Nueclear Web Banner
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Ahead of Print

Meta-analysis on the performance of p16/Ki-67 dual immunostaining in detecting high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasm


1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Zhongda Hospital, Southeast University, Nanjing 210009, China
2 Department of Pathology, University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, AZ 85724, USA, China

Correspondence Address:
Yang Shen,
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Zhongda Hospital, Southeast University, Nanjing 210009
China
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

Aim: Although routine screening contributes to substantial reductions in cervical cancer morbidity and mortality, the low specificity of HPV detection and limited sensitivity of cervical cytology necessitates the application of more optimized markers, such as the newly-introduced p16/Ki-67 dual-staining method. Here we reviewed several studies to evaluate the performance of this method in cervical cancer screening. Methods: An electronic database search was performed on PubMed, Web of Science, CNKI and Wanfang Database for studies assessing p16/Ki-67 dual immunostaining in the diagnosis of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasm (HGCIN) with abnormal cytological morphologies. Two reviewers screened literatures, extracted data and assessed the quality of the included studies independently. Meta-analysis was performed using ReV. Man 5.2 and Meta-DiSc 1.2 software packages. Results: The absolute sensitivity of p16/Ki-67 dual staining for diagnosing HGCIN ranged from 80% to 94%, while the sensitivity of triage method with hrHPV testing ranged from 78% to 96%. The specificity of p16/Ki-67 testing and hrHPV detection for predicting absence of CIN2+ ranged from 39% to 79% and 15% to 44%, respectively. Quantitative meta-analysis showed that the pooled sensitivity of p16/ki-67 dual staining is 0.88 [95%CI (0.86-0.90)], the pooled specificity is 0.58 [95%CI (0.56-0.60)]. For hrHPV testing, the pooled sensitivity and pooled specificity is 0.94 [95%CI (0.93-0.96)] and 0.32 [95%CI (0.29-0.34)], respectively. Conclusions: p16/Ki-67 dual immunostaining had comparable sensitivity and improved specificity in screening HGCIN or CC when compared with hrHPV detection. Further studies may be beneficial to assess the efficacy of this novel biomarker, which can be potentially used as one of the initial screening assays.


Print this article
Search
 Back
 
  Search Pubmed for
 
    -  Sun M
    -  Shen Y
    -  Ren ML
    -  Dong YM
 Citation Manager
 Article Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed285    
    PDF Downloaded14    

Recommend this journal