We have been encouraging practicing gynecologists to adopt molecular diagnostics tests, PCR, and cancer biomarkers, as alternatives enabled by these platforms, to traditional Papanicolaou and colposcopy tests, respectively. An aliquot of liquid-based cytology was used for the molecular test [high-risk HPV types, (HR HPV)], another for the PAP test, and one more for p16/Ki67 dual-stain cytology. A total of 4499 laboratory samples were evaluated, and we found that 25.1% of low-grade samples and 47.9% of high-grade samples after PAP testing had a negative HR HPV-PCR result. In those cases, reported as Pap-negative, 22.1% had a positive HR HPV-PCR result. Dual staining with p16/Ki67 biomarkers in samples was positive for HR HPV, and 31.7% were also positive for these markers. Out of the PCR results that were positive for any of these HR HPV subtypes, n 68.3%, we did not find evidence for the presence of cancerous cells, highlighting the importance of performing dual staining with p16/Ki67 after PCR to avoid unnecessary colposcopies. The encountered challenges are a deep-rooted social reluctance in Mexico to abandon traditional Pap smears and the opinion of many specialists. Therefore, we still believe that colposcopy continues to be a preferred procedure over the dual-staining protocol.
Keywords: HPV genotyping; gynecology private practice; p16/Ki67 biomarkers; uterine cervical cancer screening.