IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0082416.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Histology Verification Demonstrates That Biospectroscopy Analysis of Cervical Cytology Identifies Underlying Disease More Accurately than Conventional Screening: Removing the Confounder of Discordance

Author

Listed:
  • Ketan Gajjar
  • Abdullah A Ahmadzai
  • George Valasoulis
  • Júlio Trevisan
  • Christina Founta
  • Maria Nasioutziki
  • Aristotelis Loufopoulos
  • Maria Kyrgiou
  • Sofia Melina Stasinou
  • Petros Karakitsos
  • Evangelos Paraskevaidis
  • Bianca Da Gama-Rose
  • Pierre L Martin-Hirsch
  • Francis L Martin

Abstract

Background: Subjective visual assessment of cervical cytology is flawed, and this can manifest itself by inter- and intra-observer variability resulting ultimately in the degree of discordance in the grading categorisation of samples in screening vs. representative histology. Biospectroscopy methods have been suggested as sensor-based tools that can deliver objective assessments of cytology. However, studies to date have been apparently flawed by a corresponding lack of diagnostic efficiency when samples have previously been classed using cytology screening. This raises the question as to whether categorisation of cervical cytology based on imperfect conventional screening reduces the diagnostic accuracy of biospectroscopy approaches; are these latter methods more accurate and diagnose underlying disease? The purpose of this study was to compare the objective accuracy of infrared (IR) spectroscopy of cervical cytology samples using conventional cytology vs. histology-based categorisation. Methods: Within a typical clinical setting, a total of n = 322 liquid-based cytology samples were collected immediately before biopsy. Of these, it was possible to acquire subsequent histology for n = 154. Cytology samples were categorised according to conventional screening methods and subsequently interrogated employing attenuated total reflection Fourier-transform IR (ATR-FTIR) spectroscopy. IR spectra were pre-processed and analysed using linear discriminant analysis. Dunn’s test was applied to identify the differences in spectra. Within the diagnostic categories, histology allowed us to determine the comparative efficiency of conventional screening vs. biospectroscopy to correctly identify either true atypia or underlying disease. Results: Conventional cytology-based screening results in poor sensitivity and specificity. IR spectra derived from cervical cytology do not appear to discriminate in a diagnostic fashion when categories were based on conventional screening. Scores plots of IR spectra exhibit marked crossover of spectral points between different cytological categories. Although, significant differences between spectral bands in different categories are noted, crossover samples point to the potential for poor specificity and hampers the development of biospectroscopy as a diagnostic tool. However, when histology-based categories are used to conduct analyses, the scores plot of IR spectra exhibit markedly better segregation. Conclusions: Histology demonstrates that ATR-FTIR spectroscopy of liquid-based cytology identifies the presence of underlying atypia or disease missed in conventional cytology screening. This study points to an urgent need for a future biospectroscopy study where categories are based on such histology. It will allow for the validation of this approach as a screening tool.

Suggested Citation

  • Ketan Gajjar & Abdullah A Ahmadzai & George Valasoulis & Júlio Trevisan & Christina Founta & Maria Nasioutziki & Aristotelis Loufopoulos & Maria Kyrgiou & Sofia Melina Stasinou & Petros Karakitsos & E, 2014. "Histology Verification Demonstrates That Biospectroscopy Analysis of Cervical Cytology Identifies Underlying Disease More Accurately than Conventional Screening: Removing the Confounder of Discordance," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(1), pages 1-16, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0082416
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0082416
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0082416
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0082416&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0082416?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0082416. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.