Scoring mechanisms of p16INK4a immunohistochemistry based on either independent nucleic stain or mixed cytoplasmic with nucleic expression can significantly signal to distinguish between endocervical and endometrial adenocarcinomas in a tissue microarray study

Table 2 Diagnostic performance of 4 scoring methods for measuring p16^INK4a expression in correctively distinguishing 14 ECA from 24 EMA

Scoring method	C	N	Mean of C plus N
Sensitivity	35.7%	78.6%	71.4%
(95% CI)	(20.5%,50.9%)	(65.5%,91.6%)	(57.1%,85.8%)
Specificity	83.3%	70.8%	87.5%
(95% CI)	(71.5%,95.2%)	(56.4%,85.3%)	(77.0%,98.0%)
PPV	55.6%	61.1%	76.9%
(95% CI)	(39.8%,71.4%)	(45.6%,76.6%)	(63.5%,90.3%)
NPV	69.0%	85.0%	84.0%
(95% CI)	(54.3%,83.7%)	(73.6%,96.4%)	(72.3%,95.7%)
Accuracy	65.8%	73.7%	81.6%
(95% CI)	(50.7%,80.9%)	(59.7%,87.7%)	(69.3%,93.9%)

PS:
1. C: Method of scoring based on independent cytoplasmic staining alone, irrespective of nucleic staining.
2. N: Method of scoring based on independent nucleic staining alone, irrespective cytoplasmic staining.
3. Mean of C plus N: Method of scoring based on mean of cytoplasmic score plus nucleic score.
Note:
Negative p16^INK4a expression (score 0–3) tends to be EMA, whereas positive p16^INK4a expression (scores 4–12) tends to be ECA.

ISSN: 1479-5876