Determination of malignant potential of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia
- 419 Downloads
Basic diagnostic procedures in cervical cancer screening are able to set the diagnosis but they do not provide any information about the biological nature and behavior of lesions. The causal link of HPV infection and cervical cancer and discoveries of complex interactions between host and HPV genome opened new possibilities in molecular diagnostics. HPV DNA analysis, determination of viral load, detection of E6 and E7 mRNA transcripts, identifying of methylation profiles, genomic changes, miRNAs, and telomerase activity should be the right choice for exact diagnostics and prediction of behavior of premalignant lesions of the cervix. These findings set a completely new light not only in diagnostic but also in management and treatment of cervical dysplasia and cervical cancer.
KeywordsCervical intraepithelial neoplasia Cervical cancer HPV
This work was supported by the project “Molecular diagnostics of cervical cancer” (ITMS: 26220220113); Project “Increasing opportunities for career growth in research and development in the field of medical sciences;” ITMS 26110230067, Comenius University Grants 303/2011, 242/2012, and 287/2015; and the VEGA Grant 1/0271/12 as well as the APVV-0224-12 Grant.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflicts of interest
- 1.Ferlay J. GLOBOCAN 2012. http://globocan.iarc.fr. Accessed 3 Dec 2015.
- 6.Herbeck G. et al. Atlas kolposkopie. (Book in Czech) Praha: Maxdorf s.r.o; 2011.Google Scholar
- 16.Thomsen LT, Frederiksen K, Munk C, et al. Long-term risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse according to high-risk human papillomavirus genotype and semi-quantitative viral load among 33,228 women with normal cervical cytology. Int J Cancer. 2015;137(1):193–203.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Lee CH, Peng CY, Li RN, et al. Risk evaluation for the development of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: development and validation of risk-scoring systems. Int J Cancer. 2015; 136(2):Google Scholar
- 23.de Wilde J, Kooter J, Overmeer RM, et al. hTERT promoter activity and CpG methylation in HPV-induced carcinogenesis. BMC Cancer. 2010;271(10):1–14.Google Scholar
- 24.Yin A, Zhang Q, Kong X, et al. JAM3 methylation status as a biomarker for diagnosis of preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions of the cervix. Oncotarget. 2015.Google Scholar
- 28.Uhlik K, et al. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) or other in situ hybridization (ISH) testing of uterine cervical cells to predict precancer and cancer. Technology assessment report. Project ID: CANC0511. 2013. Tufts Evidence-based Practice Center.Google Scholar
- 33.Gimenes F, Souza RP, de Abreu AL, et al. Simultaneous detection of human papillomavirus integration and c-MYC gene amplification in cervical lesions: an emerging marker for the risk to progression. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2015.Google Scholar
- 34.Kuglik P, Kasikova K, Smetana J, et al. Molecular cytogenetic analyses of hTERC (3q26) and MYC (8q24) genes amplifications in correlation with oncogenic human papillomavirus infection in Czech patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cervical carcinomas. Neoplasma. 2015;62(1):130–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar