These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Detection of high-risk HPV (16, 18, 33) in situ cancer of the cervix by PCR technique.
    Author: Pete I, Szirmai K, Csapó Z, Szánthó A, Füle T, Gallai M, Kovalszky I.
    Journal: Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 2002; 23(1):74-8. PubMed ID: 11876400.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to collect data about the incidence of high-risk HPV (16, 18, 33) types in in situ cervical cancers, and to evaluate the reliability of the morphological signs of HPV infection by comparing the presence of these signs to the PCR-proven HPV virus infection. METHODS: Fifty patients who underwent conisation at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary because of in situ cervical cancer were examined retrospectively for the presence of HPV infection by the PCR technique. The direct and indirect morphological signs of HPV infection identified in the histological and cytological samples were compared to the actual results of virus DNA amplification by PCR in the identical histological sections. The evaluation of the cytological smears and the histological sections was accomplished independently by two different pathologists. RESULTS: E6 open reading frame of HPV 16, 18 or 33 was detected by PCR in 56% (28 cases) of the histological sections of the 50 examined patients with in situ cancer. In 92% (26 patients) of the 28 HPV positive patients one HPV type was detected, while in one of the remaining two cases two HPV types (16/33), or all three types could be detected. The direct morphological signs for HPV infection proved to be 75% sensitive and 50% specific when compared to the results of PCR. Their predictive value for HPV infection was 65%. For the indirect HPV signs the sensitivity was 64% and specificity 31%. The predictive value, prognosticating the presence of HPV 16, 18, 33 infection was 54% in the same sections. Using significance analysis no significant relationship (p = 0.7728) could be detected between the positivity of indirect signs and the presence of HPV 16, 18, 33 infection, while in case of direct signs the relationship was almost significant (p = 0.0675). The joint testing of the direct and indirect signs did not improve the results (p = 0.1338). During the review of the cytological smears the specificity of the cytology in predicting true HPV infections was found to be 68% and sensitivity was 20%. The predictive value was only 50%. A significance analysis was not accomplished by this diagnostic method because of the missing data (see text). CONCLUSION: The method of Nawa et al. seems to be a reliable approach for the detection of HPV DNA in paraffin-embedded material. The three main types of HPV (16, 18, 33) are probably represented in lower percentages in CIN III in Hungary, but a larger survey is needed to obtain reliable data. The direct and indirect morphological signs of HPV infection failed to show a significant relationship with the PCR proven presence of HPV 16, 18, 33.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]