Search

Contains fulltext : 52428.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), AIM: To investigate whether urine is a good medium for screening and whether there is a correlation between the amount of extracted DNA and human papillomavirus (HPV)-positivity. METHODS: In the present study, 30 first-voided urine (FVU) specimens and 20 urethroglandular swabs using cervex-brushes from male partners of HPV-positive patients, and 31 FVU specimens and 100 liquid-based cervix cytology leftovers sampled with cervix-brushes from HPV-positive women were examined for the presence of beta-globin. Oncogenic HPV were detected using type-specific PCR. RESULTS: beta-globin was found in all the brushed samples, whereas it was found in only 68.9% of the FVU specimens. HPV-PCR was positive in 60.0% of the male brushes, in 29% of the female brushes and in 0% of the male FVU specimens. DNA concentration was, respectively, 0.9998 ng/microL, 37.0598 ng/microL and 0.0207 ng/microL. CONCLUSION: Urine is not a good tool for HPV detection, probably because the low DNA concentration reflects a low amount of collected cells. beta-globin is measurable in FVU by real time quantitative PCR, but the DNA concentration is lower compared to brush sampling for both genders. beta-globin-positivity of urethral and cervical swabs is 100%, showing a higher mean concentration of DNA, leading to a higher detection rate of HPV. This is the first article linking DNA-concentration to the presence of HPV.

Various expert groups of pathologists around the world are discussing minimal datasets and consensus reports for the reporting of malignancy (breast, colon, prostate, ...). These datasets facilitate research and data input and will also create consistency in the reporting. Furthermore, it gives to the clinician the scientifically proven information to take decisions for the management of his patient. To agree upon a Belgian consensus for colorectal cancer reporting, this issue was discussed at the Belgian Gastrointestinal Pathology Club after revision of the literature of the recently published French, British and American guidelines. The American guidelines are the most complete but very extensive. In contrast the British minimal dataset is restricted to the absolute minimum of the current knowledge. The main concern of practising surgical pathologists in the use of an extensive list of parameters is the feasibility in the daily practice. It could be argued that large lists of datapoints run the risk of 4 G "overkill", gathering information which turns out to be useless and which could induce a negative feeling towards registration. In the present paper a synthesis of the French, British and American guidelines for reporting colorectal cancer is presented, with the aim, in a next future, to build a Belgian consensus.