Cytopathology and the Micronucleus Test in Monitoring Post-Radiotherapy Patients for Cervical Cancer

Main Article Content

Catia Martins Leite Padilha Lucas Gomes Padilha Filho Rosana da Paz Ferreira Sergio Augusto Lopes de Souza

Abstract

The use of radiotherapy as a form of treatment for cervical cancer induces morphological changes both in neoplastic cells and in normal epithelial and stromal cells. These alterations represent a challenge for the identification of residual lesions, generating a scenario of complexity in the post-radiotherapy cytopathological evaluation. Therefore, the objective of this study was to comparatively analyze the cytopathological examination (Conventional Cytology X Liquid-Based Cytology) with the Micronucleus Test of post-radiotherapy patients for cervical cancer and to describe the genotoxicity of radiation. This is a cross-sectional, descriptive study whose population consisted of ten patients with cervical cancer undergoing radiotherapy at the Cancer Hospital II of the National Cancer Institute (INCA – Rio de Janeiro/RJ, Brazil). For analysis of the Micronucleus Test, a control group with ten patients, equivalent to the study group, was included. The results showed that the low quality of Conventional Cytology in cases of post-radiotherapy control of cervical cancer can be a barrier to the speed of diagnosis and identification of recurrent lesions. A relevant alternative is the use of Liquid-Based Cytology, which contributes positively to the quality of diagnosis in irradiated patients, mainly associated with the Micronucleus Test, but the adoption of Liquid-Based Cytology for mass screening may be hampered by the cost of the technique. On the other hand, the use of the Micronucleus Test, which proved to be significant in irradiated patients, is a low cost and easy analysis technique. Therefore, in view of the above, we propose, as a follow-up protocol for patients undergoing radiotherapy for cervical cancer, performing Liquid-Based Cytology associated with the Micronucleus Test, which can be extended to other types of tumors.

Keywords: Uterine Cervical Cancer. Radiotherapy. Cytopathology. Micronucleus. Cellular Genotoxicity.

Article Details

How to Cite
PADILHA, Catia Martins Leite et al. Cytopathology and the Micronucleus Test in Monitoring Post-Radiotherapy Patients for Cervical Cancer. Medical Research Archives, [S.l.], v. 11, n. 10, oct. 2023. ISSN 2375-1924. Available at: <https://esmed.org/MRA/mra/article/view/4555>. Date accessed: 19 july 2024. doi: https://doi.org/10.18103/mra.v11i10.4555.
Section
Research Articles

References

1. World Health Organization: Regional Office for Europe. World Cancer Report: Cancer Research for Cancer Development. IARC; 2020.

2. Popalis ML, Ramirez SI, Leach KM, Granzow ME, Stoltzfus KC, Moss JL. Improving cervical cancer screening rates: a scoping review of resources and interventions. Cancer Causes Control. 2022;33(11):1325-1333. doi:10.1007/s10552-022-01618-2

3. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209-249. doi:10.3322/caac.21660

4. Brasil IN de C. Estimate | 2023 – Cancer Incidence in Brazil.

5. Medrado L, Lopes RM. Conexões históricas entre as políticas de rastreamento do câncer de colo do útero e a educação profissional em citopatologia no Brasil. Trab Educ E Saúde. 2023;21:e00969206.
doi:10.1590/1981-7746-ojs969

6. Ferreira MDCM, Nogueira MC, Ferreira LDCM, Bustamante-Teixeira MT. Early detection and prevention of cervical cancer: knowledge, attitudes and practices of FHS professionals. Ciênc Saúde Coletiva. 2022;27(6):2291-2302. doi:10.1590/1413-81232022276.17002021

7. Bentz JS. Liquid-based cytology for cervical cancer screening. Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2005;5(6):857-871. doi:10.1586/14737159.5.6.857

8. Monsonego J, Autillo-Touati A, Bergeron C, et al. Liquid-based cytology for primary cervical cancer screening: a multi-centre study. Br J Cancer. 2001;84(3):360-366. doi:10.1054/bjoc.2000.1588
9. Freitas VCAD, Nicolau AIO, Lima TM, Pinheiro AKB. Cytopathology of the uterine cervix and sample suitability: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Acta Paul Enferm. 2023;36:eAPE00972.
doi:10.37689/acta-ape/2023AO00972

10. Levine EM Ginsberg NA, Fernandez CM. Age and Cervical Cancer Screening Recommendations. Med Res Arch. 2021;9(4). doi:10.18103/mra.v9i4.2375

11. Lopes VAS, Ribeiro JM. Limiting and facilitating factors for cervical cancer control: a literature review. Ciênc Saúde Coletiva. 2019;24(9):3431-3442.
doi:10.1590/1413-81232018249.32592017

12. Simion N, Căruntu ID, Avădănei ER, Balan R, Amălinei C. Conventional cytology versus liquid based cytology in cervical pathology: correspondences and inconsistencies in diagnosis, advantages and limits. Romanian J Morphol Embryol Rev Roum Morphol Embryol. 2014;55(4):1331-1337.

13. Padilha CM leite. Avaliação Cito-Oncótica de Pacientes Com Câncer de Colo Uterino Submetidas a Radioterapia. Tese de doutorado. UFRJ; 2021.

14. Vidal MLB. Efeitos adversos tardios subseqüentes ao tratamento radioterápico para câncer de colo uterino na bexiga, reto e função sexual. Published online 2008:94-94.

15. Enríquez SOG, Cedillo CH, Figueroa YT. Intervención educativa basada en metodologías B-learning para mejorar las citologías cervicales: experiencias de enfermeras. Esc Anna Nery 2023;27:e20220198.
doi:10.1590/2177-9465-ean-2022-0198es

16. Thuler LCS, Aguiar SS de Bergmann A. Determinantes do diagnóstico em estadio avançado do câncer do colo do útero no Brasil. Rev Bras Ginecol E Obstetrícia. 2014; 36:237-243.
doi:10.1590/S0100-720320140005010

17. Powers CN. Radiation treatment effects in cervical cytology. Diagn Cytopathol. 1995;13(1):75-80. doi:10.1002/dc.2840130116

18. Poflee SV, Bhatia JK. Cervical cytology: Radiation and other therapy effects. Cytojournal. 2022;19:32. doi:10.25259/CMAS_03_12_2021

19. Padilha CML, Araújo MLC, Souza SAL de. Cytopathologic evaluation of patients submitted to radiotherapy for uterine cervix cancer. Rev Assoc Médica Bras. 2017; 63:379-385. doi:10.1590/1806-9282.63.04.379

20. Linder J, Zahniser D. The ThinPrep Pap Test. Acta Cytol. 1997;41(1):30-38. doi:10.1159/000332302

21. Singh U, Anjum, Qureshi S, et al. Comparative study between liquid-based cytology & conventional Pap smear for cytological follow up of treated patients of cancer cervix. Indian J Med Res. 2018;147(3):263-267. doi:10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_854_16

22. Diz MDPE, Medeiros RB de. Cervical cancer – risk factors, prevention, diagnosis and treatment. Rev Med. 2009;88(1):7-15. doi:10.11606/issn.1679-9836.v88i1p7-15

23. Samanta S, Dey P, Nijhawan R. Micronucleus in Cervical Intraepithelial Lesions and Carcinoma. Acta Cytol. 2011;55(1):42-47. doi:10.1159/000320792

24. Nersesyan AK. Possible role of the micronucleus assay in diagnostics and secondary prevention of cervix cancer: a minireview. Tsitol Genet. 2007;41(5):64-66.
25. Nersesyan AK, Ilin AI. The micronucleus assay in exfoliated human cells: a mini review of papers from the CIS. Tsitol Genet. 2007;41(2):56-66.

26. Silva RCG, Figueirêdo RDPV, Silva ACO, Lima CEQ, Oliveira SR, Peres AL. Cytopathologic follow-up of women with cervical cancer post-radiotherapy: case series. J Bras Patol E Med Lab. 2018;54(2).
doi:10.5935/1676-2444.20180018

27. Silva DSMD, Silva AMN, Brito LMO, Gomes SRL, Nascimento MDDSB, Chein MBDC. Cervical cancer screening in the State of Maranhão, Brazil. Ciênc Saúde Coletiva. 2014;19(4):1163-1170.
doi:10.1590/1413-81232014194.00372013

28. Rosa MI, Seibert P, Silva BR. Accuracy of the Papanicolaou Test in the Diagnosis of Cervical Cancer Precursor Lesions. Inova Saúde. 2016;5(2):63-75.
doi:10.18616/is. v5i2.3011

29. Bolick DR, Hellman DJ. Laboratory Implementation and Efficacy Assessment of the ThinPrep Cervical Cancer Screening System. Acta Cytol. 1998;42(1):209-213. doi:10.1159/000331548

30. Khakwani M, Parveen R, Azhar M. Comparison of PAP smear and liquid based cytology as a screening method for cervical carcinoma. Pak J Med Sci. 2022;38(7):1827-1831. doi:10.12669/pjms.38.7.5742

31. Honarvar Z, Zarisfi Z, Salari Sedigh S, Masoumi Shahrbabak M. Comparison of conventional and liquid-based Pap smear methods in the diagnosis of precancerous cervical lesions. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2022;42(6):2320-2324. doi:10.1080/01443615.2022.2049721
32. Shield PW, Daunter B, Wright RG. Post-irradiation cytology of cervical cancer patients. Cytopathology. 1992;3(3):167-182. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2303. 1992.tb00043.x

33. Zannoni GF, Vellone VG, Carbone A. Morphological Effects of Radiochemotherapy on Cervical Carcinoma: A Morphological Study of 50 Cases of Hysterectomy Specimens After Neoadjuvant Treatment. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2008;PAP. doi:10.1097/PGP.0b013e31815b1263

34. CML Padilha, Diré GD, Padilha Filh LG. Analysis of Actinic Effect after Radiotherapy in the Uterine Col Carcinomas. J Am Sci. 2005;1(1). http://www.americanscience.org

35. Jones B. Toxicity after Cervical Cancer Treatment using Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy. Clin Oncol. 2009;21(1):56-63. doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2008.10.009

36. Yıldırım H, Göker A, Demirci H, Güvenal T, Korkmaz M. A comparative study for selectivity of micronuclei in cervical exfoliated cells on chronic boron effects. J Cytol. 2019;36(2):75. doi:10.4103/JOC.JOC_185_17

37. Padilha CML, Araújo Junior MLC, Souza SALD. Cytopathologic evaluation of patients submitted to radiotherapy for uterine cervix cancer. Rev Assoc Médica Bras. 2017;63(4):379-385.
doi:10.1590/1806-9282.63.04.379

38. Ganesan N, Phansalkar M, Ambroise M, Varghese R. Validating micronucleus score in effusion fluids. J Cytol. 2017;34(4):193.
doi: 10.4103/JOC.JOC_178_16

39. Bhattathiri VN, Bindu L, Remani P, Chandralekha B, Davis CA, Nair MK. Serial cytological assay of micronucleus induction: a new tool to predict human cancer radiosensitivity. Radiother Oncol. 1996;41(2):139-142.
doi:10.1016/S0167-8140(96)01810-5

Most read articles by the same author(s)