Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and the risk of spontaneous preterm birth: A Dutch population-based cohort study with 45,259 pregnancy outcomes

Diede L Loopik, Joris van Drongelen, Ruud L M Bekkers, Quirinus J M Voorham, Willem J G Melchers, Leon F A G Massuger, Folkert J van Kemenade, Albert G Siebers, Diede L Loopik, Joris van Drongelen, Ruud L M Bekkers, Quirinus J M Voorham, Willem J G Melchers, Leon F A G Massuger, Folkert J van Kemenade, Albert G Siebers

Abstract

Background: Excisional procedures of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) may increase the risk of preterm birth. It is unknown whether this increased risk is due to the excision procedure itself, to the underlying CIN, or to secondary risk factors that are associated with both preterm birth and CIN. The aim of this study is to assess the risk of spontaneous preterm birth in women with treated and untreated CIN and examine possible associations by making a distinction between the excised volume of cervical tissue and having cervical disease.

Methods and findings: This Dutch population-based observational cohort study identified women aged 29 to 41 years with CIN between 2005 and 2015 from the Dutch pathology registry (PALGA) and frequency matched them with a control group without any cervical abnormality based on age at and year of pathology outcome (i.e., CIN or normal cytology) and urbanization (<100,000 inhabitants or ≥100,000 inhabitants). All their 45,259 subsequent singleton pregnancies with a gestational age ≥16 weeks between 2010 and 2017 were identified from the Dutch perinatal database (Perined). Nineteen potential confounders for preterm birth were identified. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for preterm birth comparing the 3 different groups of women: (1) women without CIN diagnosis; (2) women with untreated CIN; and (3) women with treated CIN prior to each childbirth. In total, 29,907, 5,940, and 9,412 pregnancies were included in the control, untreated CIN, and treated CIN group, respectively. The control group showed a 4.8% (1,002/20,969) proportion of spontaneous preterm birth, which increased to 6.9% (271/3,940) in the untreated CIN group, 9.5% (600/6,315) in the treated CIN group, and 15.6% (50/321) in the group with multiple treatments. Women with untreated CIN had a 1.38 times greater odds of preterm birth compared to women without CIN (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.60; P < 0.001). For women with treated CIN, these odds 2.07 times increased compared to the control group (95% CI 1.85 to 2.33; P < 0.001). Treated women had a 1.51 times increased odds of preterm birth compared to women with untreated CIN (95% CI 1.29 to 1.76; P < 0.001). Independent from cervical disease, a volume excised from the cervix of 0.5 to 0.9 cc increased the odds of preterm birth 2.20 times (37/379 versus 1,002/20,969; 95% CI 1.52 to 3.20; P < 0.001). These odds further increased 3.13 times and 5.93 times for women with an excised volume of 4 to 8.9 cc (90/724 versus 1,002/20,969; 95% CI 2.44 to 4.01; P < 0.001) and ≥9 cc (30/139 versus 1,002/20,969; 95% CI 3.86 to 9.13; P < 0.001), respectively. Limitations of the study include the retrospective nature, lack of sufficient information to calculate odds of preterm birth <24 weeks, and that the excised volume could only be calculated for a select group of women.

Conclusions: In this study, we observed a strong correlation between preterm birth and a volume of ≥0.5 cc excised cervical tissue, regardless of the severity of CIN. Caution should be taken when performing excisional treatment in women of reproductive age as well as prudence in case of multiple biopsies. Fertile women with a history of performing multiple biopsies or excisional treatment for CIN may benefit from close surveillance during pregnancy.

Conflict of interest statement

All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form and declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years, no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Figures

Fig 1. Spontaneous births by gestational age…
Fig 1. Spontaneous births by gestational age for women with no CIN, untreated CIN, or treated CIN (treated CIN 1× or treated CIN ≥2×) before each childbirth.
The distribution between all 4 groups was statistically significantly different (all P < 0.001; two-sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov test). CIN, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.
Fig 2. Spontaneous births by gestational age…
Fig 2. Spontaneous births by gestational age per volume excised from cervix before each childbirth.
The distribution between the groups was statistically significantly different for 0 cc vs 1.00–3.99 cc (P < 0.001), 0 cc vs 4.00–8.99 cc (P < 0.001), 0 cc vs ≥9 cc (P < 0.001), 0.10–0.49 cc vs 4.00–8.99 cc (P = 0.005), 0.10–0.49 cc vs ≥9 cc (P = 0.004), 1.00–3.99 cc vs 4.00–8.99 cc (P = 0.005), 1.00–3.99 cc vs ≥9 cc (P = 0.008) (two-sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov test). CIN, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.

References

    1. Vaccarella S, Lortet-Tieulent J, Plummer M, Franceschi S, Bray F. Worldwide trends in cervical cancer incidence: impact of screening against changes in disease risk factors. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49(15):3262–73. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2013.04.024
    1. Kyrgiou M, Koliopoulos G, Martin-Hirsch P, Arbyn M, Prendiville W, Paraskevaidis E. Obstetric outcomes after conservative treatment for intraepithelial or early invasive cervical lesions: systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2006;367(9509):489–98. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68181-6
    1. Bruinsma FJ, Quinn MA. The risk of preterm birth following treatment for precancerous changes in the cervix: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2011;118(9):1031–41. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.02944.x
    1. Conner SN, Frey HA, Cahill AG, Macones GA, Colditz GA, Tuuli MG. Loop electrosurgical excision procedure and risk of preterm birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(4):752–61. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000174
    1. Kyrgiou M, Athanasiou A, Kalliala IEJ, Paraskevaidi M, Mitra A, Martin-Hirsch PP, et al.. Obstetric outcomes after conservative treatment for cervical intraepithelial lesions and early invasive disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;11:Cd012847 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012847
    1. Aitken CA, van HME, Siebers AG, van FJ, Niesters HGM, Melchers WJG, et al.. Introduction of primary screening using high-risk HPV DNA detection in the Dutch cervical cancer screening programme: a population-based cohort study. BMC Med. 2019;17(1):228. doi: 10.1186/s12916-019-1460-0
    1. Danhof NA, Kamphuis EI, Limpens J, van LR, Pajkrt E, Mol BW. The risk of preterm birth of treated versus untreated cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN): a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2015;188:24–33. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2015.02.033
    1. Casparie M, Tiebosch AT, Burger G, Blauwgeers H, van de A, van Krieken JH, et al.. Pathology databanking and biobanking in The Netherlands, a central role for PALGA, the nationwide histopathology and cytopathology data network and archive. Cell Oncol. 2007;29(1):19–24. doi: 10.1155/2007/971816
    1. Perined. Perinatale zorg in Nederland 2016. Perined, Utrecht: (2018).
    1. Kluyver T R-KB, Perez P, Granger B, Bussonnier M, Frederic J, Kelley K, Hamrick J, Grout J, Corlay S, Ivanov P, Avila D, Abdalla S, Willing C, editor Jupyter Notebooks—a publishing format for reproducible computational workflows2016: ELPUB.
    1. van Rossum GaD, Fred L. Python 3 Reference Manual: CreateSpace; 2009.
    1. Noehr B, Jensen A, Frederiksen K, Tabor A, Kjaer SK. Loop electrosurgical excision of the cervix and subsequent risk for spontaneous preterm delivery: a population-based study of singleton deliveries during a 9-year period. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201(1):33, e31–36. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.02.004
    1. Jančar N, Mihevc Ponikvar B, Tomšič S. Cold-knife conisation and large loop excision of transformation zone significantly increase the risk for spontaneous preterm birth: a population-based cohort study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;203:245–9. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.06.005
    1. Blomfield PI, Buxton J, Dunn J, Luesley DM. Pregnancy outcome after large loop excision of the cervical transformation zone. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993;169(3):620–5. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(93)90633-t
    1. Crane JM, Delaney T, Hutchens D. Transvaginal ultrasonography in the prediction of preterm birth after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107(1):37–44. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000192169.44775.76
    1. Himes KP, Simhan HN. Time from cervical conization to pregnancy and preterm birth. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109(2 Pt 1):314–9. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000251497.55065.74
    1. Ortoft G, Henriksen T, Hansen E, Petersen L. After conisation of the cervix, the perinatal mortality as a result of preterm delivery increases in subsequent pregnancy. BJOG. 2010;117(3):258–67. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2009.02438.x
    1. Paraskevaidis E, Koliopoulos G, Lolis E, Papanikou E, Malamou-Mitsi V, Agnantis NJ. Delivery outcomes following loop electrosurgical excision procedure for microinvasive (FIGO stage IA1) cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2002;86(1):10–3. doi: 10.1006/gyno.2002.6650
    1. Poon LC, Savvas M, Zamblera D, Skyfta E, Nicolaides KH. Large loop excision of transformation zone and cervical length in the prediction of spontaneous preterm delivery. BJOG. 2012;119(6):692–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.03203.x
    1. Sadler L, Saftlas A, Wang W, Exeter M, Whittaker J, McCowan L. Treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and risk of preterm delivery. JAMA. 2004;291(17):2100–6. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.17.2100
    1. Simoens C, Goffin F, Simon P, Barlow P, Antoine J, Foidart JM, et al.. Adverse obstetrical outcomes after treatment of precancerous cervical lesions: a Belgian multicentre study. BJOG. 2012;119(10):1247–55. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2012.03429.x
    1. Stout MJ, Frey HA, Tuuli MG, Cahill AG, Odibo AO, Roehl KA, et al.. Loop electrosurgical excision procedure and risk of vaginal infections during pregnancy: an observational study. BJOG. 2015;122(4):545–51. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.13252
    1. Werner CL, Lo JY, Heffernan T, Griffith WF, McIntire DD, Leveno KJ. Loop electrosurgical excision procedure and risk of preterm birth. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115(3):605–8. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181d068a3
    1. Shanbhag S, Clark H, Timmaraju V, Bhattacharya S, Cruickshank M. Pregnancy outcome after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(4):727–35. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181b5cba3
    1. Bruinsma F, Lumley J, Tan J, Quinn M. Precancerous changes in the cervix and risk of subsequent preterm birth. BJOG. 2007;114(1):70–80. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.01107.x
    1. Cruickshank ME, Flannelly G, Campbell DM, Kitchener HC. Fertility and pregnancy outcome following large loop excision of the cervical transformation zone. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1995;102(6):467–70. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1995.tb11319.x
    1. Castanon A, Brocklehurst P, Evans H, Peebles D, Singh N, Walker P, et al.. Risk of preterm birth after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia among women attending colposcopy in England: retrospective-prospective cohort study. BMJ. 2012;345:e5174. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e5174
    1. Kitson SJ, Greig E, Michael E, Smith M. Predictive value of volume of cervical tissue removed during LLETZ on subsequent preterm delivery: a cohort study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;180:51–5. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.06.011
    1. Khalid S, Dimitriou E, Conroy R, Paraskevaidis E, Kyrgiou M, Harrity C, et al.. The thickness and volume of LLETZ specimens can predict the relative risk of pregnancy-related morbidity. BJOG. 2012;119(6):685–91. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.03252.x
    1. Bjorge T, Skare GB, Bjorge L, Trope A, Lonnberg S. Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes After Treatment for Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(6):1265–73. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001777
    1. Jakobsson M, Gissler M, Paavonen J, Tapper AM. Loop electrosurgical excision procedure and the risk for preterm birth. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(3):504–10. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181b052de
    1. Heinonen A, Gissler M, Riska A, Paavonen J, Tapper AM, Jakobsson M. Loop electrosurgical excision procedure and the risk for preterm delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;121(5):1063–8. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31828caa31
    1. Andia D, Mozo de Rosales F, Villasante A, Rivero B, Diez J, Perez C. Pregnancy outcome in patients treated with cervical conization for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2011;112(3):225–8. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2010.10.015
    1. Sjøborg KD, Vistad I, Myhr SS, Svenningsen R, Herzog C, Kloster-Jensen A, et al.. Pregnancy outcome after cervical cone excision: a case-control study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2007;86(4):423–8. doi: 10.1080/11038120701208158
    1. Forsmo S, Hansen MH, Jacobsen BK, Oian P. Pregnancy outcome after laser surgery for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1996;75(2):139–43. doi: 10.3109/00016349609033306
    1. van Rooijen M, Persson E. Pregnancy outcome after laser vaporization of the cervix. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1999;78(4):346–8.
    1. Smaldone GM, Krohn MA, McGee EA. Cervical cancer and risk for delivery of small-for-gestational age neonates. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2010;19(5):969–74. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2009.1574
    1. Lima AF, Francisco C, Júlio C, Paula T, Vitorino A, Borrego J. Obstetric outcomes after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: six years of experience. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2011;15(4):276–9. doi: 10.1097/LGT.0b013e31821a6823
    1. Integraal Kankercentrum Nederland, Werkgroep Richtlijn CIN, AIS en VAIN: Dutch Nationwide Guideline CIN, AIS and VAIN, version 1.0. Last updated: 12-11-2015. [cited 2020 May 15]. Available from: .
    1. Bentley J. Colposcopic management of abnormal cervical cytology and histology. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2012;34(12):1188–202. doi: 10.1016/S1701-2163(16)35468-8
    1. Massad LS, Einstein MH, Huh WK, Katki HA, Kinney WK, Schiffman M, et al.. 2012 updated consensus guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;121(4):829–46. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182883a34
    1. Loopik DL, Siebers AG, Melchers WJG, Massuger L, Bekkers RLM. Clinical practice variation and overtreatment risk in women with abnormal cervical cytology in the Netherlands: two-step versus see-and-treat approach. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;222(4):354, e351–354.e310. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.10.004

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnere