Cytology of the vulva: feasibility and preliminary results of a new brush

Early Diagnostics of Vulvar Intraepithelial Neoplasia

Simple Summary

The spectrum of vulvar disorders is wide and varies from infections, dermatoses, manifestations of hormonal and systemic conditions to vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) and invasive cancer. It is not always possible to distinguish vulvar lesions on the basis of macroscopical aspects and the distribution of changes. For definite diagnosis of a vulvar lesion, a biopsy is needed. However, in practice, the decision to perform a biopsy is often delayed due to a lack of specificity of symptoms at the early stages of the neoplastic disease. The aim of this article is to provide clinicians, both gynecologists and dermatologists, with the main features of vulvar precancerous lesions, in order to recognize and treat them on time, thus preventing vulvar cancer. Clinical appearance of VIN is variable with significant variations present in color, surface, and topography. Evaluation of all VIN lesions should be conducted very carefully, because an underlying early invasive squamous cancer appears to be present in a significant percentage of patients.

Abstract

The spectrum of vulvar lesions ranges from infective and benign dermatologic conditions to vulvar precancer and invasive cancer. Distinction based on the characteristics of vulvar lesions is often not indicative of histology. Vulvoscopy is a useful tool in the examination of vulvar pathology. It is more complex than just colposcopic examination and presumes naked eye examination accompanied by magnification, when needed. Magnification can be achieved using a magnifying glass or a colposcope and may aid the evaluation when a premalignant or malignant lesion is suspected. It is a useful tool to establish the best location for biopsies, to plan excision, and to evaluate the entire lower genital system. Combining features of vulvar lesions can help prediction of its histological nature. Clinically, there are two distinct premalignant types of vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia: HPV-related VIN, more common in young women, multifocal and multicentric; VIN associated with vulvar dermatoses, more common in older women and usually unicentric. For definite diagnosis, a biopsy is required. In practice, the decision to perform a biopsy is often delayed due to a lack of symptoms at the early stages of the neoplastic disease. Clinical evaluation of all VIN lesions should be conducted very carefully, because an underlying early invasive squamous cancer may be present.

Defining benchmarks for tolerable risk thresholds in cancer screening: Impact of HPV vaccination on the future of cervical cancer screening

The performance of cervical cancer screening will decline as a function of lower disease prevalence—a consequence of successful human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination. Replacement of cytology with molecular HPV testing as the primary screening test and adoption of risk‐based screening, with less intense screening of vaccinated individuals and initiated at older ages is expected to improve efficiency. However, policy officials may decide to further reduce or eliminate screening as the ratio of benefits to harms continues to decline. To evaluate the level of risk currently tolerated for different cancers in the United States (ie, for which clinical guidelines do not recommend secondary prevention though effective screening methods exist), we used US cancer registry data to compare incidence (2008‐2012) and survival (1988‐2011) associated with different cancers for which organized screening is recommended and not recommended. The most common cancer at ages 70 to 74 years (ie, age group with highest cancer incidence and reasonable life expectancy to consider screening in the US) satisfying Wilson and Jungner's classic screening criteria was vulvar cancer (incidence = 9/100 000 females). In comparison, the incidence of cervical cancer among females 65 years of age (the upper recommended age limit for screening) was 13 cases per 100 000 females (low as a reflection of effective screening), whereas 10‐year survival was 66% (similar to vulvar cancer at 67%). Our approach of defining tolerable risk in cancer screening could help guide future decisions to modify cervical screening programs.

Sec62/Ki67 and p16/Ki67 dual-staining immunocytochemistry in vulvar cytology for the identification of vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia and vulvar cancer: a pilot study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to analyze the diagnostic performance of a newly established immunocytochemical dual-staining protocol for the simultaneous expression of SEC62 and Ki67 in vulvar liquid-based cytology specimens for the identification of vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) and vulvar cancer. In addition, we investigated the p16/Ki67 dual stain, which has already been established in cervical cytology.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For this pilot study, residual material from liquid-based cytology was collected retrospectively from 45 women. The presence of one or more double-immunoreactive cells was considered as a positive test result for Sec62/Ki67 and p16/Ki67 dual staining. The test results were correlated with the course of histology.

RESULTS

All cases of VIN and vulvar cancer were Sec62/Ki67 and p16/Ki67 dual-stain positive, and normal and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions were all negative. The sensitivity of cytology for VIN + cases was 100% (22/22), whereas punch biopsy classified one case of vulvar carcinoma as inflammation. All cases with high-intensity (grades 3 and 4) Sec62 staining in Sec62/Ki67-positive cases were carcinomas.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study demonstrate that Sec62/Ki67 and p16 Ki67 dual-staining cytology could be a promising adjunctive diagnostic tool for VIN and squamous cell carcinoma, in addition to standard histology.

Mechanisms of nuclear size regulation in model systems and cancer

Changes in nuclear size have long been used by cytopathologists as an important parameter to diagnose, stage, and prognose many cancers. Mechanisms underlying these changes and functional links between nuclear size and malignancy are largely unknown. Understanding mechanisms of nuclear size regulation and the physiological significance of proper nuclear size control will inform the interplay between altered nuclear size and oncogenesis. In this chapter we review what is known about molecular mechanisms of nuclear size control based on research in model experimental systems including yeast, Xenopus, Tetrahymena, Drosophila, plants, mice, and mammalian cell culture. We discuss how nuclear size is influenced by DNA ploidy, nuclear structural components, cytoplasmic factors and nucleocytoplasmic transport, the cytoskeleton, and the extracellular matrix. Based on these mechanistic insights, we speculate about how nuclear size might impact cell physiology and whether altered nuclear size could contribute to cancer development and progression. We end with some outstanding questions about mechanisms and functions of nuclear size regulation.