Retrospective histopathological study of cervical punch/loop biopsies
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Retrospective histopathological study evaluating correlation between diagnostic cervical punch biopsies and subsequent therapeutic excisional loop diathermy biopsies
IRAS ID
163991
Contact name
Vasileios Stamelos
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University Hospital of North Staffordshire
Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier
N/A , N/A
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 6 months, 1 days
Research summary
When a woman receives an abnormal cervical smear test result she is sent to a consultant who performs an examination of the cervix named colposcopy. If disease is seen at colposcopy then a diagnostic “cervical punch biopsy” can be taken at the time, where a section of tissue is removed for histological examination. All women whose “punch biopsy” confirms cervical pre-cancer receive further treatment during a second colposcopy, where a larger piece of tissue is removed from the cervix and sent for biopsy. It has been noted that there can be differences between the results of the 1st and the 2nd biopsy and there are many potential reasons to explain this. One explanation is the fact that the scientists who report these biopsies are inevitably subjective. At the University Hospital of North Staffordshire we have found that in 30% of cases there is disagreement between the two biopsies and it is possible that the method we apply to stop the bleeding after the biopsy might help treat the cervix. A new test called p16 has recently been developed and has been shown to accurately detect high grade cervical disease. We would like an expert histology consultant to blindly review the histology report of a number of existing tissue samples stored at the hospital and apply the p16 test to them as well. We expect that this project will help us understand the discrepancy between the initial diagnostic and subsequent therapeutic biopsies. If this is confirmed, then it will suggest that the initial diagnostic biopsies can also be therapeutic and any further treatment could be avoided in selected patients. This will have major implications for women of child-bearing age considering that cervical surgery can affect the wellbeing of a pregnancy.
REC name
South Central - Hampshire B Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
14/SC/1392
Date of REC Opinion
17 Nov 2014
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion