Value of P16/Ki-67 double staining detection in screening cervical cancer and precancerous lesions

doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn371439-20191224-00099

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective To explore the value and clinical significance of double staining detection of P16/Ki-67 in the screening of cervical cancer and precancerous lesions. Methods Patients admitted to Department of Gynecology of Weifang People's Hospital of Shandong Province from September 2018 to May 2019 were selected, including 110 patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) below grade 2, 31 patients with CIN2, 27 patients with CIN3, and 12 patients with cervical cancer. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA, thinprep cytologic test (TCT) and P16/Ki-67 double staining detection as primary screening method for cervical cancer and precancerous lesions were evaluated, and the feasibility of P16/Ki-67 double staining detection as shunt for high-risk HPV positive patients was discussed. Results The sensitivities of HPV DNA, TCT and P16/Ki-67 double staining detection in the diagnosis of <CIN2 grade were 80.91%, 75.45%, 81.82%, the specificities were 91.43%, 87.14%, 97.14%, the positive predictive values were 93.68%, 90.22%, 97.83%, and the negative predictive values were 75.29%, 69.32%, 77.27% respectively, with statistically significant differences (χ ²=1.593, P=0.042; χ ²=4.736, P=0.034; χ ²=4.667, P=0.037; χ ²=1.564, P=0.048). The specificity of P16/Ki-67 double staining detection was higher than that of HPV DNA and TCT, and the sensitivity and positive predictive value were higher than those of TCT (all P<0.012 5). The sensitivities of HPV DNA, TCT and P16/Ki-67 double staining detection in the diagnosis of CIN2 grade were 90.32%, 83.87%, 96.77%, with a statistically significant difference (χ ²=2.952, P=0.029); the specificities were 80.91%, 75.45%, 81.82%, with no significant difference (χ ²=2.505, P=0.066); the positive predictive values were 57.10%, 49.10%, 60.00%, with no significant difference (χ ²=1.939, P=0.079); and the negative predictive values were 96.70%, 94.30%, 98.90%, with a statistically significant difference (χ ²=3.175, P=0.013). The sensitivity and negative predictive value of P16/Ki-67 double staining detection were higher than those of TCT (both P<0.012 5). The sensitivities of HPV DNA, TCT and P16/Ki-67 double staining detection in the diagnosis of CIN3 grade were 92.59%, 96.30%, 96.30%, with no significant difference (χ ²=0.497, P=0.780); the specificities were 80.91%, 75.45%, 81.82%, with a statistically significant difference (χ ²=4.677, P=0.036); the positive predictive values were 54.30%, 49.10%, 56.50%, with a statistically significant difference (χ ²=1.760, P=0.045); and the negative predictive values were 97.80%, 98.80%, 98.90%, with no significant difference (χ ²=0.441, P=0.802). The specificity and positive predictive value of P16/Ki-67 double staining detection were higher than those of TCT (both P<0.012 5). The sensitivities of HPV DNA, TCT and P16/Ki-67 double staining detection in the diagnosis of cervical cancer were 91.67%, 75.00%, 100.00%, with a statistically significant difference (χ ²=3.293, P=0.034); the specificities were 80.91%, 75.45%, 81.82%, the positive predictive values were 34.40%, 25.00%, 37.50%, and the negative predictive values were 98.90%, 96.50%, 100.00% respectively, with no significant differences (χ²=2.736, P=0.255; χ ²=1.834, P=0.400; χ ²=3.075, P=0.081). The sensitivity of P16/Ki-67 double staining detection was higher than that of TCT (P<0.012 5). For the shunt of high-risk HPV positive patients, the sensitivities of P16/Ki-67 double stain detection and TCT were 98.44% and 89.06%, the specificities were 85.71% and 61.90%, and the negative predictive values were 94.70% and 65.00% respectively, with statistically significant differences (χ ²=4.800, P=0.028; χ ²=3.079, P=0.039; χ ²=5.284, P=0.022); the positive predictive values were 95.50% and 87.70%, with no significant difference (χ ²=2.565, P=0.109). Conclusion Cytology P16/Ki-67 double staining detection is more specific than HPV DNA and TCT in the diagnosis of <CIN2 grade, and its sensitivity and positive predictive value are higher than those of TCT; the sensitivity and negative predictive value of diagnosis of CIN2 grade are higher than TCT; the specificity and positive predictive value of diagnosis of CIN3 grade are higher than those of TCT; the sensitivity of diagnosis of cervical cancer is higher than that of TCT. In the shunt of high-risk HPV positive patients, P16/Ki-67 double staining detection provides a more sensitive and accurate shunt path.

Key words: Uterine cervical neoplasms, Human papillomavirus DNA tests, Genes, p16, Ki-67 antigen

Song Mingze, Cheng Yiming, Li Gang, Wang Zhenming, Li Shirong. Value of P16/Ki-67 double staining detection in screening cervical cancer and precancerous lesions[J]. Journal of International Oncology, 2020, 47(11): 675-681.

Figures/Tables 13

References 19

[1]	王麟华, 吴玉梅, 于新平. DNA损伤修复在宫颈癌放疗敏感性中的研究进展[J]. 解放军预防医学杂志, 2019,37(8):193-194.
[2]	周焕娣, 黄小军, 夏燕卿, 等. 探讨P16/Ki67蛋白检测在宫颈上皮内瘤变诊断中的应用[J]. 中国实用医药, 2018,13(12):16-17. DOI: 10.14163/j.cnki.11-5547/r.2018.12.007.
[3]	颜丽, 周德平, 杨君. 人乳头瘤病毒L1壳蛋白在宫颈脱落细胞中的表达及其临床意义[J]. 重庆医科大学学报, 2016,41(10):1064-1068. DOI: 10.13406/j.cnki.cyxb.001031.
[4]	李博涵, 谭桂春. 高危型人乳头瘤病毒阳性患者宫颈病变风险预测方法及进展[J]. 国际妇产科学杂志, 2019,46(1):98-103. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-1870.2019.01.025.
[5]	王琳倩, 余辉, 高亮, 等. 液基细胞学联合DNA定量细胞学在筛查宫颈病变中的应用价值[J]. 中国优生与遗传杂志, 2014,22(5):14-17, 80.
[6]	叶延青. HPV检测在宫颈未明确诊断意义的不典型鳞状上皮细胞中临床意义[J]. 中国实用医药, 2010,5(19):61-62. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-7555.2010.19.038.
[7]	Liu G, Sharma M, Tan N, et al. HIV-positive women have higher risk of human papilloma virus infection, precancerous lesions, and cervical cancer[J]. AIDS, 2018,32(6):795-808. DOI: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000001765. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000001765 pmid: 29369827
[8]	Arbyn M, Ronco G, Anttila A, et al. Evidence regarding human papillomavirus testing in secondary prevention of cervical cancer[J]. Vaccine, 2012,30 Suppl 5: F88-F99. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.06.095. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.06.095
[9]	Stanczuk GA, Baxter GJ, Currie H, et al. Defining optimal triage strategies for hrHPV screen-positive women-an evaluation of HPV 16/18 genotyping, cytology, and p16/Ki-67 cytoimmunochemistry[J]. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 2017,26(11):1629-1635. DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-17-0534. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-17-0534 pmid: 28887297
[10]	Wentzensen N, Schiffman M, Palmer T, et al. Triage of HPV positive women in cervical cancer screening[J]. J Clin Virol, 2016,76 Suppl 1: S49-S55. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcv.2015.11.015. doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2015.11.015
[11]	Rijkaart DC, Berkhof J, van Kemenade FJ, et al. Evaluation of 14 triage strategies for HPV DNA-positive women in population-based cervical screening[J]. Int J Cancer, 2012,130(3):602-610. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.26056. doi: 10.1002/ijc.26056 pmid: 21400507
[12]	Wentzensen N, von Knebel Doeberitz M. Biomarkers in cervical cancer screening[J]. Dis Markers, 2007,23(4):315-30. DOI: 10.1155/2007/678793. doi: 10.1155/2007/678793 pmid: 17627065
[13]	da Costa LBE, Triglia RM, Andrade L. p16INK4a, cytokeratin 7, and Ki-67 as potential markers for low-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia progression[J]. J Low Genit Tract Dis, 2017,21(3):171-176. DOI: 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000310. doi: 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000310 pmid: 28403025
[14]	Ciavattini A, Sopracordevole F, Di Giuseppe J, et al. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in pregnancy: interference of pregnancy status with p16 and Ki-67 protein expression[J]. Oncol Lett, 2017,13(1):301-306. DOI: 10.3892/ol.2016.5441. doi: 10.3892/ol.2016.5441 pmid: 28123559
[15]	Uijterwaal MH, Polman NJ, Witte BI, et al. Triaging HPV-positive women with normal cytology by p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology testing: baseline and longitudinal data[J]. Int J Cancer, 2015,136(10):2361-2368. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.29290. doi: 10.1002/ijc.29290 pmid: 25345358
[16]	梁江红, 罗蕊丽. p16/Ki67细胞学双染检测对宫颈癌筛查患者的分流管理现状[J]. 湖北医药学院学报, 2016,35(2):228-230. DOI: 10.13819/j.issn.1006-9674.2016.02.029.
[17]	Celewicz A, Celewicz M, Wezowska M, et al. Clinical efficacy of p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cervical cytology in secondary prevention of cervical cancer [J]. Pol J Pathol, 2018,69(1):42-47. DOI: 10.5114/pjp.2018.75335. doi: 10.5114/pjp.2018.75335 pmid: 29895125
[18]	Zhang R, Ge X, You K, et al. p16/Ki67 dual staining improves the detection specificity of high-grade cervical lesions[J]. J Obstet Gynaecol Res, 2018,44(11):2077-2084. DOI: 10.1111/jog.13760. doi: 10.1111/jog.13760 pmid: 30094887
[19]	Areán-Cuns C, Mercado-Gutiérrez M, Paniello-Alastruey I, et al. Dual staining for p16/Ki67 is a more specific test than cytology for triage of HPV-positive women[J]. Virchows Arch, 2018,473(5):599-606. DOI: 10.1007/s00428-018-2432-z. doi: 10.1007/s00428-018-2432-z pmid: 30094492

诊断指标	≥CIN2级(n=70)		χ²值	P值	≥CIN3级(n=39)		χ²值	P值
诊断指标	TCT	P16/Ki-67	χ²值	P值	TCT	P16/Ki-67	χ²值	P值
敏感性	87.14	97.14	4.834	0.028	89.74	97.44	0.855	0.355
特异性	75.45	81.82	1.326	0.250	62.41	64.54	2.811	0.094
阳性预测值	69.32	77.27	1.422	0.233	39.77	43.18	1.906	0.167
阴性预测值	90.22	97.83	4.738	0.031	95.65	98.91	0.964	0.326
假阴性率	12.86	2.86	4.834	0.028	10.26	2.56	0.855	0.355
假阳性率	24.55	18.18	1.326	0.250	37.59	35.46	2.811	0.094