Active surveillance of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2: 2025 British Society of Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology and European Society of Gynaecologic Oncology consensus statement
Maria Kyrgiou, Sarah J Bowden, Laura Burney Ellis, Anne Hammer, Deirdre Lyons, Theresa Freeman-Wang, Konstantinos S Kechagias, Ilkka Kalliala, Mario Preti, Vesna Kesic, Ignacio Zapardiel, Margaret Cruickshank, Murat Gultekin, Pierre Martin-Hirsch
{"title":"Active surveillance of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2: 2025 British Society of Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology and European Society of Gynaecologic Oncology consensus statement","authors":"Maria Kyrgiou, Sarah J Bowden, Laura Burney Ellis, Anne Hammer, Deirdre Lyons, Theresa Freeman-Wang, Konstantinos S Kechagias, Ilkka Kalliala, Mario Preti, Vesna Kesic, Ignacio Zapardiel, Margaret Cruickshank, Murat Gultekin, Pierre Martin-Hirsch","doi":"10.1016/s1470-2045(24)00524-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Histological diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) has traditionally been the cutoff for local surgical treatment, due to a substantial risk of cancer development. However, evidence from the past decade suggests 50–60% of CIN2 lesions spontaneously regress, and active surveillance (or conservative management—ie, leaving the lesion untreated) might be justified in some cases. Active surveillance of CIN2 lesions is now practised widely, although clear recommendations on eligibility, frequency of surveillance, threshold for treatment, and criteria for return to routine recall are insufficient in most countries. In 2023, the cumulative risk of invasive cancer over 20 years was found to be substantially higher in patients under active surveillance when compared with patients who received immediate local treatment, with the greatest difference observed in women older than 30 years. This Policy Review and practice algorithm from the British Society of Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology and the European Society of Gynaecologic Oncology prevention committees aims to review existing evidence and present clear recommendations to assist clinical decision making. Active surveillance, rather than immediate treatment, might be reasonable in a carefully selected cohort of patients. The risk of progression, need for repeat visits, and cumulative risk of future invasion associated with active surveillance should be carefully balanced against the benefits of awaiting regression, including consideration of the woman's age, fertility wishes, additional risk factors, and likelihood of compliance to follow-up. Clinical audit and, ideally, prospective databases are required to monitor long-term outcomes and safety.","PeriodicalId":22865,"journal":{"name":"The Lancet Oncology","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Lancet Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(24)00524-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Histological diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) has traditionally been the cutoff for local surgical treatment, due to a substantial risk of cancer development. However, evidence from the past decade suggests 50–60% of CIN2 lesions spontaneously regress, and active surveillance (or conservative management—ie, leaving the lesion untreated) might be justified in some cases. Active surveillance of CIN2 lesions is now practised widely, although clear recommendations on eligibility, frequency of surveillance, threshold for treatment, and criteria for return to routine recall are insufficient in most countries. In 2023, the cumulative risk of invasive cancer over 20 years was found to be substantially higher in patients under active surveillance when compared with patients who received immediate local treatment, with the greatest difference observed in women older than 30 years. This Policy Review and practice algorithm from the British Society of Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology and the European Society of Gynaecologic Oncology prevention committees aims to review existing evidence and present clear recommendations to assist clinical decision making. Active surveillance, rather than immediate treatment, might be reasonable in a carefully selected cohort of patients. The risk of progression, need for repeat visits, and cumulative risk of future invasion associated with active surveillance should be carefully balanced against the benefits of awaiting regression, including consideration of the woman's age, fertility wishes, additional risk factors, and likelihood of compliance to follow-up. Clinical audit and, ideally, prospective databases are required to monitor long-term outcomes and safety.