CyclinA1 Promoter Methylation in Self-Sampling Test

Oranratanaphan, Shina; Kengsakul, Malika; Triratanachat, Surang; Kitkumthorn, Nakarin; Mutirangura, Apiwat; Termrungruanglert, Wichai

doi:10.31557/APJCP.2020.21.10.2913

CyclinA1 Promoter Methylation in Self-Sampling Test

Document Type : Research Articles

Authors

¹ Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.

² Panyananthaphikkhu Chonprathan Medical Center, Srinakharinwirot University, Nonthaburi, Thailand.

³ Department of Oral Biology, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.

⁴ Center of Excellence in Molecular Genetics of Cancer and Human Diseases, Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.

10.31557/APJCP.2020.21.10.2913

Abstract

Background: Self sampled HPV testing is a cervical cancer screening method . However, cytology in self-sampled specimen cannot be used as a triage test. Therefore, other methods for triage should be considered. CyclinA1 (CCNA1) promoter methylation has strong association with cervical precancerous and cancerous lesion. The objective of this study was to compare the diagnostic value of CCNA1 and self-sampled specimen for detecting high-grade cervical intraepithelial lesions or worse (CIN2+). Materials and Methods: A cross sectional study was conducted. Women with abnormal cytology or positive for high risk HPV (hrHPV) indicated for colposcopic examination were enrolled. Self-collected sampling for hrHPV DNA (SS-HPV) and CCNA1 were performed. hrHPV DNA testing was done by Cobas 4800 method. CCNA1 promoter methylation was detected by CCNA1 duplex methylation specific PCR. Histopathologic result as CIN2+ obtaining from colposcopic directed biopsy or excisional procedure was considered as positive a gold standard. The results of hrHPV and CCNA1 were reported as positive or negative. Sensitivity specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of SS-HPV and CCNA1 were calculated by comparing the results with the gold standard. Results: Two hundreds and eighty women were recruited. High-grade cervical lesions and cervical cancer (CIN2+) were diagnosed in 21.8% (61 cases) of the patients. The most common type of hrHPV was non 16, 18 subtype, followed by HPV16 and 18. CCNA1 was positive in 13 patients out of whom, twelve were CIN2+. Sensitivity of CCNA1 was 19.7 % and its specificity and accuracy were 99.5% and 82.14%, respectively. The sensitivity of SS-HPV was 70.5%, and its specificity and accuracy were 39.2% and 43.3%, respectively. Conclusion: Due to high specificity and positive predictive value of CCNA1, it can be used as alarming sign of having high-grade cervical intraepithelial lesions, especially in patient who has positive hrHPV DNA test based on self-collected sampling.

Keywords