Relationships of p16 Immunohistochemistry and Other Biomarkers With Diagnoses of Cervical Abnormalities: Implications for LAST Terminology.

Arch Pathol Lab Med

From Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York (Dr Castle); Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom (Ms Adcock and Dr Cuzick); Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland (Drs Wentzensen and Schiffman); the Department of Pathology, University of New Mexico Cancer Center, Albuquerque (Ms Torrez-Martinez, Dr Torres, Dr Joste, Dr Gravitt, Mr Hunt, and Dr Wheeler); the Department of Pathology, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville (Dr Stoler); the Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland (Dr Ronnett); the Department of Pathology, University of California, San Francisco (Dr Darragh); and Sacramento, California (Dr Kinney).

Published: June 2020

Context.—: Lower Anogenital Squamous Terminology (LAST) standardization recommended p16 immunohistochemistry (p16 IHC) for biopsies diagnosed morphologically as cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 (CIN2) to classify them as low-grade or high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSILs).

Objective.—: To describe the relationships of p16 IHC and other biomarkers associated with cervical cancer risk with biopsy diagnoses.

Design.—: A statewide, stratified sample of cervical biopsies diagnosed by community pathologists (CPs), including 1512 CIN2, underwent a consensus, expert pathologist panel (EP) review (without p16 IHC results), p16 IHC interpretation by a third pathology group, and human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping, results of which were grouped hierarchically according to cancer risk. Antecedent cytologic interpretations were also available.

Results.—: Biopsies were more likely to test p16 IHC positive with increasing severity of CP diagnoses, overall ( ≤ .001) and within each HPV risk group ( ≤ .001 except for low-risk HPV [ < .010]). All abnormal grades of CP-diagnosed biopsies were more likely to test p16 IHC positive with a higher HPV risk group ( < .001), and testing p16 IHC positive was associated with higher HPV risk group than testing p16 IHC negative for each grade of CP-diagnosed biopsies ( < .001). p16 IHC-positive, CP-diagnosed CIN2 biopsies were less likely than CP-diagnosed CIN3 biopsies to test HPV16 positive, have an antecedent HSIL cytology, or to be diagnosed as CIN3 by the EP ( .001 for all). p16 IHC-positive, CP-diagnosed CIN1 biopsies had lower HPV risk groups than p16 IHC-negative, CP-diagnosed CIN2 biopsies ( < .001).

Conclusions.—: p16 IHC-positive, CP-diagnosed CIN2 appears to be lower cancer risk than CP-diagnosed CIN3. LAST classification of "HSIL" diagnosis, which includes p16 IHC-positive CIN2, should annotate the morphologic diagnosis (CIN2 or CIN3) to inform all management decisions, which is especially important for young (<30 years) women diagnosed with CIN2 for whom surveillance rather than treatment is recommended.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8575174PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2019-0241-OADOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

p16 ihc
32
hpv risk
16
p16 ihc-positive
16
p16
14
cancer risk
12
biopsies test
12
ihc positive
12
risk group
12
ihc-positive cp-diagnosed
12
cp-diagnosed cin2
12

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!