Squamous Vulvar Intraepithelial Neoplasia: 2004 Modified Terminology, ISSVD Vulvar Oncology Subcommittee

Università degli Studi di Torino, Torino, Piedmont, Italy
The Journal of reproductive medicine (Impact Factor: 0.7). 12/2005; 50(11):807-10. DOI: 10.1097/01.ogx.0000201921.69949.10
Source: PubMed


In the current classification, squamous vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) is categorized as VIN 1, 2 and 3 according to the degree of abnormality. There is neither evidence that the VIN 1-3 morphologic spectrum reflects a biologic continuum nor that VIN 1 is a cancer precursor. The VIN 2 and 3 category includes 2 types of lesion, which differ in morphology, biology and clinical features. VIN, usual type (warty, basaloid and mixed), is HPV related in most cases. Invasive squamous carcinomas of warty or basaloid type is associated with VIN, usual type. VIN, differentiated type, is seen particularly in older women with lichen sclerosus and/or squamous cell hyperplasia in some cases. Neither VIN, differentiated type, nor associated keratinizing squamous cell carcinoma is HPV related. The term VIN should apply only to histologically high grade squamous lesions (former terms, VIN 2 and VIN 3 and differentiated VIN 3). The term VIN 1 will no longer be used. Two categories should describe squamous VIN: VIN, usual type (encompassing former VIN 2 and 3 of warty, basaloid and mixed types) and VIN, differentiated type (VIN 3, differentiated type).

Download full-text


Available from: Hope Haefner
    • "uVIN accounts for approximately 90% of VIN lesions. It has previously been graded as low-grade (VIN 1) or high-grade (VIN 2/3) depending on the thickness of vulval epithelium containing undifferentiated cells; however, VIN 1 was removed from the 2004 VIN classification as these lesions have little known risk of invasive carcinoma (Sideri 2005; Wilkinson 2015). uVIN is associated with high-risk HPV types, "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Usual-type vulval intraepithelial neoplasia (uVIN) is a pre-cancerous condition of the vulval skin. Also known as high-grade VIN, VIN 2/3 or high-grade vulval squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL), uVIN is associated with high-risk subtype human papilloma virus (HPV) infection. The condition causes distressing vulval symptoms in the majority of affected women and may progress to vulval cancer, therefore is usually actively managed. There is no consensus on the optimal management of uVIN. High morbidity and recurrence rates associated with surgical treatments make less invasive treatments highly desirable. Objectives: To determine which interventions are the most effective, safe and tolerable for treating women with uVIN. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Issue 8 2015, MEDLINE and EMBASE (up to 1 September 2015). We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field. Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed medical and surgical interventions in women with uVIN. If no RCTs were available, we included non-randomised studies (NRSs) with concurrent comparison groups that controlled for baseline case mix in multivariate analysis. Data collection and analysis: We used Cochrane methodology with two review authors independently extracting data and assessing risk of bias. Where possible, we synthesised data in meta-analyses using random-effects methods. Network meta-analysis was not possible due to insufficient data. Main results: We included six RCTs involving 327 women and five NRSs involving 648 women. The condition was variously named by investigators as uVIN, VIN2/3 or high-grade VIN. Five RCTs evaluated medical treatments (imiquimod, cidofovir, indole-3 carbinol), and six studies (one RCT and five NRSs) evaluated surgical treatments or photodynamic therapy. We judged two RCTs and four NRSs to be at a high or unclear risk of bias; we considered the others at relatively low risk of bias. Types of outcome measures reported in NRSs varied and we were unable to pool NRS data. Medical interventions: Topical imiquimod was more effective than placebo in achieving a response (complete or partial) to treatment at five to six months post-randomisation (three RCTs, 104 women; risk ratio (RR) 11.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.21 to 44.51; high-quality evidence). At five to six months, a complete response occurred in 36/62 (58%) and 0/42 (0%) women in the imiquimod and placebo groups, respectively (RR 14.40, 95% CI 2.97 to 69.80). Moderate-quality evidence suggested that the complete response was sustained at one year (one RCT, nine complete responses out of 52 women (38%)) and beyond, particularly in women with smaller VIN lesions. Histologically confirmed complete response rates with imiquimod versus cidofovir at six months were 45% (41/91) and 46% (41/89), respectively (one RCT, 180 women; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.37; moderate-quality evidence). Twelve-month data from this trial are awaited; however, interim findings suggested that complete responses were sustained at 12 months. Only one trial reported vulval cancer at one year (1/24 and 2/23 in imiquimod and placebo groups, respectively). Adverse events were more common with imiquimod than placebo and dose reductions occurred more frequently in the imiquimod group than in the placebo group (two RCTs, 83 women; RR 7.77, 95% CI 1.61 to 37.36; high-quality evidence). Headache, fatigue and discontinuation were slightly more common with imiquimod than cidofovir (moderate-quality evidence). Quality of life scores reported in one trial (52 women) were not significantly different for imiquimod and placebo. The evidence of effectiveness of topical treatments in immunosuppressed women was scant. There was insufficient evidence on other medical interventions. Surgical and other interventions: Low-quality evidence from the best included NRS indicated, when data were adjusted for confounders, that there was little difference in the risk of VIN recurrence between surgical excision and laser vaporisation. Recurrence occurred in 51% (37/70) of women overall, at a median of 14 months, and was more common in multifocal than unifocal lesions (66% versus 34%). Vulval cancer occurred in 11 women (15.1%) overall at a median of 71.5 months (9 to 259 months). The risk of vulval cancer did not differ significantly between excision and laser vaporisation in any of the NRSs; however, events were too few for robust findings. Alternative surgical procedures that might be as effective include Cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspiration (CUSA) and loop electrosurgical excision (LEEP) procedures, based on low- to very low-quality evidence, respectively. Very low-quality evidence also suggested that photodynamic therapy may be a useful treatment option.We found one ongoing RCT of medical treatment (imiquimod) compared with surgical treatment. Authors' conclusions: Topical treatment (imiquimod or cidofovir) may effectively treat about half of uVIN cases after a 16-week course of treatment, but the evidence on whether this effect is sustained is limited. Factors predicting response to treatment are not clear, but small lesions may be more likely to respond. The relative risk of progression to vulval cancer is uncertain. However, imiquimod and cidofovir appear to be relatively well tolerated and may be favoured by some women over primary surgical treatment.There is currently no evidence on how medical treatment compares with surgical treatment. Women who undergo surgical treatment for uVIN have about a 50% chance of the condition recurring one year later, irrespective of whether treatment is by surgical excision or laser vaporisation. Multifocal uVIN lesions are at a higher risk of recurrence and progression, and pose greater therapeutic dilemmas than unifocal lesions. If occult cancer is suspected despite a biopsy diagnosis of uVIN, surgical excision remains the treatment of choice. If occult cancer is not a concern, treatment needs to be individualised to take into account the site and extent of disease, and a woman's preferences. Combined modalities may hold the key to optimal treatment of this complex disease.
    No preview · Article · Jan 2016 · Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online)
    • "Vulvar cancer in pre-menopausal women, as found in communities within the East Arnhem district and several communities bordering that district (hereafter referred to as Arnhem Land), is associated with persistent human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, particularly genotype 16, whereas in older women it is more usually associated with a dermatological condition called lichen sclerosus [3] [4] [5]. The precursor lesion to HPV-related invasive vulvar cancer is vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) usual type (warty, basaloid and mixed) [6], and the incidence of VIN in this population is similarly high (34.7 per 100 000 in women aged less than 50 years) [2]. Previous work with the Arnhem Land population, however, found no evidence that higher rates of HPV infection [7] or that particularly virulent strains of HPV [8] could explain the excess incidence of vulvar cancer in this population, suggesting the possible involvement of additional environmental and/or genetic factors that may impair host immunity . "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective A cluster of vulvar cancer exists in young Aboriginal women living in remote communities in Arnhem Land, Australia. A genetic case–control study was undertaken involving 30 cases of invasive vulvar cancer and its precursor lesion, high-grade vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN), and 61 controls, matched for age and community of residence. It was hypothesized that this small, isolated population may exhibit increased autozygosity, implicating recessive effects as a possible mechanism for increased susceptibility to vulvar cancer. Methods : Genotyping data from saliva samples were used to identify runs of homozygosity (ROH) in order to calculate estimates of genome-wide homozygosity. Results No evidence of an effect of genome-wide homozygosity on vulvar cancer and VIN in East Arnhem women was found, nor was any individual ROH found to be significantly associated with case status. This study found further evidence supporting an association between previous diagnosis of CIN and diagnosis of vulvar cancer or VIN, but found no association with any other medical history variable. Conclusions These findings do not eliminate the possibility of genetic risk factors being involved in this cancer cluster, but rather suggest that alternative analytical strategies and genetic models should be explored.
    No preview · Article · Jun 2014 · Gynecologic Oncology
  • Source
    • "The International Society for the Study of Vulvovaginal disease (ISSVD) has proposed that VIN should not be graded but described as high-grade VIN lesions only (VIN 2 or VIN 3). The ISSVD has also recommended that the term low-grade VIN (VIN 1, or mild dysplasia) should not be used anymore and that such lesions should be classified as flat condyloma acuminatum, or given an appropriate descriptive term [49]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Condyloma acuminatum, intraepithelial neoplasia, and squamous cell carcinoma are three relatively frequent vulvar lesions. Condyloma acuminatum is induced by low risk genotypes of human papillomavirus (HPV). Vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) and squamous cell carcinoma have different etiopathogenic pathways and are related or not with high risk HPV types. The goal of this paper is to review the main pathological and clinical features of these lesions. A special attention has been paid also to epidemiological data, pathological classification, and clinical implications of these diseases.
    Full-text · Article · Feb 2014
Show more