4.0 Article

Anal cytology and p16 immunostaining for screening anal intraepithelial neoplasia in HIV-positive and HIV-negative men who have sex with men: a cross-sectional study

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STD & AIDS
Volume 25, Issue 10, Pages 726-733

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0956462413518193

Keywords

HIV; AIDS; sexually transmitted infections; human papillomavirus; HPV; men who have sex with men; MSM; transgender; anal intraepithelial neoplasia; AIN; p16 immunohistochemistry

Funding

  1. Indian Council of Medical Research, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Akin to cervical cancer in sexually-active women, men who have sex with men (MSM) are predisposed to anal cancers, especially those with HIV co-infection. This cross-sectional study endeavored to assess the prevalence of anal dysplasia using Pap smears and p16 immunostaining amongst Indian MSM. A total of 31 consecutive HIV-positive and 34 HIV-negative MSM, from a cohort of sexually transmitted infection clinic attendees, underwent anal cytological evaluation with Pap smear and p16 staining. Chi square test and coefficient of correlation were used for comparison. Eighteen (27.7%) had abnormal anal cytology; increased in HIV-positive as compared to HIV-negative men (35% versus 20%, p=0.180). Similarly, both low-grade (25.8% versus 17.6%) and high-grade lesions (8.3% versus 4.8%) were comparable in HIV-positive and HIV-negative group. Thirteen (20%) smears were p16-positive with a sensitivity and specificity for anal dysplasia of 72.3% and 100%, respectively. Anal cytology may be used to screen for anal dysplasia in MSM irrespective of HIV status. Furthermore, the addition of p16, with greater specificity for high-grade lesions, may improve diagnostic accuracy especially for high-grade lesions. A larger study to further corroborate these observations is warranted.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available