Testing Cervicography and Cervicoscopy as Screening Tests for Cervical Cancer

Aims and Background Suboptimal sensitivity is currently reported for Pap test in screening for cervical cancer. Colposcopy is known to be more sensitive than cytology but its use as a screening test is not possible due to costs and complexity. Screening by cervicography has been suggested as a compromise being less costly and feasible. The present study evaluates the feasibility of screening by cervicography and cervicoscopy (naked eye examination of the cervix after acetic acid lavage) on a consecutive screening series. Methods Cervicography and cervicoscopy were performed by the smear taker in subjects consecutively attending a screening clinic. Women with abnormal cytology (atypia or more severe lesion) and/or abnormal cervicography or cervicoscopy (acetowhite lesion) underwent colposcopic assessment. The three screening methods were compared according to positivity rate, CIN 2-3 detection rate and positive predictive value. Results 2105 consecutive subjects were screened. Positivity rate was 3.8 %, 15.3 % or 25.4 % for cytology, cervicography or cervicoscopy, respectively, 486 of 555 women attended the assessment phase, 281 directed biopsies were performed and 8 CIN 2-3 lesions were detected. Cytology, cervicography and cervicoscopy, detected 5.5, or 7 of 8 CIN 2-3 lesions, respectively. The positive predictive value was 0% for cytologic atypia, 25 % for cytologic SIL, 1.75 % for cervicography and 2.05% for cervicoscopy. Detecting one CIN 2-3 lesion at cytology cost $ 5,543. The cost per each additional cytologically negative CIN 2-3 lesion detected at cervicography or cervicoscopy was $ 12,947 or $ 3,916, respectively. Conclusions The study confirms the limited sensitivity of cytology for CIN 2-3. The association of cervicography was not cost effective. Cervicoscopy was poorly specific but increased the detection rate of CIN 2-3 at relatively low costs. Cervicoscopy is worth further evaluation as a screening test.