Treatment of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions: A “see and treat” versus a three-step approach

Screen-and-treat approach in managing cervical cancer precursor lesions: An observational study with 524 women

OBJECTIVE

To detect factors related to overtreatment with the "Screen-and-treat" approach (S&T) in women with suspicious cervical precancerous lesions.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective observational study of 524 women with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) or more severe (HSIL+) in cytology, treated by the Large Loop Excision of the Transformation Zone (LLETZ): 161 without a previous biopsy (S&T group) and 363 with a previous biopsy (biopsy group) from January 2017 to July 2020. The main outcome was a diagnosis of LLETZ: negative (negative or low-grade squamous intraepithlelial lesion LSIL) or HSIL+. A negative diagnosis was interpreted as "overtreatment." Results were analyzed as a function of the S&T approach (whether previous biopsy or not). Variables were obtained from medical records, and were compared with Chi-square or Fisher's exact test (p, p-value), to estimate the chances of a logistic regression analysis (Odds Ratio, OR, or admitting a Confidence Interval (CI) of 95 %).

RESULTS

No differences were observed in groups regarding menopausal status, smoking, hormonal contraceptive use, colposcopy findings, LLETZ diagnosis, and recurrence. Comparing biopsy vs S&T groups, the frequency of women over 40 years was 28.4 % vs 39.7 % (p = 0.011), and transformation zone type 3 was 12.2 vs 26.8 % (p < 0.001), respectively. In women managed by S&T, when compared to a LLETZ diagnosis, an HSIL+ result was more frequent in women presenting with TZ 1 (93.1 % TZ1 vs 78.5 % TZ2 vs 73.8 % TZ3, p = 0.008) and in women with abnormal colposcopy (92.9 % abnormal vs 38.1 % negative, p < 0.001). Multiple regression analysis found that women with negative colposcopic findings presented a higher risk for negative LLETZ diagnosis (LSIL/Negative final histology) (18.6; 6.18-56.02).

CONCLUSIONS

No difference was observed in the LLETZ diagnosis in women who did or did not use the S&T approach: it was adequate for women referred by cytological HSIL along with high-grade colposcopic findings.

Overtreatment rate after immediate local excision of suspected cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: A prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The gold standard of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) treatment is large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) after histopathological diagnosis from punch biopsies. In addition, treatment may be appropriate at initial colposcopy. Our objective was to study the applicability of immediate treatment strategy according to clinical parameters.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study among patients referred to colposcopy at Helsinki University Hospital, Finland, between January 2014, and September 2018 (ISRCTN10933736). Patients treated with LLETZ, either after biopsies or immediately at initial colposcopy, were included. The main outcome measure was overtreatment (OT) rate defined as normal or low-grade histopathological findings in LLETZ specimen within both treatment groups.

RESULTS

A total of 572 patients treated with LLETZ were included: 360 treated after biopsies and 212 treated immediately at initial colposcopy. When LLETZ was performed immediately after high-grade referral cytology and with colposcopic impression of high-grade disease, the overtreatment (OT) rate was 10.0% (95% CI 9.10 to 17.2), whereas when LLETZ was done after biopsy-confirmed high-grade lesions, the OT rate was 18.9% (95% CI 14.7 to 23.7), resulting in risk difference (RD) -8.91% (95% CI -16.0 to -1.82). Among HPV16/18 positive patients the OT rate was 8.22% (95% CI 3.08 to 17.0) for immediate treatment, resulting in RD of -10.7% (95% CI -18.3 to -3.04) compared to LLETZ after biopsies.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate LLETZ does not result in overtreatment when applied on selected cases, especially after high-grade referral cytology and when high-grade lesion is also colposcopically suspected.

Clinical practice variation and overtreatment risk in women with abnormal cervical cytology in the Netherlands: two-step versus see-and-treat approach

BACKGROUND

Only a few small studies have compared the 2-step method (biopsy followed by treatment) with a see-and-treat (immediate treatment) approach in women both low-grade or high-grade referral cytology. The clinical practice variation in the Netherlands has not been reviewed before.

OBJECTIVES

To determine overtreatment rates in the 2-step versus see-and-treat approach in women referred for colposcopy because of abnormal cytology results, and to evaluate clinical practice variation in the Netherlands.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a population-based retrospective cohort study including 36,581 women with a histologic result of the cervix identified from the Dutch Pathology Registry (PALGA) between 2016 and 2017. Odds ratios for overtreatment, defined primarily as cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 or less, were determined for the 2-step and see-and-treat approach in relation to age, high-risk human papillomavirus status, and referral cytology.

RESULTS

Of the included women 10,713 women (29.3%) received the 2-step method; 6,851 women (18.7%) underwent see-and-treat; and 19,017 women (52.0%) received conservative management after colposcopy with histologic assessment with cytologic follow-up or another type of treatment. Despite the existence of a national guideline advising see-and-treat only in case of suspected high-grade disease in women who have completed their childbearing, there is a wide practice variation between the 2 strategies in the Netherlands, with 7.0-88.3% of the women receiving see-and-treat per laboratory. The median time between cytology and treatment was 1-2 months (range, 0-12 months) in women receiving see-and-treat and the 2-step method, respectively. A total of 4119 women (23.5%) were overtreated, with older women, high-risk human papillomavirus-negative women, and women with low-grade cytology results being more likely to be overtreated. Women with low-grade cytology results and see-and-treat were associated with a higher overtreatment rate than women receiving the 2-step method (65.0% [1414 of 2174] versus 32.1% [1161 of 3613], respectively; odds ratio, 3.34; 95% confidence interval, 2.92-3.82). However, in women with high-grade cytology results, see-and-treat was inversely associated with overtreatment (11.3% [529 of 4677] versus 14.3% [1015 of 7100], respectively; odds ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.58-0.81).

CONCLUSION

A see-and-treat approach is justified only in women with high-grade cytology results who have completed their childbearing. There is a wide practice variation between the 2 strategies in the Netherlands, and gynecologists should adhere to the guideline to prevent overtreatment.

Risk of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia 2 or Worse by Cytology, Human Papillomavirus 16/18, and Colposcopy Impression: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To calculate pooled risk estimates for combinations of cytology result, human papillomavirus (HPV) 16/18 genotype and colposcopy impression to provide a basis for risk-stratified colposcopy and biopsy practice.

DATA SOURCE

A PubMed search was conducted on June 1, 2016, and a ClinicalTrials.gov search was conducted on June 9, 2018, using key words such as "uterine cervical neoplasms," "cervical cancer," "mass screening," "early detection of cancer," and "colposcopy."

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

Eligible studies must have included colposcopic impression and either cytology results or HPV 16/18 partial genotype results as well as a histologic biopsy diagnosis from adult women. Manuscripts were reviewed for the following: cytology, HPV status, and colposcopy impression as well as age, number of women, and number of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2, CIN 3, and cancer cases. Strata were defined by the various combinations of cytology, genotype, and colposcopic impression.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Of 340 abstracts identified, nine were eligible for inclusion. Data were also obtained from three unpublished studies, two of which have since been published. We calculated the risk of CIN 2 or worse and CIN 3 or worse based on cytology, colposcopy, and HPV 16/18 test results. We found similar risk patterns across studies in the lowest risk groups such that risk estimates were similar despite different referral populations and study designs. Women with a normal colposcopy impression (no acetowhitening), less than high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion cytology, and HPV 16/18-negative were at low risk of prevalent precancer. Women with at least two of the following: high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion cytology, HPV16- or HPV18-positive, and high-grade colposcopic impression were at highest risk of prevalent precancer.

CONCLUSION

Our results support a risk-based approach to colposcopy and biopsy with modifications of practice at the lowest and highest risk levels.

Factors Related to Overtreatment in the See-and-Treat Approach: A Retrospective Multicentric Observational Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the association between colposcopic features, age, menopausal status, and overtreatment in women subjected to "see-and-treat" approach, to identify subgroups of patients in which this approach could be more appropriate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective multicentric cohort study conducted on women older than 25 years, with a high-grade squamous cytological report and a visible squamocolumnar junction, in which colposcopy and the excisional procedure were performed at the same time without a previous cervical biopsy (see and treat). Overtreatment was defined as histopathological finding of cervical intraepithelial lesion grade 1 or normal tissue.

RESULTS

Among the 254 included patients, the overall overtreatment rate was 12.6%, whereas in women with a grade 2 colposcopy, it was 3.2% and, in women with grade 1 colposcopy, it was 22.0%. Among the considered factors (age, menopause, and grade 1 colposcopy), only a positive association with overtreatment and grade 1 colposcopy emerged (odds ratio = 8.70, 95% CI = 2.95-25.62, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

See and treat may be appropriate in women older than 25 years with a visible squamocolumnar junction and a high-grade squamous cervical cytology. Patients need to be informed about the higher risk of overtreatment in case of a grade 1 colposcopic impression, which however may still be considered acceptable. Patient's age and menopausal status should not influence the decision to propose a see-and-treat approach.

Histopathological outcomes of women with abnormal cervical cytology: a review of literature in Thailand

Cervical cytology remains the principal screening method to detect pre-invasive and invasive cervical lesions. Management of abnormal cervical cytology depends on the risk of encountering a significant cervical lesion or high-grade cervical disease. These risks may vary in different areas across the country. Thus, determining the rate of significant cervical lesion associated with each type of abnormal cervical cytology in each area is of critical importance for designing area-specific management approach. This review was conducted to evaluate the rate of high-grade cervical disease among Thai women with abnormal cervical cytology. A relatively high incidence of underlying significant lesions including invasive disease was demonstrated even in those having only minimal smear abnormality. This baseline information is crucial and must be taken into consideration in management of women with abnormal cytological screening to achieve the goals of comprehensive cervical cancer control in Thailand.

The optimum organization for the delivery of colposcopy service in Ontario: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To determine the optimum organization for colposcopy service delivery in Ontario, Canada.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary expert panel was convened to develop a systematic review to inform organizational guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, HealthSTAR, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched from 1996 to February 2006 for articles that reported guidance or outcomes relating to improved outcomes in colposcopy training, qualifications, accreditation, maintenance of competency, the delivery of colposcopy, reducing default from colposcopy clinics, and/or strategies to improve patient satisfaction or comfort. In addition, an environmental scan identified unpublished documents related to the delivery of colposcopy services.

RESULTS

Sixteen guidance documents related to the delivery of colposcopy services were identified; 5 from the published literature and 11 from the environmental scan. These documents were used by the panel to inform the systematic review and companion guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the Ontario Colposcopy Guidelines Development Group believes that the benefits associated with the implementation of colposcopy recommendations in Ontario will result in greater organization of care and improved patient outcomes. In addition, the group anticipates that these recommendations will provide useful guidance to regional planning authorities, hospital administrators, and Cancer Care Ontario, as well as colposcopists and other practitioners, in the planning of integrated regional and provincial cancer screening services.

Effectiveness of see-and-treat for approaching pre-invasive lesions of uterine cervix

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness between the see-and-treat (S&T) approach and the conventional one (with prior biopsy) for squamous intraepithelial lesions of uterine cervix. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 900 nonpregnant women with cytology suggestive of high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions in the city of Rio de Janeiro, Southeastern Brazil, between 1998 and 2004. The S&T approach consists of a large loop excision of the transformation zone procedure and is recommended when cytology is suggestive of high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, satisfactory colposcopy with abnormalities compatible with the suspected cytological results, and the lesion is limited to the ectocervix or extends up to one centimeter of the endocervical canal. A subgroup of 336 patients whose colposcopy was considered satisfactory was analyzed, and they were divided into two groups for comparison: patients treated without prior biopsy (n = 288) and patients treated after a biopsy showing high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (n = 48). Patients who were not treated or only treated more than a year later after recruitment at the colposcopy unit were considered dropouts. RESULTS: Of patients recruited during the study period, 71 were not treated or were only treated for at least a year. The overall dropout rate was 7.9% (95% CI: 6.1;9.7). Mean time elapsed between patient recruitment and treatment was 17.5 days in the S&T group and 102.5 days in the prior biopsy group. Dropout rates were 1.4% (95% CI: 0.04;2.7) and 5.% (95% CI: 0;12.3), respectively (p=0.07). The proportion of overtreated cases (negative histology) in the S&T group was 2.0% (95% CI: 0.4;3.6). CONCLUSIONS: The difference in the mean time elapsed between patient recruitment and treatment indicates that S&T is a time-saving approach The proportion of negative cases from using the S&T approach can be regarded as low.

Treatment of the patients with abnormal cervical cytology: a "see-and-treat" versus three-step strategy

OBJECTIVE

To examine the correlation between cervical cytology and final histological results in patients who have undergone loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) with or without colposcopy-directed biopsy.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of 829 patients who underwent LEEP for abnormal cervical cytology at Gangnam Severance Hospital between January 2004 and December 2008. Patients were classified to three groups according to cervical cytology and also divided into two groups based on the treatment they received: see-and-treat group and the standard three-step group. Final histological results were compared for the each study group.

RESULTS

There were no differences in the final histological results between see-and-treat and three-step group in patients with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) cytology (N=523) (p=0.71). However, in patients with low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL)/atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) (N=257) or normal cytology (N=49), the final histological results were significantly different between see-and-treat and three-step group (p<0.001) and the rate of overtreatment was significantly higher in the see-and-treat group (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

A see-and-treat protocol may be a viable alternative only in patients with HSIL cytology if colposcopic impression is suggestive of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 or 3 lesions.

Biopsy and selective recall compared with immediate large loop excision in management of women with low grade abnormal cervical cytology referred for colposcopy: multicentre randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness of punch biopsy and selective recall for treatment versus a policy of immediate treatment by large loop excision in the management of women with low grade abnormal cervical cytology referred for colposcopy.

DESIGN

Multicentre individually randomised controlled trial, nested within the NHS cervical screening programmes.

SETTING

Grampian, Tayside, and Nottingham.

PARTICIPANTS

1983 women, aged 20-59, with cytology showing borderline nuclear abnormalities or mild dyskaryosis, October 1999-October 2002.

INTERVENTIONS

Immediate large loop excision or up to four targeted punch biopsies taken immediately with recall for treatment (by large loop excision) if these showed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade II or III or worse. Participants were followed for three years, concluding with an exit colposcopy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Clinical end points: cumulative incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade II or worse and grade III or worse at three years. Clinically significant anxiety and depression and self reported after effects assessed six weeks after colposcopy, biopsies, or large loop excision.

RESULTS

879 women (44%) had a normal transformation zone at colposcopy and had no further procedures at that time. Colposcopists were less likely to classify the transformation zone as abnormal when the allocation was large loop excision (603 (60%) in the biopsy and selective recall group; 501 (51%) in the immediate large loop excision group). Of women randomised to biopsy and recall, 157 (16%) required a second clinic visit for treatment. Specimens from almost 60% (n=296) of women who underwent immediate large loop excision showed no cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (31%; n=156) or showed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade I (28%; n=140). The percentages of women diagnosed with grade II or worse up to and including the exit examination were 22% (n=216) in the biopsy and recall arm and 23% (n=228) in the immediate large loop excision arm. There was no significant difference between the arms in cumulative incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade II or worse (adjusted relative for risk large loop excision v biopsy 1.04, 95% confidence interval 0.86 to 1.25) or grade III or worse (1.03, 0.79 to 1.34). A greater proportion of disease was detected at initial investigation and less during follow-up and at exit in the immediate large loop excision arm, but time of detection did not differ significantly between arms. Levels of anxiety and depression and reported pain did not differ between arms. Higher proportions of women randomised to large loop excision reported moderate or more severe bleeding and discharge.

CONCLUSION

A policy of targeted punch biopsies with subsequent treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade II or III and cytological surveillance for grade I or less provides the best balance between benefits and harms for the management of women with low grade abnormal cytology referred for colposcopy. Immediate large loop excision results in overtreatment and more after effects and should not be recommended.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN 34841617.

An audit of standards of the 'see and treat' approach in women with a high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion on Pap smears

This study was undertaken to audit the performances of the 'see and treat' approach in women with a high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) cytology at Chiang Mai University Hospital using selective criteria from the National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme (NHSCSP) 2004 guidelines. Women with a HSIL smear, who had undergone colposcopy and immediate loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) during June 2006 and September 2008, were reviewed. The standard measurement was determined by the following criteria: (1) the proportion of women treated at the first visit who have evidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) on histology to be >90%; (2) the primary haemorrhage must be <5%; (3) the proportion of patients admitted as inpatients owing to treatment complication to be <2%. Of 247 women in this study, the histopathological results were as follows: CIN II-III, 188 (76.1%); cancer, 31 (12.6%); adenocarcinoma in situ, 5 (2.0%); CIN I, 5 (2.0%); and no CIN, 18 (7.3%). The prevalence of CIN I or higher was 92.7%. Primary haemorrhage was observed in 13 (5.3%) women. Four (1.6%) women were admitted as inpatients because of LEEP-related complications. In conclusion, the 'see and treat' approach in our institute has acceptable overtreatment and complication rates.