Moderne Biomarker bei Präkanzerosen der Cervix uteri
Tóm tắt
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Marquardt K, Kossowski I, Pfandzelter R (2015) Jahresstatistik Zervix-Zytologie. Frauenarzt 56:954–956
Darragh TM et al (2012) The Lower Anogenital Squamous Terminology Standardization Project for HPV-Associated Lesions: Background and consensus recommendations from the College of American Pathologists and the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology. J Low Genit Tract Dis 16(3):205–242
Konsultationsfassung der S3-Präventionsleitlinie. 2016; Available from: http://leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/Zervixkarzinom-Praevention.89.0.html . Zugegriffen: 8.6.2016
Ostör AG (1993) Natural history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: A critical review. Int J Gynecol Pathol 12(2):186–192
Syrjänen KJ (1996) Spontaneous evolution of intraepithelial lesions according to the grade and type of the implicated human papillomavirus (HPV). Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 65(1):45–53
Carreon JD et al (2007) CIN2 is a much less reproducible and less valid diagnosis than CIN3: Results from a histological review of population-based cervical samples. Int J Gynecol Pathol 26(4):441–446
Wright TC et al (2007) 2006 consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or adenocarcinoma in situ. J Low Genit Tract Dis 11(4):223–239
Klaes R et al (2002) p16INK4a immunohistochemistry improves interobserver agreement in the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Surg Pathol 26(11):1389–1399
Pacchiarotti A et al (2014) Impact of p16(INK4a) immunohistochemistry staining on interobserver agreement on the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Clin Pathol 141(3):367–373
de Vet HC et al (1990) Interobserver variation in histopathological grading of cervical dysplasia. J Clin Epidemiol 43(12):1395–1398
Robertson AJ et al (1989) Observer variability in histopathological reporting of cervical biopsy specimens. J Clin Pathol 42(3):231–238
Ismail SM et al (1989) Observer variation in histopathological diagnosis and grading of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. BMJ 298(6675):707–710
Stoler MH, Schiffman M, Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance–Low-grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion Triage Study (ALTS) Group (2001) Interobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologic and histologic interpretations: Realistic estimates from the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study. JAMA 285(11):1500–1505
Bergeron C et al (2010) Conjunctive p16INK4a testing significantly increases accuracy in diagnosing high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Clin Pathol 133(3):395–406
Galgano MT et al (2010) Using biomarkers as objective standards in the diagnosis of cervical biopsies. Am J Surg Pathol 34(8):1077–1087
Reuschenbach M et al (2014) p16INK4a immunohistochemistry in cervical biopsy specimens: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the interobserver agreement. Am J Clin Pathol 142(6):767–772
Gurrola-Díaz CM et al (2008) P16INK4a immunohistochemistry improves the reproducibility of the histological diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in cone biopsies. Gynecol Oncol 111(1):120–124
Sayed K et al (2007) Diagnosing cervical biopsies in adolescents: The use of p16 immunohistochemistry to improve reliability and reproducibility. J Low Genit Tract Dis 11(3):141–146
Schmidt D et al (2011) p16/ki-67 dual-stain cytology in the triage of ASCUS and LSIL Papanicolaou cytology: results from the European equivocal or mildly abnormal Papanicolaou cytology study. Cancer Cytopathol 119(3):158–166
Denton KJ et al (2010) The sensitivity and specificity of p16(INK4a) cytology vs HPV testing for detecting high-grade cervical disease in the triage of ASC-US and LSIL pap cytology results. Am J Clin Pathol 134(1):12–21
Ikenberg H et al (2013) Screening for cervical cancer precursors with p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology: Results of the PALMS study. J Natl Cancer Inst 105(20):1550–1557
Uijterwaal MH et al (2015) Triaging HPV-positive women with normal cytology by p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology testing: Baseline and longitudinal data. Int J Cancer 136(10):2361–2368
Uijterwaal MH et al (2014) Triaging borderline/mild dyskaryotic Pap cytology with p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology testing: Cross-sectional and longitudinal outcome study. Br J Cancer 110(6):1579–1586
Luttmer R et al (2016) p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology for detecting cervical (pre)cancer in a HPV-positive gynecologic outpatient population. Mod Pathol 29:870–878. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2016.80
Reuschenbach M et al (2012) Evaluation of cervical cone biopsies for coexpression of p16INK4a and Ki-67 in epithelial cells. Int J Cancer 130(2):388–394
Clark JL et al (2016) Overdiagnosis of HSIL on cervical biopsy: Errors in P16 immunohistochemistry implementation. Hum Pathol 55:51–56. doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2016.04.010
Guo M et al (2011) Efficacy of p16 and ProExC immunostaining in the detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cervical carcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol 135(2):212–220
Walts AE, Bose S (2009) p16, Ki-67, and BD ProExC immunostaining: A practical approach for diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Hum Pathol 40(7):957–964
Hilfrich R, Hariri J (2008) Prognostic relevance of human papillomavirus L1 capsid protein detection within mild and moderate dysplastic lesions of the cervix uteri in combination with p16 biomarker. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 30(2):78–82
Huang MZ et al (2010) An analysis on the combination expression of HPV L1 capsid protein and p16INK4a in cervical lesions. Diagn Cytopathol 38(8):573–578
Lu D et al (2011) IMP3, a new biomarker to predict progression of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia into invasive cancer. Am J Surg Pathol 35(11):1638–1645
van Baars R et al (2015) Investigating diagnostic problems of CIN1 and CIN2 associated with high-risk HPV by combining the novel molecular biomarker panHPVE4 with P16INK4a. Am J Surg Pathol 39(11):1518–1528
Griffin H et al (2015) Stratification of HPV-induced cervical pathology using the virally encoded molecular marker E4 in combination with p16 or MCM. Mod Pathol 28(7):977–993
Ordi J et al (2009) p16 INK4a immunostaining identifies occult CIN lesions in HPV-positive women. Int J Gynecol Pathol 28(1):90–97
van der Marel J et al (2015) The value of endocervical curettage in addition to biopsies in women referred to colposcopy. J Low Genit Tract Dis 19(4):282–287
de Sam Lazaro S et al (2016) p16 staining of cervical biopsies may decrease the frequency of unnecessary loop electrosurgical excision procedures. J Low Genit Tract Dis 20(3):201–206. doi: 10.1097/lgt.0000000000000189
Sagasta A et al (2015) p16 staining has limited value in predicting the outcome of histological low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions of the cervix. Mod Pathol 29(1):51–59. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2015.126
Quint KD et al (2013) Progression of cervical low grade squamous intraepithelial lesions. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 170(2):501–506
Negri G et al (2004) p16INK4a expression and progression risk of low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia of the cervix uteri. Virchows Arch 445(6):616–620
Pacchiarotti A et al (2014) Prognostic value of p16-INK4A protein in women with negative or CIN1 histology result: a follow-up study. Int J Cancer 134(4):897–904