TY - JOUR
T1 - Development of models for cervical cancer screening
T2 - construction in a cross-sectional population and validation in two screening cohorts in China
AU - Wu, Zeni
AU - Li, Tingyuan
AU - Han, Yongli
AU - Jiang, Mingyue
AU - Yu, Yanqin
AU - Xu, Huifang
AU - Yu, Lulu
AU - Cui, Jianfeng
AU - Liu, Bin
AU - Chen, Feng
AU - Yin, Jian
AU - Zhang, Xun
AU - Pan, Qinjing
AU - Qiao, Youlin
AU - Chen, Wen
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s).
PY - 2021/12
Y1 - 2021/12
N2 - Background: Current methods for cervical cancer screening result in an increased number of referrals and unnecessary diagnostic procedures. This study aimed to develop and evaluate a more accurate model for cervical cancer screening. Methods: Multiple predictors including age, cytology, high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) DNA/mRNA, E6 oncoprotein, HPV genotyping, and p16/Ki-67 were used for model construction in a cross-sectional population including women with normal cervix (N = 1085), cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN, N = 279), and cervical cancer (N = 551) to predict CIN2+ or CIN3+. A base model using age, cytology, and hrHPV was calculated, and extended versions with additional biomarkers were considered. External validations in two screening cohorts with 3-year follow-up were further conducted (NCohort-I = 3179, NCohort-II = 3082). Results: The base model increased the area under the curve (AUC, 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.88–0.93) and reduced colposcopy referral rates (42.76%, 95% CI = 38.67–46.92) compared to hrHPV and cytology co-testing in the cross-sectional population (AUC 0.80, 95% CI = 0.79–0.82, referrals rates 61.62, 95% CI = 59.4–63.8) to predict CIN2+. The AUC further improved when HPV genotyping and/or E6 oncoprotein were included in the base model. External validation in two screening cohorts further demonstrated that our models had better clinical performances than routine screening methods, yielded AUCs of 0.92 (95% CI = 0.91–0.93) and 0.94 (95% CI = 0.91–0.97) to predict CIN2+ and referrals rates of 17.55% (95% CI = 16.24–18.92) and 7.40% (95% CI = 6.50–8.38) in screening cohort I and II, respectively. Similar results were observed for CIN3+ prediction. Conclusions: Compared to routine screening methods, our model using current cervical screening indicators can improve the clinical performance and reduce referral rates.
AB - Background: Current methods for cervical cancer screening result in an increased number of referrals and unnecessary diagnostic procedures. This study aimed to develop and evaluate a more accurate model for cervical cancer screening. Methods: Multiple predictors including age, cytology, high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) DNA/mRNA, E6 oncoprotein, HPV genotyping, and p16/Ki-67 were used for model construction in a cross-sectional population including women with normal cervix (N = 1085), cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN, N = 279), and cervical cancer (N = 551) to predict CIN2+ or CIN3+. A base model using age, cytology, and hrHPV was calculated, and extended versions with additional biomarkers were considered. External validations in two screening cohorts with 3-year follow-up were further conducted (NCohort-I = 3179, NCohort-II = 3082). Results: The base model increased the area under the curve (AUC, 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.88–0.93) and reduced colposcopy referral rates (42.76%, 95% CI = 38.67–46.92) compared to hrHPV and cytology co-testing in the cross-sectional population (AUC 0.80, 95% CI = 0.79–0.82, referrals rates 61.62, 95% CI = 59.4–63.8) to predict CIN2+. The AUC further improved when HPV genotyping and/or E6 oncoprotein were included in the base model. External validation in two screening cohorts further demonstrated that our models had better clinical performances than routine screening methods, yielded AUCs of 0.92 (95% CI = 0.91–0.93) and 0.94 (95% CI = 0.91–0.97) to predict CIN2+ and referrals rates of 17.55% (95% CI = 16.24–18.92) and 7.40% (95% CI = 6.50–8.38) in screening cohort I and II, respectively. Similar results were observed for CIN3+ prediction. Conclusions: Compared to routine screening methods, our model using current cervical screening indicators can improve the clinical performance and reduce referral rates.
KW - Cervical cancer
KW - Human papillomavirus virus (HPV)
KW - Screening
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85114219316&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/s12916-021-02078-2
DO - 10.1186/s12916-021-02078-2
M3 - Article
C2 - 34474668
AN - SCOPUS:85114219316
SN - 1741-7015
VL - 19
JO - BMC Medicine
JF - BMC Medicine
IS - 1
M1 - 197
ER -