p16INK4a immunostaining as an alternative to histology review for reliable grading of cervical intraepithelial lesions

Maaike G. Dijkstra, Daniëlle A.M. Heideman, Sabine C. De Roy, Lawrence Rozendaal, Johannes Berkhof, Kees Van Krimpen, Krijn Van Groningen, Peter J.F. Snijders, Chris J.L.M. Meijer, Folkert J. Van Kemenade

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

72 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Histomorphological grading of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) is crucial for clinical management. CIN grading is however subjective and affected by substantial rates of discordance among pathologists, which may lead to overtreatment. To minimise this problem, a histology review of CIN lesions by a consensus panel of pathologists is often used. Diffuse strong p16INK4a immunostaining has been proposed to aid the identification of true high-grade cervical lesions (ie, CIN2/3). Aim: To assess the value of additional interpretation of p16INK4a immunostains for making a more reproducible diagnosis of CIN2/3 lesions. Methods: The authors used a series of 406 biopsies of cervical lesions, with known HPV status, stained for both H&E- and p16INK4a. First, in a randomly selected set of 49 biopsies, we examined the effect of additional interpretation of p16 INK4a immunostained slides, on the agreement of CIN diagnosis among three pathologists. Second, the full series of samples was used to assess the accuracy of p16INK4a-supported lesion grading by a single pathologist, by evaluating the degree of diagnostic agreement with the consensus diagnosis of expert pathologists based on H&E-stained sections only. Results: The study shows that the interobserver agreement between three pathologists for the routine H&E-based diagnosis ranged from fair (weighted kappa 0.44 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.64)) to moderate (weighted kappa 0.66 (95% CI 0.47 to 0.79)). The concordance increased substantially for p16INK4a- supported grading (mean weighted kappa 0.80 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.89)). Furthermore, an almost perfect agreement was found between the p16INK4a-supported diagnosis of a single pathologist and the consensus diagnosis of an expert pathology panel (kappa 0.88 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.89)). Conclusions: These data demonstrate that additive use of p16INK4a immunohistochemistry significantly improves the accuracy of grading CIN lesions by a single pathologist, equalling an expert consensus diagnosis. Hence, the authors advocate the combined use of p16INK4a-stained slides and conventional H&E sections in routine histopathology to improve accuracy of diagnosis.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)972-977
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Clinical Pathology
Volume63
Issue number11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2010
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'p16INK4a immunostaining as an alternative to histology review for reliable grading of cervical intraepithelial lesions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this