Prevalence of cervical diseases and human papillomavirus infection in healthcare workers: a cross- sectional study

• Tamara N. Bebneva
• Elena N. Andreeva
• Marina B. Khamoshina
• Irina N. Ulyanova
• Eketerina V. Loginova

Abstract

The aim of the study was to investigate the prevalence of cervical diseases and human papillomavirus infection among healthcare workers

Material and methods. A cross-sectional study was conducted in 2022–2023. Participants of the study: 231 female healthcare workers aged 19–70 years who underwent gynecological examination as part of their annual preventive (dispensary) examination. All women underwent anamnesis collection, gynecological examination, microscopic examination, traditional cytology, HPV testing and examination of the cervix on the TruScreen optical-electronic scanning device.

Results. Inflammatory type of cytological smear (endocervicitis) was diagnosed in 26.4% (61/231) of women. The prevalence of HPV was 23.4% (54/231). In 6.5% (15/231) there was a combination of several types of the virus – 46.7% (7/15) – carriers of HPV of probable carcinogenic risk (26, 53, 66, 82, 68, 73); 56.3% (8/15) – high oncogenic risk HPV (16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59). The frequency of HPV type 66 was 3.5% (8/231), type 53 – 3.5% (8/231), 44 – 3.0% (7/231). HPV type 16 was detected in 2.6% (6/231), 18 – 0.9% (2/231), 35 – 0.4% (1/231), 39 – 0.4% (1/231), 58 – 0.4% (1/231), 31 – 2.2% (5/231).

Abnormal results of cytological smears: ASC-US, HSIL, ASC-H and cancer cells in the smear were detected in 1.7% of women. The sensitivity of the HPV test was 75.0%. Specificity was 77.5%. Diagnostic accuracy = 77.5%. PPV (positive predictive value) = 5.5%. NPV (negative predictive value) was 99.4%. The sensitivity of the TruScreen optical-electronic scanning was 100%. Specificity was 66.0%. Diagnostic accuracy = 66.6%. PPV = 4.9% NPV = 100%.

Conclusion. The accuracy of individual diagnostic methods for precancerous diseases and cervical cancer is far from ideal, so the search for new solutions to improve diagnostics remains an urgent task for healthcare. A combination of several examination methods will likely provide greater diagnostic value.

Keywords: screening; cervical cancer; HPV infection; cytological examination; HPV typing; TruScreen

References

1. URL: https://gco.iarc.who.int (date of access October 31, 2024).

2. Ormonova Zh.A., Makieva K.B., Makimbetov E.K., Toktanalieva A.N., Azhimamatova Zh.T. Cervical cancer in the world (trends, risk factors). Scientific review. Medical sciences. 2023; (4): 35–40. (in Russian)

3. Tjalma W.A. The ideal cervical cancer screening recommendation for Belgium, an industrialized country in Europe. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2014; 35 (3): 211–8.

4. Apolikhina I.A., Bashirova L.K., Letnikova L.I., Khudyakova O.V., S.V. Ivanov, Gorbunova E.A., et al. Evaluation of human papillomavirus infection in women in the Lipetsk Region, by using a diagnostic self-sampling test. Akusherstvo i ginekologiya [Obstetrics and Gynecology]. 2018; (11): 98–104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18565/aig.2018.11.98-104 (in Russian)

5. Wilson J.M.G., Jungner G. Principles and practice of screening for disease. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1968: 164 p.

6. The state of oncological care for the population of Russia in 2021. In: A.D. Kaprin, V.V. Starinsky, A.O. Shakhzadov. Moscow: MNIOI im. P.A. Gertsena – filial FGBU «NMITs radiologii» Minzdrava Rossii, 2022. (in Russian)

7. De Foucher T., Bendifallah S., Ouldamer L., Bricou A., Lavoué V., Varinot J., et al. Patterns of recurrence and prognosis in locally advanced FIGO stage IB2 to IIB cervical cancer: retrospective multicentre study from the FRANCOGYN group. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2019; 45 (4): 659–65.

8. Novik V.I. Сontroversial issues in cytological screening for cervical cancer (literature review). Opukholi zhenskoy reproduktivnoy sistemy [Tumors of the Female Reproductive System]. 2020; 16 (2): 63–71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17650/1994-4098-2020-16-2-63-71 (in Russian)

9. Cuzick J., Clavel C., Petry K.U., et al. Overview of the European and North American studies on HPV testing in primary cervical cancer screening. Int J Cancer. 2006; 119 (5): 1095–101.

10. Agorastos T., Chatzistamatiou K., Katsamagkas T., et al. Primary screening for cervical cancer based on high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) detection and HPV 16 and HPV 18 genotyping, in comparison to cytology. PLoS One. 2015; 10 (3): e0119755. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0119755

11. Anttila A., Kotaniemi-Talonen L., Leinonen M., Hakama M., et al. Rate of cervical cancer, severe intraepithelial neoplasia, and adenocarcinoma in situ in primary HPV DNA screening with cytology triage: randomised study within organised screening programme. BMJ. 2010; 340: c1804.

12. Veijalainen O., Kares S., Kujala P., et al. Human papillomavirus test with cytology triage in organized screening for cervical cancer. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2016; 95: 1220–7.

13. Hashiguchi M., Nakao Y., Honda A., et al. What has changed since the introduction of human papillomavirus testing with the cytology-based cervical cancer screening system in Japan? A social experiment. Acta Cytol. 2019; 63: 385–90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000500190

14. Hermansson R.S., Olovsson M., Hoxell E., Lindström A.K. HPV prevalence and HPV-related dysplasia in elderly women. PLoS One. 2018; 13 (1): e0189300. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189300

15. Sushinskaya T.V., Epifanova S.V., Shchepkina E.V., et al. Errors in precancerous lesions and cervical cancer diagnosis. Onkoginekologiya [Oncogynecology]. 2020; 1 (33): 49–57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52313/22278710_2020_1_49 EDN: TSSCWD. (in Russian)

16. Volchenko N.N., Borisova O.V. Errors in cervical cytological diagnostics. Novosti klinicheskoy tsitologii Rossii [News of Clinical Cytology of Russia]. 2020; 24 (1): 17–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24411/1562-4943-2020-10103 (in Russian)

17. Stukalova I.V., Gapeenko E.V., Assaf E.V., Kovalenko D.G., Avseyko E.Yu. Infection with high-risk human papillomavirus among women undergoing preventive examination. Zlokachestvennye opukholi [Malignant Tumours]. 2022; 12 (3S1): 208–9. (in Russian)

18. Bulatova I.A., Shevlyukova T.P., Nenasheva O.Yu., Shchekotova A.P., Spirina A.B. Evaluation of contamination with high-risk human papillomavirus types according to the screening results. Akusherstvo i ginekologiya [Obstetrics and Gynecology]. 2021; (10): 112–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18565/aig.2021.10.112-117 (in Russian)

19. Campaner A.B., Fernandes G.L. Discussion on cervical cytology in postmenopausal women. Minerva Obstet Gynecol. 2023; Oct 25.

20. Luo L., Zhang J. The value of TruScreen (an artificial intelligence cervical cancer screening system) in high-risk HPV positive patients. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2023; 50 (10): 206.

21. Vet J.N., Haindl J.P., Velasquez C., Parker L.J., Burns M.I., Morrell S., et al. A Performance evaluation of an optoelectronic cervical screening device in comparison to cytology and HPV DNA testing. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2022; 43 (2): 213–8.

22. Wei Y., Wang W., Cheng M., Hong Z., Gu L., Niu J., et al. Clinical evaluation of a real-time optoelectronic device in cervical cancer screening. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2021; 266: 182–6.

23. Ma Y., Di J., Bi H., Zhao Q., Qin T., Xu W., et al. Comparison of the detection rate of cervical lesion with TruScreen, LBC test and HPV test: a real-world study based on population screening of cervical cancer in rural areas of China. PLoS One. 2020; 15 (7): e0233986.

24. Yang X., He L., Xiao X., Yan L., Shi L., Ren Z., et al. Effectiveness of TruScreen for detecting CIN2+ in women with ThinPrep cytologic test results indicating atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions. Future Oncol. 2023; 19 (37): 2493–504.

25. Clinical guidelines «Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, erosion and ectropion of the cervix». 2024. URL: https://cr.minzdrav.gov.ru/recomend/597_3 (date of access October 31, 2024). (in Russian)

26. Rahmadhany R., Indarti J. A real-time optoelectronic device in screening of precancerous cervical lesion. Indones J Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 3: 117–120.

27. Singer A., Coppleson M., Canfell K., Skladnev V., Mackellar G., Pisal N., et al. A real time optoelectronic device as an adjunct to the Pap smear for cervical screening: a multicenter evaluation. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2003; 13 (6): 804–11.

All articles in our journal are distributed under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International)