Introduction
For the first time since women began receiving annual cancer screening examinations
in
1971, new regulations for cervical cancer screening were introduced starting 1 January
2020.
In November 2018, the Joint Federal Committee (G-BA) adopted a new guideline for cervical
carcinoma screening [11 ]
[22 ]. The annual gynecological screening examination remains in place. An
organized cancer screening guideline (oKFE-RL) now applies to cervical carcinoma screening.
This means that women from the age of 20 are invited by the statutory health insurance
companies to have a check-up every five years until they reach the age of 65. In addition,
a
cytological smear is taken once a year from the age of 20. The cytological findings
are
determined according to the criteria of the Munich Nomenclature III (2014) [33 ]. From the age of 35,
so-called co-testing is performed every three years. This means that in addition to
the
cytological smear, a test for the most common high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV)
types is
also performed. If abnormal smears are obtained during the screening, the following
diagnostic
algorithm applies:
Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Diagnostic algorithm according to G-BA 20–34 years (source:
Association of German Cytology Assistants e. V. Cyto-Info 1/2020).
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Diagnostic algorithm according to G-BA from 35 years of age (source:
Association of German Cytology Assistants e. V. Cyto-Info 1/2020).
The diagnostic algorithm is shown in [Fig. 1Fig. 1 ] and [Fig. 2Fig. 2 ]. For women aged 20 to 34, annual cytological prevention screening
continues to apply. However, they are divided into two age groups: 20 to 29 years
and 30 to 34
years. The rationale for this subdivision is that young women have a high HPV prevalence
with
an overall low carcinoma risk. The likelihood of regression of these changes is high
and
therefore a diagnostic colposcopy is indicated only if these low-risk findings persist
for
more than 24 months. In the case of higher-grade cell changes, a diagnostic colposcopy
should
be performed within three months or immediately in the case of groups IV and V. For
low-risk
cytologic findings from 30 years of age, HPV testing should be performed after 6–12
months.
Colposcopic diagnostic confirmation is then performed within three months if the HPV
test is
positive. If the HPV test is negative, the woman returns to annual screening.
For women from 35 years of age, the diagnostic algorithm is based on the findings
from the
co-test. If cytological group I, II-p (ASC-US), II-g (AGC endocervical NOS), and a
negative
HPV test are present, screening after three years is recommended. If group I/HPV is
detected,
retesting is recommended after 12 months. If both results are negative, the patient
returns to
primary screening. If cytological findings from group II-p (ASC-US), II-g (AGC endocervical
NOS), or HPV persistence are detected, a diagnostic colposcopy should be performed
within
three months. The same procedure applies if the constellation group IIID1 (LSIL)/HPV-negative
is present. Groups III-p (ASC-H), III-g (AGC endocervical favor neoplastic), IIID2
(HSIL,
moderate dysplasia) regardless of the HPV test should be investigated colposcopically
within
three months. A colposcopy should be performed immediately for groups IV and V.
The cancer screening examination (KFU) has been established in Germany since 1971.
According to the annual “Cervical Cytology” statistics, between 15 and 18 million
women are
examined each year as part of the KFU. A stable rate of about 1.6% of abnormal cytologies
from
group III (IIID1 [LSIL], IIID2 [HSIL, moderate dysplasia], III-p [ASC-H], g, IV, V)
has been
seen in recent years [44 ]. With regard to the diagnostic confirmation of these abnormal findings,
certification of dysplasia consultations and dysplasia units accepted by the German
Society of
Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG), German Cancer Society (DKG), Working Group Oncology
(AGO),
and Working Group Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy (AG-CPC) has been in effect since
2014.
Since 1 January 2020, the diagnostic algorithm defined by the G-BA has been the basis
for
diagnostic confirmation of suspected cytological and virological findings. The diagnostic
algorithm defines that the low-risk group of patients with high-risk HPV-positive
cytologic
findings of groups II-p (ASC-US), II-g (AGC endocervical NOS), and IIID1 (LSIL) should
receive
early colposcopic diagnostic confirmation. This approach has been strongly debated,
especially
considering the expected spontaneous remission rates and the low risk of progression
in these
patients. This approach appears to be justified only if there is evidence of high-risk
HPV
type 16/18 [55 ]
[66 ]
[77 ]. The resulting burden
on the existing diagnostic capacities and the stress on the individual patients who
do not
have conclusive clarification of how urgent their diagnostic confirmation is, provides
the
basis for this multicenter cervical carcinoma registry study. As described above,
the early
collection of results is of utmost importance, especially in the low-risk group, as
these are
patients for whom the urgency is unclear and in whom overdiagnosis and potential treatment
could cause great harm. This question is addressed in the present study with the collaboration
of dysplasia units and consultations of the Working Group on Cervical Pathology and
Colposcopy
(AG-CPC) [88 ]. This
paper presents and discusses the data collected during the diagnostic colposcopy.
The focus is
on the evaluation of the colposcopy as a diagnostic method. A diagnostic colposcopy
is
performed according to the specifications of the Rio nomenclature (IFCPC 2011) [99 ].
Results
A total of 4763 patients were enrolled in the study from July 2020 to October 2022.
Of
these, 69.7% (3321) were from a university hospital/clinic and 30.3% (1442) were from
a
practice. On average, the patients were 41.0 years and IIG IP. Persistent nicotine
abuse was
reported by 29.5% of the participants, which is significantly higher compared to the
data of
the Federal Statistical Office for the female population with 15.7% (p < 0.001)
(19).
Referral diagnosis
The reason for initial presentation was HPV persistence with cytologic group I in
23.9%
(1139), HPV persistence with cytologic group II-a in 2.1% (100), II-p (ASC-US) in
11.2%
(535), and II-g (AGC endocervical NOS) in 1.3% (64). III-p and III-g (AGC endocervical
favor
neoplastic) were present in 9.4% (447) and 2.2% (107), respectively, IIID1 (LSIL)
in 19%
(906), IIID2 (HSIL, moderate dysplasia) in 18.9% (898), IVa-p (HSIL, severe dysplasia)
in
10.7% (508), IVa-g (AIS) in 0.7% (31), IVb-p (HSIL with features suspicious for invasion)
and IVb-g (AIS with features suspicious for invasion) in 0.3% (15), 0.1% (6) and 7
patients
presented with suspected invasion V-p (squamous cell carcinoma)/V-g (endocervical
adenocarcinoma) (0.1%), 6 of which with cytological group V-p (squamous cell carcinoma)
and
one with V-g (endocervical adenocarcinoma) (see [Fig. 3Fig. 3 ]).
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Referral diagnoses at initial presentation.
HPV status
The proportion of HPV-positive patients was dominant among the women we presented
in the
diagnostic consultation. 4145 were high-risk HPV-positive (87%), 369 were HPV-negative
(7.7%), and the HPV status was unknown in 249 patients (5.2%).
Group IVa-p (severe dysplasia – HSIL)
The data collected from the 508 patients (10.7%) patients with cytological group IVa-p
(HSIL, severe dysplasia) are described below.
Colposcopically, major changes were most common (79.8%, 403), followed by minor changes
(10.5%, 53). Physiological findings were obtained in 7.5% (38) and 2.0% (10) showed
nonspecific abnormal findings. Suspected invasion was present in one patient. Only
0.6% (3)
of patients could not be adequately assessed.
Histologically, the following findings were identified in this group: 8.1% (41) had
CIN 1, 11.8% (60) had CIN 2, 55.5% (282) had CIN 3, and 0.4% (2) had squamous cell
carcinoma
(FIGO Ia2, FIGO Ib1). Histologically, adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) was diagnosed in
0.4%
(2), and adenocarcinoma (FIGO Ia2) was diagnosed in one patient (0.2%). Histology
was
unremarkable in 6.9% (35) and no histology was collected in 16.7% (85) (see [Fig. 4Fig. 4 ]
a ).
This results in CIN 2+ in 67.7% of cases, and CIN 3+, AIS, and adenocarcinoma in 56.5%
of
cases, respectively.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
a Histologies of group IVa-p (HSIL,
severe dysplasia). b Histologies of group IVa-p (HSIL, severe
dysplasia) of 20–34-year-olds. c Histologies of group IVa-p
(HSIL, severe dysplasia) of patients over 34 years.
Furthermore, the 16.7% of patients who did not receive a histological analysis by
biopsy
but underwent excision immediately based on their colposcopy findings were further
examined.
The histology of the excision was evaluated. This revealed CIN 3 in 84.1% (58), CIN 2
in
4.3% (3), CIN 1 in 2.9% (2), and unremarkable findings in 3.3% (3).
Thus, in this cytological group IVa-p, CIN 3 could be detected in 340 (66.9%) and
CIN 2
in 62 (12.2%), as well as a squamous cell carcinoma (HSIL, severe dysplasia) in two
cases,
resulting in histological CIN 2+ in 79.7% and CIN 3+ in 67.3%, respectively.
If the patients are divided up into the two age groups according to
the algorithm, the following findings are obtained:
In the group of 20–34-year-olds, 9.3% (18) showed CIN 1, 13.5% (26)
showed CIN 2, and 56.5% (109) showed CIN 3. Histology was unremarkable in 4.7% of
cases
(9) and no histology was collected in 16.1% of cases (31) (see
[Fig. 4Fig. 4 ]
b
). Thus, 69.9% had CIN 2+, and 56.5% had
CIN 3+.
In the group of patients over 34, 7.3% (23) had CIN 1, 10.8% (34)
had CIN 2, 54.9% (173) had CIN 3, and 0.6% (2) had squamous cell carcinoma (FIGO Ia2,
FIGO
Ib1). Histologically, adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) was diagnosed in 0.6% (2), and
adenocarcinoma (FIGO Ia2) was diagnosed in one patient (0.3%). Histology was unremarkable
in 8.3% (26), and no histology was collected in 17.1% (54) (see
[Fig. 4Fig. 4 ]
c
). Thus, 67.3% had CIN 2+/AIS and 56.5% had
CIN 3+/AIS.
Group IIID2 (moderate dysplasia – HSIL)
18.9% (898) of patients who presented as part of the diagnostic algorithm had a referral
diagnosis of cytology group IIID2 (HSIL, moderate dysplasia).
Colposcopically, major changes were most common (46.5%, 416), followed by minor changes
(40.6%, 363). Physiological findings were obtained in 10.3% (92), 1.8% (16) had nonspecific
abnormal findings, and 0.9% (8) had other findings. Suspected invasion was not present
in
any of the patients. Only 0.3% (3) of patients could not be adequately assessed.
Histologically, this cytological group IIID2 (HSIL, moderate dysplasia) showed the
following findings: 21% (189) had CIN 1, 22.7% (204) had CIN 2, and 28.2% (253) had
CIN 3.
Adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) was diagnosed histologically in 0.3% (3). Histology was
unremarkable in 21% (188) and no histology was collected in 6.8% (61) (see [Fig. 5Fig. 5 ]
a ). Thus, 50.9% had CIN 2+ and 28.3% had CIN 3+/AIS.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
a Histologies of group IIID2 (HSIL,
moderate dysplasia). b Histologies of group IIID2 (HSIL,
moderate dysplasia) of 20–34-years old. c Histologies of group
IIID2 (HSIL, moderate dysplasia) of patients over 34.
If the histology of the excision is evaluated in the 61 (6.8%) patients who did not
receive histology but received excision immediately based on their colposcopy findings
(n = 20), the overall result in this group was CIN 2+/AIS in 53.0%. Of these, one
patient
had CIN 1, nine had CIN 2, and ten had CIN 3. This results in CIN 3+/AIS in 29.3%
of
cases.
If the patients are also divided up here into the two age groups
according to the algorithm, the following findings are obtained:
In the group of 20–34-year-olds, 22.2% (82) had CIN 1, 26.8% (99)
had CIN 2, 26.5% (98) had CIN 3, and 0.5 (2) had AIS. Histology was unremarkable in
18.4%
(68) and no histology was collected in 5.7% (21) (see
[Fig. 5Fig. 5 ]
b
). Thus, 53.8% had CIN 2+ and 27% had CIN 3+.
In the group of patients over 34, 20.3% (107) had CIN 1, 19.9% (105)
had CIN 2, and 29.4% (155) had CIN 3. Adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) was diagnosed in
one
case. Histology was unremarkable in 22.7% (120) and no histology was collected in
7.6%
(40) (see
[Fig. 5Fig. 5 ]
c
). Thus, 49.4% had CIN 2+/AIS and 29.5% had
CIN 3+/AIS.
Group IIID1 (LSIL)
Each of the so-called low-risk groups are evaluated below, starting with cytological
group IIID1 (LSIL), which consisted of 906 women.
Colposcopically, cytological group IIID1 (LSIL) showed minor changes most frequently
(62.4%, 560), followed by major changes (18.3%, 164), and physiological findings were
obtained in 15.6% (140). Nonspecific abnormal findings were seen in 3.2% (29) and
other
findings in 0.4% (4). Suspected invasion was not present in any of the patients. 1.0%
(9) of
patients could not be adequately assessed.
Of the 906 patients who presented with IIID1 (LSIL), CIN 1 was found in 29.1% (264),
CIN 2 in 15.7% (142), and CIN 3 in 11.7% (106). Histology was unremarkable in 31.7%
(287)
and no histology was collected in 11.5% (104). AIS occurred in 3 cases (0.3%) (see
[Fig. 6Fig. 6 ]
a ).
Thus, in this cytologic group, CIN 2+ was present in 27.4%, and CIN 3+/AIS in 11.7%.
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
a Histologies of group IIID1 (LSIL).
b Histologies of group IIID1 (LSIL) of 20–34-year-olds. c Histologies of group IIID1 (LSIL) of patients over 34 years of
age.
If the patients are also divided up here into the two age groups
according to the algorithm, the following findings are obtained:
In the group of 20–34-year-olds, 28.5% (47) had CIN 1, 22.4% (37)
CIN 2, 11.5% (19) CIN 3, and 0.6 (1) AIS. Histology was unremarkable in 23.6% (39)
and no
histology was collected in 13.3% (22) (see
[Fig. 6Fig. 6 ]
b
). Thus, 34.5% had CIN 2+/AIS and 12.1% had
CIN 3+/AIS.
In the group of patients over 34, 29.3% (217) had CIN 1, 14.2% (105)
had CIN 2, and 11.7% (87) had CIN 3. Adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) was diagnosed in
two
cases. Histology was unremarkable in 33.5% of cases (248) and no histology was collected
in 11.1% of cases (82) (
[Fig. 6Fig. 6 ]
c
). Thus, 26.2% had
CIN 2+/AIS and 12% had CIN 3+/AIS.
Group II-p (ASC-US)
In the group of participants presenting with cytology group II-p (535), colposcopically
minor changes were most frequent (54.8%, 291), followed by physiological changes with
26.6%
(141). Major changes were detected in 13.6% (72) and nonspecific abnormal findings
in 3.8%
(20). Other findings were found in 1.3% of cases (7). Suspected invasion was not present
in
any of the patients. 0.7% (4) of patients could not be adequately assessed.
Histologically, this cytological group II-p showed the following findings: 21.5% (115)
CIN 1, 13.1% (70) CIN 2, 10.5% (56) CIN 3. One patient (0.2%) showed squamous cell
carcinoma
(FIGO Ia2) and 0.2% (1) showed AIS. Histology was unremarkable in 37.4% (200) and
no
histology was collected in 17.2% (92) (see [Fig. 7Fig. 7 ]
a ). Thus, 23.4% had CIN 2+ and 10.8% had
CIN 3+ and AIS.
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
a Histologies of group II-p. b Histologies of group II-p of 20–34-year-olds. c Histologies of group II-p patients over 34 years.
If the patients are also divided up here into the two age groups
according to the algorithm, the following findings are obtained:
In the group of 20–34-year-olds (46), CIN 1 was present in 32.6%
(15), CIN 2 in 8.7% (4), CIN 3 in 10.9% (5), and a carcinoma described above in one
case.
Histology was unremarkable in 30.4% (14) and no histology was collected in 15.2% (7)
(see
[Fig. 7Fig. 7 ]
b
). Thus, 23.8% had CIN 2+/AIS and 13% had
CIN 3+/AIS.
In the group of patients over 34 (489), 20.4% (100) had CIN 1, 13.5%
(66) had CIN 2, and 10.4% (51) had CIN 3. Adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) was diagnosed
in
one case. Histology was unremarkable in 38% of cases (186) and no histology was collected
in 17.4% of cases (85) (see
[Fig. 7Fig. 7 ]
c
). Thus, 24.1% had CIN 2+/AIS and 10.6% had
CIN 3+/AIS.
Group II-g (AGC endocervical NOS)
In the group of participants presenting with cytology group II-g (AGC endocervical
NOS)
(64), colposcopically minor changes were most frequent (48.4%, 31), followed by
physiological changes with 26.6% (17). Major changes were seen in 21.9% (14) and other
findings were seen in 3.1% (2). Suspected invasion and nonspecific abnormal findings
were
not present in any of the patients.
Histologically, this cytological group II-g (AGC endocervical NOS) showed the following
findings: 20.3% (13) CIN 1, 10.9% (7) CIN 2, 23.4% (15) CIN 3. Histology was unremarkable
in
40.6% (26) and no histological analysis was performed in 4.7% (3) (see [Fig. 8Fig. 8 ]). This results in CIN 2+ in 34.4% and
CIN 3+ in 23.4%. CIN 2+ is not found significantly more frequently in cytology group
II-g
(AGC endocervical NOS) (34.4%) compared to group II-p (23.4%) (p = 0.0676).
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
Group II-g histologies (AGC endocervical NOS).
A distinction between age groups was not made in only five patients
under 35 years of age.
HPV persistence/II-a (NILM)
Furthermore, 99 patients with cytological group II-a and HPV persistence were evaluated.
Here, colposcopic findings were most frequently physiological (38%, 38), followed
by minor
changes with 35% (35). Major changes were detected in 23% (23), nonspecific abnormal
findings in 3% (3), and other findings in one patient.
Histologically, this cytological group II-a/HPV persistence showed the following
findings: 13% (13) CIN 1, 10% (10) CIN 2, and 11% (11) CIN 3. In one case, the histology
of
the biopsy revealed an AIS. Histology was unremarkable in 58% (58) and no histological
analysis was performed in 7% (7) (see [Fig. 9Fig. 9 ]). In this group, CIN 2+ occurs in 21% of cases, and CIN 3+ and
AIS occurs in 12.1% of cases.
Fig. 9
Fig. 9
Histologies of the HPV persistence/II-a group.
A distinction between the age groups was also not made here in only
14 female patients under 35 years of age.
HPV persistence/I (NILM)
In the largest group of patients (1139) presenting with cytological group I and HPV
persistence, the most common colposcopic findings were physiological (48%, 541), followed
by
minor changes at 32.5% (367). Major changes were detected in 8.4% (95), nonspecific
abnormal
findings in 8% (90), and other findings in 3.1% (35). 1% (11) of patients could not
be
adequately assessed.
Histologically, this cytological group I/HPV persistence showed the following findings:
17.5% (199) CIN 1, 7.3% (83) CIN 2, 5.6% (64) CIN 3. In one case, the histology of
the
biopsy revealed squamous cell carcinoma FIGO stage Ia2. AIS was seen in 0.2% (2),
unremarkable histology in 43.6% (497), and no tissue sample was obtained in 25.7%
(293) (see
[Fig. 10Fig. 10 ]). Thus, in this
group, CIN 2+ was present in 13% and CIN 3+ and AIS in 5.9%.
Fig. 10
Fig. 10
Histologies of the HPV persistence/I group.
When the different age groups were considered, it was found that only 25 patients
in
this group were younger than 35 years of age. Therefore, an age-based subgroup examination
was not performed in this group.
HPV-negative
Finally, we report on the 369 patients who tested HPV-negative and presented for
diagnostic colposcopy based solely on their cytological findings.
Here, 2.2% (8) patients had II-p (ASC-US), 21.1% (78) had III-p (ASC-H), 11.1% (41)
had
III-g (AGC endocervical favor neoplastic), 11.1% (41) had IIID1 (LSIL), 38.8% (143)
had
IIID2 (HSIL, moderate dysplasia), and 13.8% (51) had IVa-p (HSIL, severe dysplasia).
Only
four presented with IVa-g (AIS), one with IVb-p (HSIL with features suspicious for
invasion), and two with IVb-g (AIS with features suspicious for invasion) (see [Fig. 11Fig. 11 ]).
Fig. 11
Fig. 11
Cytologies in HPV negativity.
Among patients who were HPV-negative, colposcopically minor changes were most common
with 36.6% (134), followed by major changes (34.4%, 126). Physiological findings were
obtained in 22.4% (82), nonspecific abnormal findings in 4.1% (15), and other findings
in
2.5% (9). 0.8% (3) of patients could not be adequately assessed.
Histologically, the following findings were seen in this group who presented with
HPV-negative findings: 24.7% (91) had CIN 1, 14.1% (52) had CIN 2, 13.8% (51) had
CIN 3.
Histology revealed AIS in 0.3% (1). Histology was unremarkable in 31.5% (116) and
no
histology was collected in 15.7% (58) (see [Fig. 12Fig. 12 ]
a ). In this group, CIN 2+ was present
in 27.9% and CIN 3 and AIS in 14.1%.
Fig. 12
Fig. 12
a Histologies in HPV negativity. b Histologies in HPV negativity of 20–34-year-olds. c Histologies in HPV negativity of over 34-year-olds.
If the patients are also divided up here into the two age groups
according to the algorithm, the following findings are obtained:
In the group of 20–34-year-olds (120), 20% (24) had CIN 1, 20.8%
(25) had CIN 2, 24.2% (29) had CIN 3, 17.5% (21) had unremarkable histology, and no
histology was collected in 17.5% (21) (see
[Fig. 12Fig. 12 ]
b
). Thus, 45% had CIN 2+ and 24.2% had CIN 3+.
In the group of patients over 34 (249), 26.9% (67) had CIN 1, 10.8%
(27) had CIN 2, and 8.8% (22) had CIN 3. AIS was diagnosed in one case. Histology
was
unremarkable in 38.2% (95) and no histology was collected in 14.9% (37) (see
[Fig. 12Fig. 12 ]
c ). Thus, 20.1% had CIN 2+/AIS and 9.2% had
CIN 3+/AIS.
Discussion
The new organized cancer screening guideline (oKFE-RL) for cervical cancer screening,
which was introduced in Germany in January 2020, regulates in detail the procedures
of
diagnostic confirmation in the event of abnormal findings [11 ]
[22 ]. This includes, firstly, that women over
the age of 20 receive an invitation letter from the statutory health insurers. The
importance
of this invitation letter is reflected in the fact that, as Marquardt et al. have
shown, the
main cause for the development of cervical carcinoma in Germany is not attending the
screening
[1010 ]. Furthermore,
diagnostic confirmation centers around the colposcopy, which is performed in certified
dysplasia consultations and units. In addition to the diagnostic confirmation procedures
to be
carried out, the legislature stipulates consistent documentation. This is to be evaluated
at a
later stage – after 2026 – by the Leipzig Registry Office. Since it was foreseeable
that these
documentation procedures could not be organized in the first year of the new screening,
the
AG-CPC initiated the registry study in June 2020. By October 2022, 4763 patients had
already
undergone colposcopic examinations at the nine participating consultations. A quarter
of these
patients had HPV persistence with unremarkable cytology. If the patients with abnormal
cytology are also taken into account, the rate of HPV positivity rises to 87%. This
high
proportion can be explained by the preselection based on the new clarification algorithm.
Overall, available data from Xhaja et al. show that in primary screening starting
at age 35,
6.41% of cytologically healthy women were high-risk HPV-positive during co-testing;
Marquardt
et al. report 5.82% [1111 ]
[1212 ]. These different positivity rates for high-risk HPV depend on regional
differences, but also on the method used to perform the HPV test.
Knowing that, until 2019, women presented in the dysplasia consultations and units
predominantly with suspicious cytology, regardless of HPV status, the positivity rates
for HPV
above explain the increased strain on these consultation hours. If HPV persistence
is detected
and checked after 12 months, diagnostic colposcopy is indicated within three months.
The
diagnostic algorithm was followed for all patients enrolled here.
The target lesions for diagnostic consultations in the new screening are CIN 3+ lesion,
AIS, and adenocarcinoma of the cervix. These findings are treated depending on the
stage.
Individual rules apply almost exclusively in pregnancy, and surgical diagnostic confirmation
is rare in this phase of life. Outside of pregnancy, interventional treatment is usually
performed, since, depending on the literature, progression of CIN 3 to cervical carcinoma
can
be expected to be up to 12% [1313 ]
[1414 ]
[1515 ]
[1616 ]
[1717 ]
[1818 ].
All patients were asked about their nicotine abuse. 29.5% of participants reported
nicotine abuse, which is significantly higher compared to the data from the Federal
Statistical Office [1919 ]. This suggests that nicotine abuse, among other factors, is a risk
factor in the genesis of cervical carcinoma and its precursors, in addition to HPV
infection.
We did not ask about other co-morbidities in the survey questionnaires.
We would also have liked to address the importance of identifying the subtype of high-risk
HPV. But experience from the various dysplasia consultations and units shows that
when
patients present to these specialty consultations, data transfer on HPV testing is
incomplete.
Not only is information on the HPV testing system missing. Information about which
HPV type
was detected is often also not specified: HPV type 16, HPV type 18, or the other HPV
types
(“others”). In addition, the HPV testing systems used in routine clinical practice
are not
comparable in terms of subtype determination. Therefore, we cannot make a statement
in this
study regarding the risk profile of the different HPV subtypes.
The other data collected will be discussed in relation to the cytological group of
findings and HPV findings. Here, the correlation between the cytological result and
the HPV
test result, collected outside the dysplasia consultation, is evaluated and interpreted
with
the colposcopic findings. Special consideration is given to the histological results
after
taking a biopsy of the cervix.
In the cytological group IVa-p (HSIL, severe dysplasia) we find colposcopically “major
changes” in 79.8%. Regardless of the colposcopy findings, CIN 2+ lesions are detected
in 79.7%
of cases in this group. This high proportion can be explained by the patients biopsied
primarily in the diagnostic colposcopy and the final histology in the patients who
were
operated on immediately without preoperative histological confirmation of the diagnosis.
Squamous cell carcinoma (early tumor stage) was detected twice. When comparing the
CIN 3+ rate
of 67.3% with the data from Marquardt et al. [1212 ], which reported a CIN 3+ rate of 74.5% in
group IVa-p (HSIL, severe dysplasia), our figures are lower. One explanation for this
lower
rate could be that in the study by Marquardt et al. data were only collected from
one
laboratory. In our registry study, cytological results from numerous different cytology
laboratories were used as indications for further procedures and were not centrally
controlled
in one laboratory before colposcopic examination. Thus, no uniform evaluation standards
can be
applied here. The colposcopy findings obtained, especially the percentage of major
changes,
correspond to the histological results.
Considering the cytological group IIID2 (HSIL, moderate dysplasia), CIN 2+ is present
in
50.9% of cases; after excision therapy, this rate increases minimally to 53%. This
corresponds
with the colposcopic rate of 46.5% “major changes” and 1.8% nonspecific abnormal findings.
Again, if we consider our target lesion CIN 3+, this was seen in 29.2%; this correlates
very
well with the results of Marquardt et al. 2022, who diagnosed CIN 3+ in 31% of patients
in
group IIID2 (HSIL, moderate dysplasia). If we look at the numbers from the 2015 annual
statistics of cytology laboratories in Germany [44 ], we find less CIN 3+ in PAP IIID2 (HSIL,
moderate dysplasia) in the new screening than in 2015 annual cytology screening. Here,
among
the women in whom histology was performed and with a group IIID2 (HSIL, moderate dysplasia),
CIN 3 or AIS were histologically detected in 40.1%. This should not be interpreted
as a
failure of the new screening. Rather, we are now seeing patients with a group IIID2
(HSIL,
moderate dysplasia) earlier than ever in the histological analysis. Cumulatively,
however, the
rate of CIN 3+ and AIS will increase the longer the IIID2 (HSIL, moderate dysplasia)
findings
persist and the later the histological analysis is performed. The approach in the
old
screening until 2019 was to clarify the persistent findings, at the earliest after
one year.
The new screening has the concept of detecting patients with CIN 3/AIS in group IIID2
(HSIL,
moderate dysplasia) as early as possible. Whether the current screening situation
will
decrease the incidence of cervical carcinoma is not currently foreseeable.
The following discusses the findings obtained in patients with low-risk cytologic
groups
II-p (ASC-US), II-g (AGC endocervical NOS), and IIID1 (LSIL). In group IIID1 (LSIL),
as
expected, colposcopically “minor changes” are shown most frequently with 62.4%.
Histologically, however, CIN 2+ is found in 27.4% of cases in this cytological group.
If we
again consider our target lesion, this study showed CIN 3+ in 11.7% (AIS in 0.3%);
Marquardt
et al. (2022) reported 7.3%. Our detection rate of CIN 3+ is thus comparatively higher,
but
corresponds well with the colposcopic findings in this group of as many as 18.3% “major
changes”. The main reason will be that the diagnostic confirmation rate in the registry
study
for this group of patients was higher than in the study by Marquardt et al. [1212 ].
In group II-p (ASC-US), with a histological analysis rate of 82.8%, CIN 3+ was found
in
10.7%. Surprisingly, AIS and squamous cell carcinoma were detected once each, respectively.
If
this is compared with the data from Marquardt et al. [1212 ], which only diagnosed CIN 3+ in 1.4%, the
figures in this registry study are significantly higher. This can be explained in
particular
by the higher histological analysis rate in our study. Our histologically confirmed
cases of
CIN 2+ correspond to the number of colposcopic “major changes” detected. This discrepancy
in
the data may also reflect how variable the criteria for assigning group II-p (ASC-US)
are in
different cytology laboratories. In any case, in the cytology laboratories whose patients
were
included in the registry study, CIN 2+ lesions were concealed much more frequently
behind
group II-p (ASC-US) than in Marquardt et al. [1212 ].
Cytological group II-g (AGC endocervical NOS) presents as a rather small group with
only
64 patients, but it shows a relatively high rate of CIN 3+ with 23.4%. These high
figures have
not yet been recorded in any major study, not even in the 2015 annual statistics.
One critical
note with regard to the annual statistics of 2015 is that the diagnostic confirmation
rate in
this cytological findings group was very low at only 1.02%. Based on the data we have
collected, there may need to be a revision of the classification of the low-risk cytological
groups defined in Munich Nomenclature III. A comparison of our results for groups
II-p
(ASC-US) and II-g (AGC endocervical NOS) shows a statistical trend, but no significance
with
regard to CIN 2+.
In patients presenting with unremarkable cytology and HPV persistence, group I (NILM)
and
group II-a (NILM) were evaluated separately. It was suspected that group II-a (NILM)/HPV
persistence has a higher risk of CIN 3+ lesion than group I. After all, group II-a
(NILM)
indicates a past medical history of morphological abnormalities of the cervix. As
described in
Munich Nomenclature III [33 ], group II-a (NILM) is indeed assigned in distinction to group I (NILM)
when there is an abnormal medical history (cytological/histological/colposcopic/clinical
findings). Our assumption was then confirmed. This is because the largest group we
examined
colposcopically, with cytological group I (NILM) and HPV persistence, shows CIN 3+
and AIS
only half as often (at 5.9%) as group II-a (NILM) with HPV persistence (11% CIN 3,
AIS). In
both groups, the number of CIN 2+ corresponds to the “major changes”. Thus, we demonstrated
that colposcopic major change findings were assigned three times more frequently in
patients
with group II-a (NILM) than in patients with group I (NILM). The rate of major changes
in
patients with group I (NILM) correlates with the data from Berger et al. (2023) [2020 ]. However, in this
small case study, no subgroup analysis was performed between groups I (NILM) and II-a
(NILM),
but all patients with normal cytological findings were evaluated together. However,
interpretation of our results in patients with group II-a (NILM) is difficult because
we do
not have access to the medical history data of enrolled patients with this group of
findings
in the registry study. Thus, we do not know what prior diagnosis led to the assignment
of
group II-a (NILM). According to the G-BA decision, HPV persistence may be behind this
group,
as well as cytological, histological, colposcopic, or clinical previous findings.
It is
important to ensure that patients are assigned group II-a (NILM) according to uniform
criteria.
In the low-risk cytologic groups and in the high-risk cytologic groups, we performed
an
age-based analysis of our data. Separate evaluations in women aged 20–34 years and
35 years
and older showed no differences in CIN 2+ or CIN 3+ rates in these cohorts. In women
with HPV
persistence, such an age-dependent subgroup analysis was not performed because, as
expected,
in the group of women aged 20–34 years, HPV persistence was checked only in very few
cases.
This is not even required according to the valid diagnostic algorithm. Surprisingly,
some HPV
examinations with negative test results were found in women aged 20–34 years and in
women aged
35 years and older. Thus, an age-dependent subgroup study could be performed in this
group.
The evaluation of HPV-negative patients who had an indication for a diagnostic colposcopy
shows a relatively low proportion of CIN 2+ lesions (28.4%) independent of age; only
13.8% had
CIN 3. The differences are astonishing when an age-dependent evaluation is performed.
The rate
of CIN 2+ and CIN 3 is more than twice as high in women aged 20–34 years compared
with women
aged 35 years and older. These results support the hypothesis that HPV diagnosis before
the
age of 35 years is not useful in screening. In addition, it should be noted that these
data
could only be collected because the young patients were incorrectly tested for HPV
prior to
presentation for a diagnostic colposcopy outside the guidelines of the oKFE-RL. These
data
suggest that deviating from the predetermined algorithm is not useful. A negative
HPV test
with a cytological examination that requires clarification must not result in a diagnostic
colposcopy not being performed. The test result collected in this subgroup should
not be
confused with the false-negative rate for HPV assumed in primary HPV screening. It
is well
known that a false-negative rate of 4.5% is assumed for the first hybrid capture test
2 used
in routine clinical practice for CIN 2 and CIN 3 [2121 ]. More recent studies hypothesize a
false-negative rate of almost 10% [2222 ].
In a synopsis of the present findings of our initial data of the registry study on
the new
cervical cancer screening, according to the organized early cancer screening guideline
(oKFE-RL), we can show that the target lesion CIN 3+ and AIS is detected unexpectedly
frequently in a not insignificant proportion, especially in the cytological low-risk
group. It
is too early to draw a definitive summary. The available figures may suggest that
in HPV
persistence with abnormal group I cytology (NILM), a diagnostic colposcopy is indicated
only
after HPV persistence of 24 months; thus, HPV persistence confirmed in co-testing
after 12
months initially has no further consequence, but co-testing must be repeated after
another 12
months. This then leads to a diagnostic colposcopy in case of further HPV persistence.
It can
be assumed that this will reduce the number of unnecessary diagnostic colposcopies.
However,
based on the results of our study, we must explicitly state that women with normal
cytology
who have an abnormal medical history (group II-a, NILM) should receive a diagnostic
colposcopy
after 12 months of HPV persistence.
Today, we cannot answer whether the cervical carcinoma screening newly introduced
in 2020
in accordance with the oKFE-RL can reduce the incidence and mortality of cervical
carcinoma.
We note that the new screening enables a very early diagnosis of CIN 3. This is possible
because the diagnostic algorithm requires patients with abnormal findings to be sent
for a
diagnostic colposcopy at a very early stage. However, our data also indicate that
due to the
very early clarification diagnosis, a large number of young women with confirmed CIN 1
and
CIN 2 are at risk of overtreatment. This is often superfluous, as remission can often
be
expected in this group, but progression occurs rarely [1717 ]
[2323 ]. After all, even a recently published
study showed that women under 25 years of age with CIN 3 have a regression rate of
29% and
thus in individual cases even in these young women an initially conservative, prospective
not
immediately surgical procedure can be discussed [2424 ]. In these young women and in those with
CIN 1 and CIN 2 with an existing desire to have children, the harm would be great
if the
overtreatment increased the incidence of premature births [2525 ]. It should be noted that especially in
women < 30 years, the risk of preterm birth after conization seems to be high [2626 ].
