6) ◽  
pp. 351-352
Author(s):  
Diede L. Loopik ◽  
Joanna IntHout ◽  
Renée M. F. Ebisch ◽  
Willem J. G. Melchers ◽  
Leon F. A. G. Massuger ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document