Reproducibility of Reading a Set of Cervical Cytology Smears in Four Specialized Centers in Medellin, Antioquia

Authors

  • Edwin Guevara University of Antioquia
  • Armando Baena University of Antioquia
  • Maribel Almonte International Agency for Research on Cancer
  • Jorge E. Salazar University of Antioquia
  • Ángela Gaviria University of Antioquia
  • Gloria I. Sánchez University of Antioquia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.rfnsp.15340

Keywords:

cervical cancer, cervical cytology smear, reproducibility

Abstract

Objective: to assess the degree of reproducibility in the reading of cervical cytology smears among four specialized reading centers at Medellin, Colombia. Methodology: 181 cervical cytology smears from a study on the prevalence of cytological abnormalities in Pueblorrico, a town located in the southwestern region of the state of Antioquia in Colombia, were re-read by four specialized centers in Medellin. Each center was asked to conduct a blind routine reading of the smears to avoid disclosure of information between centers. The reproducibility was measured by percentage agreement and kappa. Results: of 181 smears only 55 matched across all 4 centers, with an overall concordance rate of 30% and an overall kappa of 0.31. According to Fleiss scale, poor reproducibility was observed. The concordance between pairs of centers ranged between 0.3 y 0.7. Discussion: there is a high variability in the interpretation of cytological results among centers in Medellin. It is necessary to implement training processes and to unify readings for cervical cytology criteria.
|Abstract
= 254 veces | PDF (ESPAÑOL (ESPAÑA))
= 32 veces|

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Edwin Guevara, University of Antioquia

MSc in Epidemiology. Infection and Cancer Group. School of Medicine. University of Antioquia. Medellín, Colombia.

Armando Baena, University of Antioquia

MSc in Statistics. Infection and Cancer Group. School of Medicine. University of Antioquia. Medellín, Colombia.

Maribel Almonte, International Agency for Research on Cancer

MSc and PhD in Epidemiology. International Agency for Research on Cancer. Lyon, France.

Jorge E. Salazar, University of Antioquia

MSc in Epidemiology. Infection and Cancer Group. School of Medicine. University of Antioquia. Medellín, Colombia.

Ángela Gaviria, University of Antioquia

MSc in Epidemiology. Infection and Cancer Group. School of Medicine. University of Antioquia. Medellín, Colombia.

Gloria I. Sánchez, University of Antioquia

MSc y PhD in Molecular Microbiology. Infection and Cancer Group. School of Medicine. University of Antioquia. Medellín, Colombia.

References

(1). Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM. Es-timates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: globocan 2008. Int J Cancer 2010;127: 2893-2917. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.25516

(2). La Vecchia C, Bosetti C, Lucchini F, Bertuccio P, Negri E, Boyle P, et al. Cancer mortality in Europe, 2000-2004, and an overview of trends since 1975. Ann Oncol 2010; 21 (6): 1323-1360. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdp530

(3). Robles SC, White F, Peruga A. Trends in cervical cancer mortality in the Americas. Bull Pan Am Health Organ 1996; 30: 290-301.

(4). Monsonego J, Bosch FX, Coursaget P, Cox JT, Franco E, Frazer I, et al. Cervical cancer control, priorities and new directions. Int J Cancer 2004; 108: 329-333. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.11530

(5). Koss LG. The Papanicolaou test for cervical cancer detection. A triumph and a tragedy. jama 1989; 261: 737-743. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.261.5.737

(6). Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, Moriarty A, O’Connor D, Prey M, et al. The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002; 287: 2114-2119. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.287.16.2114

(7). Laara E, Day NE, Hakama M. Trends in mortality from cervical cancer in the Nordic countries: association with organised scree-ning programmes. Lancet 1987; 1: 1247-1249. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(87)92695-X

(8). Sankaranarayanan R, Madhukar Budukh A, Rajkumar R. Effecti-ve Screening Programes for Cervical Cancer in Low- and Middle-Income Developing Countries. Bulletin of the World Health Orga-nization 2001; 79: 954-962.

(9). Murillo R, Almonte M, Pereira A, Ferrer E, Gamboa OA, Jer£nimo J, et al. Cervical Cancer Screening Programs in Latin America and the Caribbean: Prevention of Cervical Cancer in La-tin America and the Caribbean Region: Progress and Challenges on HPV Vaccination and Screening. Vaccine 2008; 26: L37-L48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2008.06.013

(10). Pineros M, Cendales R, Murillo R, Wiesner C, Tovar S. [Pap test coverage and related factors in Colombia, 2005.]. Rev Salud Pú-blica; 2007; 9: 327-341. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0124-00642007000300002

(11). Cendales R, Wiesner C, Murillo RH, Pineros M, Tovar S, Mejia JC. Quality of vaginal smear for cervical cancer screening: a con-cordance study. Biomédica; 2010. pp. 107-115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7705/biomedica.v30i1.158

(12). Confortini M, Carozzi F, Dalla Palma P, Ghiringhello B, Parisio F, Prandi S, et al. Interlaboratory reproducibility of atypical squa-mous cells of undetermined significance report: a national survey. Cytopathology 2003; 14: 263-268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2303.2003.00061.x

(13). Stoler MH, Schiffman M. Interobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologic and histologic interpretations: realistic estimates from the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study. JAMA 2001; 285: 1500-1505. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.285.11.1500

(14). Bernstein SJ, Sanchez-Ramos L, Ndubisi B. Liquid-based cervical cytologic smear study and conventional Papanicolaou smears: a metaanalysis of prospective studies comparing cytologic diagnosis and sample adequacy. Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2001. pp. 308-317. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1067/mob.2001.116736

(15). Grisales H, Vanegas AP, Gaviria AM, Castano J, Mora MA, Bo-rrero M, et al. Prevalence of epithelial squamous cell abnormali-ties and associated factors in women of a rural town of Colombia. Biomédica 2008; 28: 181-182.

(16). Fleiss J. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological Bulletin 1971; 76: 5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031619

(17). Chmur KH, Periyakoil V. Kappa coefficients in medical research. Stat Med 2002; 21: 20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1180

(18). Lazcano-Ponce E, Palacio-Mejía LS, Allen-Leigh B, Yunes-Diaz E, Alonso P, Schiavon R, et al. Decreasing cervical cancer morta-lity in Mexico: effect of Papanicolaou coverage, birthrate, and the importance of diagnostic validity of cytology. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008; 17(10): 2808-2817. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-2659

(19). Baena A, Almonte M, Valencia ML, Martínez S, Quintero K, Sán-chez GI. Trends and social indicators of both mortality breast can-cer and cervical cancer in Antioquia, Colombia, 2000-2007. Salud Pública Mex 2011; 53: 486-492.

(20). Profamilia. Encuesta Nacional de Salud y Demografía (ENDS) 2010. Bogotá: Ministerio de la Protección Social; 2010.

(21). Renshaw AA, Davey DD, Birdsong GG, Walsh M, Styer PE, Mody DR, et al. Precision in gynecologic cytologic interpretation: a study from the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2003; 127: 1413-1420 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5858/2003-127-1413-PIGCIA

(22). Grisales H, Vanegas AP, Gaviria AM, Castano J, Mora MA, Bo-rrero M, et al. Prevalence of epithelial squamous cell abnormali-ties and associated factors in women of a rural town of Colombia. Biomédica; 2008; 28: 271-283. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7705/biomedica.v28i2.98

(23). Kumar N, Sayed S, Moloo Z. Educational needs and causes of fal-se diagnosis of atypical squamous cells of unknown significance at a university hospital. Afr J Reprod Health 2011; 15: 113-116.

(24). Nygard JF, Sauer T, Skjeldestad FE, Skare GB, Thoresen SO. CIN 2/3 and cervical cancer after an ASCUS pap smear. A 7-year, prospective study of the Norwegian population-based, coordina-ted screening program. Acta Cytol 2003; 47: 991-1000. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000326673

(25). McGrath CM. ASCUS in Papanicolaou smears. Problems, con-troversies, and potential future directions. Am J Clin Pathol 2002; 117 Suppl: S62-75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1309/DK4A-2R4G-BRK7-JU8Y

(26). Díaz MC, Parra EA. Guía Control de Calidad para la toma proce-samiento e interpretación en muestras de citología de cuello uteri-no. Bogotá: Instituto Nacional de Salud; 2009.

Downloads

Published

2014-05-07

How to Cite

1.
Guevara E, Baena A, Almonte M, Salazar JE, Gaviria Ángela, Sánchez GI. Reproducibility of Reading a Set of Cervical Cytology Smears in Four Specialized Centers in Medellin, Antioquia. Rev. Fac. Nac. Salud Pública [Internet]. 2014 May 7 [cited 2025 Jan. 22];32(2):54-60. Available from: https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/fnsp/article/view/15340

Issue

Vol. 32 No. 2 (2014)

Section

Research

Categories

License

Copyright (c) 2021 Edwin Guevara, Armando Baena, Maribel Almonte, Jorge E. Salazar, Ángela Gaviria, Gloria I. Sánchez

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The contents of the articles are the responsibility of the authors

The editorial committee has editorial independence from the National School of Public Health "Héctor Abad Gómez" of the University of Antioquia.

The editorial committee is not responsible for aspects related to copying, plagiarism or fraud that may appear in the articles published in it.

When you are going to reproduce and disclose photographs or personal data in printed or digital format, informed consent is required. Therefore, this requirement is required of the author at the time of receipt of the manuscript.

Authors are responsible for obtaining the necessary permissions to reproduce any material protected by reproduction rights.

The authors preserve the moral rights and assign the economic rights that will correspond to the University of Antioquia, to publish it, distribute electronic copies, include them in indexing services, directories or national and international databases in Open Access, under the Creative Commons Attribution license -Not Commercial-Share Equal 4.0 International Commercial (CC BY-NC-SA) which allows others to distribute, remix, retouch, and create from the work in a non-commercial way, as long as the respective credit and license are granted. new creations under the same conditions.

The authors will sign the declaration of transfer of economic rights to the University of Antioquia, after the acceptance of the manuscript.

The editorial committee reserves the right to reject the articles whose authors do not offer satisfactory explanations about the contribution of each author, to meet the criteria of authorship in the submission letter. All authors must meet the four criteria of authorship according to ICMJE: "a) .- That there is a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the article or to the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of the data. b) That they have participated in the design of the research work or in the critical review of its intellectual content. c) .- That has been intervened in the approval of the final version that will be published.d). That they have the capacity to respond to all aspects of the article in order to ensure that issues related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are adequately investigated and resolved. "

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC