Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of a compact, rechargeable, magnifying device to triage VIA and HPV positive women in a cervical cancer screening program in rural India

  • Original paper
  • Published:
Cancer Causes & Control Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Many limited-resourced countries have either introduced cervical cancer screening programs or are contemplating to do so using visual inspection after acetic acid application (VIA) or human papillomavirus (HPV) detection tests. Both tests have high false-positivity and a suitable triaging strategy is required. Colposcopy triaging is not practicable in most resource-limited settings due to several reasons. We evaluated a portable, battery-operated, magnifying device (GynocularTM) to triage screen positive women in community setting in India.

Methods

Women positive on VIA or oncogenic HPV test were examined with Gynocular by clinicians in primary health clinics. Findings were documented using the International Federation for Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy (IFCPC) terminology. Swede score was also calculated. Biopsy was performed irrespective of Gynocular findings. The accuracy of Gynocular to detect high-grade lesions or cancer (HSIL+) was estimated. The suitability of Gynocular to correctly triage screen positive cases for immediate ablative treatment was also evaluated by creating simulated scenarios.

Results

Sensitivity and specificity of Gynocular were 96.4 and 47.1 %, respectively, to detect HSIL + at the threshold of IFCPC grade 1 findings. Increasing threshold to grade 2 changed sensitivity and specificity to 92.9 and 94.1 %, respectively. Optimum combination of sensitivity and specificity as determined by the receiver operating curve analysis was at the cut-off Swede score of 5. Triaging of VIA/HPV positive women to treatment using grade 2 criteria would have resulted in modest overtreatment and missing of very few high-grade lesions.

Conclusion

Gynocular can be used as an effective triaging device for VIA/HPV positive women.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray F (2013) GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 11. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon. http://globocan.iarc.fr

  2. Sahasrabuddhe VV, Parham GP, Mwanahamuntu MH, Vermund SH (2012) Cervical cancer prevention in low- and middle-income countries: feasible, affordable, essential. Cancer Prev Res 5(1):11–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sankaranarayanan R, Gaffikin L, Jacob M, Sellors J, Robles S (2005) A critical assessment of screening methods for cervical neoplasia. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 89:S4–S12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Sankaranarayanan R (2014) Screening for cancer in low- and middle-income countries. Ann Glob Health 80(5):412–417

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Sankaranarayanan R, Wesley RS (2003) A practical manual on visual screening for cervical neoplasia. IARC Technical Publication; No. 41. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France

  6. Bornstein J, Bentley J, Bösze P, Girardi F, Haefner H, Menton M, Perrotta M, Prendiville W, Russell P, Sideri M, Strander B, Tatti S, Torne A, Walker P (2012) 2011 colposcopic terminology of the International Federation for Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy. Obstet Gynecol 120(1):166–172

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bowring J, Strander B, Young M, Evans H, Walker P (2010) The Swede score: evaluation of a scoring system designed to improve the predictive value of colposcopy. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 14(4):301–305

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Strander B, Ellström-Andersson A, Franzén S, Milsom I, Radberg T (2005) The performance of a new scoring system for colposcopy in detecting high-grade dysplasia in the uterine cervix. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 84:1013–1017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. dos Santos Silva I (1999) Cancer epidemiology: principles and methods. IARC Press, Lyon

    Google Scholar 

  10. Wright TC Jr, Cox JT, Massad LS, Twiggs LB, Wilkinson EJ (2002) ASCCP-Sponsored Consensus Conference. 2001 Consensus Guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA 287:2120–2129

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Control Comprehensive Cervical Cancer (2014) A guide to essential practice, 2nd edn. World Health Organization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  12. Basu P, Mittal S, Banerjee D, Singh P, Panda C, Dutta S, Mandal R, Das P, Biswas J, Muwonge R, Sankaranarayanan R (2015) Diagnostic accuracy of VIA and HPV detection as primary and sequential screening tests in a cervical cancer screening demonstration project in India. Int J Cancer 137(4):859–867

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ghosh I, Mittal S, Banerjee D, Singh P, Dasgupta S, Chatterjee S, Biswas J, Panda C, Basu P (2014) Study of accuracy of colposcopy in VIA and HPV detection-based cervical cancer screening program. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 54:570–575

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sankaranarayanan R, Shastri SS, Basu P, Mahé C, Mandal R, Amin G, Roy C, Muwonge R, Goswami S, Das P, Chinoy R, Frappart L, Patil S, Choudhury D, Mukherjee T, Dinshaw K (2004) The role of low-level magnification in visual inspection with acetic acid for the early detection of cervical neoplasia. Cancer Detect Prev 28(5):345–351

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Nessa A, Roy JS, Chowdhury MA, Khanam Q, Afroz R, Wistrand C, Thuresson M, Thorsell M, Shemer I, Wikström Shemer EA (2014) Evaluation of the accuracy in detecting cervical lesions by nurses versus doctors using a stationary colposcope and Gynocular in a low-resource setting. BMJ Open 4(11):e005313. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005313

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Ngonzi J, Bajunirwe F, Wistrand C, Mayanja R, Altman D, Thorsell M, Wikström Shemer EA (2013) Agreement of colposcope and gynocular in assessment of cervical lesions by swede score: a randomized, crossover pilot trial. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 17(4):372–377. doi:10.1097/LGT.0b013e31827ba7c5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Nessa A, Wistrand C, Begum SA, Thuresson M, Shemer I, Thorsell M, Shemer EA (2014) Evaluation of stationary colposcope and the Gynocular, by the Swede score systematic colposcopic system in VIA positive women: a crossover randomized trial. Int J Gynecol Cancer 24(2):339–345. doi:10.1097/IGC

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Gynius AB, Stockholm, Sweden, donated the two Gynocular instruments used in the study. However, they did not have any role in preparing the project protocol, conduct of the study, data analysis, and preparation of manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Screening Group, Early Detection and Prevention Section, International Agency for Research on Cancer (WHO), 150 cours Albert Thomas, 69372, Lyon Cedex 08, France

    Partha Basu & Richard Muwonge

  2. Chittaranjan National Cancer Institute, Kolkata, West Bengal, India

    Dipanwita Banerjee, Srabani Mittal, Ranajit Mandal, Ishita Ghosh, Pradip Das & Jaydip Biswas

Authors
  1. Partha Basu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dipanwita Banerjee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Srabani Mittal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ranajit Mandal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ishita Ghosh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Pradip Das
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Richard Muwonge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Jaydip Biswas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Partha Basu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Basu, P., Banerjee, D., Mittal, S. et al. Evaluation of a compact, rechargeable, magnifying device to triage VIA and HPV positive women in a cervical cancer screening program in rural India. Cancer Causes Control 27, 1253–1259 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-016-0805-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-016-0805-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation