In vivo optical cellular diagnosis for uterine cervical or vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia using flexible gastrointestinal endocytoscopy - a prospective pilot study-

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-58036/v1

Download PDF

Research article

In vivo optical cellular diagnosis for uterine cervical or vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia using flexible gastrointestinal endocytoscopy - a prospective pilot study-

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-58036/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Journal Publication

published 02 Oct, 2020

Read the published version in BMC Cancer →

You are reading this older preprint version

Read the latest preprint version →

Backgrouund

For patients with any kind of atypical squamous intraepithelial lesion of the uterine cervix or vagina, colposcopy and punch biopsy are common procedures for histological determination following cytology. However, colposcopy-guided biopsy does not provide a high level of diagnostic accuracy. The aim of this study was to determine the usefulness of optical biopsy in vivo using endocytoscopy compared with conventional procedures using colposcopy.

Methods

Between May 2018 and March 2019, patients who were scheduled for cervical conization or mapping biopsies of the vagina were prospectively enrolled. Endocytoscopy was performed by senior endoscopists prior to scheduled procedures, and endocytoscopic images and biopsy samples were taken from the most prominent site and surrounding area of the cervical or vaginal lesions. The collection process of images was randomized and anonymous, and three doctors separately evaluated the images according to the ECA classification. ECA 4 and 5 are indicative of endoscopic malignancy. The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy (benign or malignant: cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 3 or vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia (VAIN) 3 or worse) of cell images at the most prominent site in each patient.

Results

A total of 28 consecutive patients were enrolled. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of endocytoscopic images were 95.0% (84.8-98.6%), 87.5% (61.9-96.5%), 95.0% (84.8-98.6%), 87.5% (61.9-96.5%) and 92.9% (78.2-98.0%), respectively. Inter-observer agreement among three reviewers was 0.78 (0.08-9.88, P < 0.01). On the other hand, the accuracy of colposcopy-guided biopsy was 74.1% (64.0-84.0%).

Conclusions

Optical cell diagnosis of cervical or vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia using endocytoscopy provides a high level of diagnostic accuracy.

Trial registration

The study was registered with the UMIN database (ID: 000031712).

UMIN000031712. Registered 16 March 2017, https://rctportal.niph.go.jp/detail/um?trial_id=UMIN000031712

Cancer Biology

Oncology

Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia

Colposcopy

Vaginal Neoplasms

Endoscopes

ECA classification

Cervical cancer is the 4th-most commonly diagnosed cancer (6.6% of total cases) and the 4th-leading cause of cancer death (7.5% of total cancer deaths) in women worldwide [1]. The estimated number of new cases of cervical cancer worldwide every year is 527,600 and the estimated number of deaths from cervical cancer every year is 265,700 [1]. Generally, screening for cervical cancer is performed by cytology (Papanicolaou test) using cervical smears. According to the categories of the 2001 Bethesda system, patients with any kind of atypical squamous intraepithelial lesion of the uterine cervix or vagina are recommended by the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology to receive colposcopy or an immediate loop electrosurgical excision procedure [2, 3]. Colposcopy and punch biopsy are common procedures for histological determination following cytology. The 2011 Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology guidelines recommend cervical conization for patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 3 or worse lesions diagnosed by biopsy [4, 5]. However, colposcopy-guided biopsy does not always provide high diagnostic accuracy [6, 7].

Recently, endocytoscopy, which provides in vivo cellular imaging, has been developed and instruments have become commercially available. The most advanced endocytoscope is a flexible scope for the digestive tract that enables conventional observation, magnifying observation (× 100) and microscopic visualization (× 500) by using a hand lever [8]. There have been some reports about the usefulness of endocytoscopy for diagnosis of gastrointestinal intraepithelial neoplasia and non-epithelial neoplasia [9–13]. The aim of this study was to determine whether optical biopsy in vivo using endocytoscopy has better diagnostic performance than that of conventional procedures using colposcopy.

Subjects

Between May 2018 and March 2019, patients who were scheduled for cervical conization or mapping biopsies under lumbar anesthesia were prospectively enrolled. The inclusion criterion was indication for treatment of CIN or vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia (VAIN) detected by colposcopy and/or cytology. Patients who were allergic to methylene blue, patients who were under 20 years old and patients for whom endocytoscopy would adversely affect the scheduled operation were excluded. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients before enrolment, and this study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards detailed in the Declaration of Helsinki. The authors’ institutional ethics committee approved this study on March 15, 2017 (Hokkaido University Hospital Review Board 017–0296). The study was registered with the UMIN database (ID: 000031712) on March 16, 2017.

Supplemental Fig. 1 shows the flow of our study.

Endocytoscopy

Patients under lumbar spinal anesthesia and sedation were placed in the lithotomy position in the operating room. After inserting a Cusco speculum into the vagina, vaginal irrigation was performed. Cell imaging in vivo was performed using endocytoscopy (H290EC) with a video processor (CV290) and light source (CLV290; Olympus Medical Systems Corp., Tokyo, Japan). This equipment provides about 500 magnification and an observation range of 570 × 500 µm with an outer diameter of 9.7 mm [9]. The endoscope was inserted into the vagina by senior endoscopists (S. O. and K. M.) and surfaces of the cervical or vaginal lesions were observed. After washing carefully, the lesions were stained using 0.1% methylene blue and endocytoscopic images of malignant areas and surrounding areas (two areas of each) were obtained. An additional movie file shows this in more detail [see Additional file 1]. Target biopsies through the endoscope were performed from each area (Radial Jaw™ 4 biopsy forceps, Boston Scientific Corporation, USA). After completing the endocytoscopy, scheduled procedures were performed by gynecologists.

Review of endocytoscopic images

For evaluation of cell images, two images (from the most prominent site and surrounding area) per patient were selected, and the collection process was randomized and anonymous. Reviews were performed separately by three doctors (endoscopist: M. O., gynecologists: A. N. and pathologist: M. I.). Clinical information, preoperative results of cytology and histology, and other images including images obtained by colposcopy and endoscopy were unavailable at the time of the reviews. The three reviewers classified the cell images into 5 grades according to the ECA classification published by Inoue et al. [9]. ECA 4 and 5 are indicative of endoscopic malignancy. Figure 1 shows endocytoscopic images according to the ECA classification.

Colposcopy

Colposcopy was performed by gynecologists before this study at an outpatient clinic using traditional equipment (OCS-500; Olympus, Tokyo, Japan). Punch biopsies were taken from abnormal lesions by using Atom Biopsy Punch, A-type (ATOM Medical Corporation, Japan).

Histopathological diagnosis and final diagnosis

Histopathological diagnosis of biopsies and surgical materials was made according to the grades of CIN and VAIN by pathologists (Fig. 2).

Outcomes

The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy (benign or malignant) of cell imaging at the most prominent site per patient judged by the reviewers to histological diagnosis using biopsies. When the results of the three reviewers did not match, the larger one of the reviews was used for calculation of accuracy. The secondary endpoints included diagnostic accuracy of all obtained cell images to histological diagnosis obtained by biopsies and colposcopy-guided biopsies, inter-observer agreement and adverse events. Malignant lesions were defined as ECA 4 and 5 in endocytoscopic images and as CIN 3 or VAIN 3 or worse in histology.

Sample size

The sensitivity of colposcopy-guided target biopsy was about 70% according to a previous report [6]. With the assumption of diagnostic accuracy using cell imaging being 90%, the number of cases achieving a power of 80% at the significance level of 2.5% (one-sided) was calculated to be 34 based on results of the binomial test (normal approximation).

Statistical analysis

JMP® Pro 11.2.0 (SAS Institute Inc.) was used for data analysis. For the primary endpoint, the Z test was performed at a significance level of 2.5% (one-sided) with respect to a threshold value of 70% (correct diagnosis rate by colposcopy-guided biopsy). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy were calculated, and the area under the curve (AUC) from receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis was evaluated. Fleiss’ κ was used to evaluate inter-observer agreement [14]. A p value of < .05 in each analysis was considered statistically significant.

Patients

A total of 28 consecutive patients were enrolled to this study and 54 images excluding 2 images that were insufficient images were evaluated. The mean age of the patients was 43 (range, 25 − 68) years, and 2 patients showed local recurrences after the operation (cervical cancer and vaginal cancer). Colposcopy and biopsy were performed in 27 patients before enrolment, and CIN 3 or VAIN 3 or worse was diagnosed in 21 patients. Characteristics of the patients are shown in Table 1.

Table 1

Characteristics of patients.
Numbers, n	28
Age (mean, range), years	43 (25–68)
Preoperative diagnosis, n VAIN CIN	2 26
Diagnosis of colposcopy guided biopsy, n < VAIN 3 and < CIN 3 CIN 3 SCC	6 17 4
Intervention, n Cervical and resection of vagina Mapping biopsy	24 4
Final diagnosis, n No dysplasia CIN 2 VAIN 3 and CIN 3 SCC	4 1 19 4
VAIN: vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia, CIN: cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, SCC: squamous cell carcinoma.

Primary endpoint

Twenty-eight endoscopic images from the most prominent sites in the patients were analyzed. Table 2 shows the relationship between the ECS classification and grade of histological dysplasia. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy of endocytoscopic images were 95.0% (84.8–98.6%), 87.5% (61.9–96.5%), 95.0% (84.8–98.6%), 87.5% (61.9–96.5%) and 92.9% (78.2–98.0%), respectively. Endocytoscopy significantly increased the diagnostic performance compared to colposcopy-guided biopsy (P < 0.01).

Table 2

Correlations between ECS classification and histological diagnosis (the most prominent sites).
Biopsy ECS classification	< CIN 3 < VAIN 3, n	≥ CIN 3 ≥ VAIN 3, n	Total, n
ECS 1–3, n	7	1	8
ECS 4, 5, n	1	19	20
Total, n	8	20	28
CIN: cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, VAIN: vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia, ECS: endocytoscopy.
Sensitivity; 95.0 (84.8–98.6), specificity; 87.5 (61.9–96.5), PPV; 95.0 (84.8–98.6), NPV; 87.5; (61.9–96.5), accuracy; 92.9 (78.2–98.0) (95% CI).

Secondary endpoints

Excluding 2 images with poor staining, a total of 54 images including the most prominent site and surrounding area for each patient were evaluated (Table 3). Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy of endocytoscopic images were 92.0% (79.9–97.6%), 82.8% (72.4–87.5%), 82.1% (71.4–87.1%), 92.3% (80.7–97.6%) and 87.0% (75.9–92.2%), respectively. The ROC curve is shown in Fig. 3 and the AUC was 0.89.

Table 3

Correlations between ECS classification and histological diagnosis (including the most prominent sites and surrounding area).
Biopsy ECS classification	< CIN 3 < VAIN 3, n	≥ CIN 3 ≥ VAIN 3, n	Total, n
ECS 1–3, n	4	2	26
ECS 4, 5, n	5	23	28
Total, n	29	25	54
CIN: cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, VAIN: vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia, ECS: endocytoscopy
Sensitivity; 92.0 (79.9–97.6), specificity; 82.8 (72.4–87.5), PPV; 82.1 (71.4–87.1), NPV; 92.3 (80.7–97.6), accuracy; 87.0 (75.9–92.2) (95% CI).

The relationship between colposcopy-guided biopsy and final histological diagnosis based on the operation is shown in Table 4. The accuracy of colposcopy-guided biopsy was 74.1% (64.0–84.0%), which was similar to that in previous reports. On the other hand, the accuracy of ECA classification to final diagnosis was 85.7% (73.2–85.7%).

Table 4

Correlations of histological diagnosis between colposcopy guided biopsy and final procedures.
Final procedure Colposcopy	< CIN 3 < VAIN 3, n	≥ CIN 3 ≥ VAIN 3, n	Total, n
< CIN 3 < VAIN 3, n	2	5	7
≥ CIN 3 ≥ VAIN 3, n	2	18	20
Total, n	4	23	27
CIN: cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, VAIN: vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia
Sensitivity; 78.3 (72.3–84.1), specificity; 50.0 (16.0-83.5) PPV; 90.0 (83.2–96.7), NPV; 28.6 (9.1–47.7), accuracy; 74.1(64–84.0) (95% CI).

The diagnostic performance of each observer is shown in Table 5. Inter-observer agreement among the three reviewers using Fleiss’ κ was 0.78 (0.08–9.88, P < 0.01), and indicating good agreement. There were no adverse events and endocytoscopy had no adverse effects on scheduled procedures and final diagnosis.

Table 5

Diagnostic performance of each observer.
Observer	Sensitivity	Specificity	PPV	NPV	Accuracy
A (endoscopist)	88.0 (75.4–95.1)	82.8 (71.9–88.9)	81.5 (69.8–88.1)	88.9 (77.2–99.5)	85.2 (73.5–91.8)
B (gynecologist)	92.0 (79.7–97.6)	79.3 (68.7–84.1)	79.3 (68.7–84.1)	92.0 (79.7–97.6)	85.2 (73.8–90.4)
C (pathologist)	95.7 (83.1–99.2)	77.4 (68.1–80.1)	75.9 (65.9–78.7)	96.9 (84.4–99.3)	85.2 (74.5–88.2)
PPV: positive predictive value, NPV: negative predictive value.

This study demonstrated the potential of flexible endocytoscopy for digestive tract to evaluate CIN and VAIN. Endocytoscopy provides real-time cellular images in vivo and it enables immediate diagnosis and treatment without the need for biopsy. Endocytoscopy visualizes at a depth of about 50 µm from the surface, and atypical cells up to the surface such as CIN 3 and VAIN 3 can therefore be seen. Endocytoscopy might be useful for determination of the need for conization.

Recently, there have been a few reports on the usefulness of flexible magnifying endoscopy with narrow band imaging (ME-NBI) for evaluation of CIN [15, 16]. ME-NBI visualizes microstructures of the mucosa showing microvascular features with 80-100-fold. However, ME-NBI indirectly reflects histological findings and it is different from endocytoscopy to visualize cell atypia.

There have also been some reports on fluorescence confocal endomicroscopy of the cervix for evaluation of cellular images in vivo. J Tan et al. reported that the sensitivity for detection of CIN was 97%. However, low inter-observer agreement reported by Schlosser C et al. is problematic for a clinical setting [17, 18]. Endocytoscopy provides sharp images that reflect the size, chromatin concentration and density of the nucleus similar to histopathology, and it enables diagnosis of CIN in vivo. In addition, ECA classification was simple and useful for diagnosis of malignant lesions.

On the other hand, colposcopy, which has been one of the standard methods for diagnosis of CIN or VAIN for a long time, is a subjective and indirect test. We usually judge abnormalities with some typical findings (such as acetowhite epithelium, mosaic, atypical vessels) that indirectly represent cell concentrations and angiogenesis. The accuracy of colposcopy is therefore affected by the condition of observation and experience of the colposcopists.

In this study, colposcopy-guided biopsy was conducted by two well-trained gynecologist and showed accuracy that was similar to that in previous reports. The small number of colposcopists taking biopsies might have influenced the results.

Our study has some limitations. This study was performed by some experts at a single center with a small sample size, and colposcopy and endocytoscopy were not performed on the same day. Generally, flexible endoscopies for digestive tract provides high-quality and high-resolution images, but the length of the scope is too long for gynecological use. Development of equipment suitable for diagnosis of gynecological neoplasia is needed. Further study is needed to verify the usefulness of endocytoscopy for examination of and establishment of a treatment strategy for cervical and vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia.

Optical cell diagnosis using flexible gastrointestinal endocytoscopy provides a high level of diagnostic accuracy, and ECA classification is clinically applicable. Endoscopic cellular imaging in vivo might be a new diagnostic tool for cervical or vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia.

CIN: cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, VAIN:vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia, PPV:positive predictive value, NPV:negative predictive value, ROC:receiver operating characteristic curve, AUC:area under the curve, ME-NBI:magnifying endoscopy with narrow band imaging.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved on March 15, 2017 (Hokkaido University Hospital Review Board 017-0296).

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Funding

Not applicable

Authors' contributions

SO and NA wrote the first draft. KM contributed to data collection. ET contributed to histological diagnosis. NS and HW contributed to revise the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank statistical advice by Hiroaki Iijima at Hokkaido University Hospital Clinical Research and Medical Innovation Center.

We also wish to thank study support by Marin Ishikawa, Masayoshi Ono, Hiroshi Asano, Kei Ihira and Yosuke at Hokkaido University Hospital.

Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:394–424.
Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, et al. The 2001 Bethesda system: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA. 2002;287:2114–9.
Massad LS, Einstein MH, Huh WK. et al. 2012 Updated Consensus Guidelines for the Management of Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Tests and Cancer Precursors. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2013;17:1–27.
Ebina Y, Yaegashi N, Katabuchi H. et al. Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology guidelines 2011 for the treatment of uterine cervical cancer. Int J Clin Oncol. 2015;20(2):240–8.
Ebina Y, Mikami M, Nagase S. et al. Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology guidelines 2017 for the treatment of uterine cervical cancer. Int J Clin Oncol. 2019;24(1):1–19.
Nakamura Y, Matsumoto K, Satoh T, et al. Optimizing biopsy procedures during colposcopy for women with abnormal cervical cancer screening results: a multicenter prospective study. Int J Clin Oncol. 2015;20(3):579–85.
Underwood M, Arbyn M, Parry-Smith W, et al. Accuracy of colposcopy-directed punch biopsies: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2012;119(11):1293–301.
Kumagai Y, Takubo K, Kawada K, et al. A newly developed continuous zoom-focus endocytoscope. Endoscopy. 2017;49(2):176–80.
Inoue H, Sasajima K, Kaga M, et al. Endoscopic in vivo evaluation of tissue atypia in the esophagus using a newly designed integrated endocytoscope: a pilot trial. Endoscopy. 2006;38(9):891–5.
Ohkura 10KaiseM, Iizuka Y. T, et al. Endocytoscopy is a promising modality with high diagnostic accuracy for gastric cancer. Endoscopy. 2015;47(1):19–25.
Shimizu Y, Takahashi M, Yoshida T, et al. Endoscopic in vivo cellular imaging of superficial squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck by using an integrated endocytoscopy system (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2013;78(2):351–8.
Kudo SE, Wakamura K, Ikehara N, Mori Y, Inoue H, Hamatani S. Diagnosis of colorectal lesions with a novel endocytoscopic classification – a pilot study. Endoscopy. 2011;43:869–75.
Ono S, Kato M, Ishigaki S, Shimizu Y. In vivo cellular imaging of gastric mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma in a Helicobacter pylori-negative patient. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;79(1):163–4.
Fleiss JL. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol Bull. 1971;76:378–82.
Nishiyama N, Kanenishi K, Mori H, et al. Flexible magnifying endoscopy with narrow band imaging for the diagnosis of uterine cervical tumors: A cooperative study among gastrointestinal endoscopists and gynecologists to explore a novel microvascular classification system. Oncol Lett. 2017;14(1):355–62.
Uchita K, Kanenishi K, Hirano K, et al. Characteristic findings of high–grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or more on magnifying endoscopy with narrow band imaging. Int J Clin Oncol. 2018;23(4):707–14.
Tan J, Delaney P, McLaren WJ. Confocal endomicroscopy: a novel imaging technique for in vivo histology of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2007;4(6):863–71.
Schlosser C, Bodenschatz N, Lam S, et al. Fluorescence confocal endomicroscopy of the cervix: pilot study on the potential and limitations for clinical implementation. J Biomed Opt. 2016;21(12):126011.

Download PDF

Journal Publication

published 02 Oct, 2020

Read the published version in BMC Cancer →

Review #1 received at journal
09 Sep, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed at journal
02 Sep, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed at journal
30 Aug, 2020
Review #2 received at journal
30 Aug, 2020
Editor assigned by journal
17 Aug, 2020
Reviewers invited by journal
17 Aug, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed at journal
17 Aug, 2020
Submission checks completed at journal
16 Aug, 2020
Editor invited by journal
16 Aug, 2020
First submitted to journal
11 Aug, 2020

You are reading this older preprint version

Read the latest preprint version →

In vivo optical cellular diagnosis for uterine cervical or vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia using flexible gastrointestinal endocytoscopy - a prospective pilot study-

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Background

Patients And Methods

Methods

Endocytoscopy

Review of endocytoscopic images

Colposcopy

Histopathological diagnosis and final diagnosis

Outcomes

Sample size

Statistical analysis

Results

Patients

Primary endpoint

Secondary endpoints

Discussion

Conclusions

Abbreviations

Declarations

References

Supplementary Files

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1