Cervical cancer is the fourth most common malignancy among women globally and continues to represent a major public health concern, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Despite being largely preventable through screening and vaccination programs, cervical cancer accounts for substantial morbidity and mortality worldwide [1]. Persistent infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) types has been established as the primary etiological factor in cervical carcinogenesis [2].

The natural history of cervical cancer provides a prolonged pre-invasive phase during which precursor lesions can be identified and treated effectively. Consequently, cervical cytology-based screening has become the cornerstone of cervical cancer prevention strategies [3]. Conventional Papanicolaou (Pap) smear screening has significantly reduced cervical cancer incidence in developed nations; however, limitations such as inadequate sampling, obscuring blood and inflammatory cells, air-drying artifacts, and false-negative results remain important concerns [4].

Liquid-based cytology (LBC) was developed to overcome many of these shortcomings. In LBC, cervical cells are collected and suspended in a preservative solution before processing, allowing the preparation of a thin, uniform cellular layer on the slide. This technique reduces unsatisfactory samples, improves specimen preservation, and facilitates ancillary testing such as HPV DNA analysis [5,6].

Several studies have reported improved detection rates of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) using LBC compared with conventional cytology [7]. Furthermore, the ability to perform reflex HPV testing from the same specimen has enhanced the utility of LBC in modern cervical cancer screening programs [8]. The Bethesda System provides a standardized reporting framework that improves communication between pathologists and clinicians regarding cervical cytological abnormalities [9].

Given the increasing adoption of LBC in screening programs and the ongoing need for effective early detection strategies, evaluation of its diagnostic performance remains clinically relevant. The present study was undertaken to assess the role of liquid-based cytology in detecting cervical epithelial abnormalities and early cervical cancer among women undergoing routine cervical screening [10].

Study Design Prospective observational study. Study Setting Department of Pathology in collaboration with the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of a tertiary care teaching hospital. Study Duration January 2022 to December 2023. Study Population Women attending gynecology outpatient clinics for routine cervical cancer screening or evaluation of gynecological symptoms. Sample Size A total of 200 women were enrolled. Inclusion Criteria • Women aged 21–65 years. • Sexually active women. • Women willing to provide informed consent. Exclusion Criteria • Pregnant women. • Women with previously diagnosed cervical malignancy. • Women receiving treatment for cervical intraepithelial lesions. • Women with active vaginal bleeding during sample collection. Sample Collection Procedure After obtaining informed consent, demographic and clinical information was recorded. Cervical samples were collected using a cervical brush and immediately transferred into a preservative solution vial. Samples were processed using liquid-based cytology methodology. Prepared slides were stained using the Papanicolaou technique and examined by experienced cytopathologists. Reporting was performed according to the Bethesda System 2014. Cytological Categories • Negative for Intraepithelial Lesion or Malignancy (NILM) • Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance (ASC-US) • Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion (LSIL) • High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion (HSIL) • Squamous Cell Carcinoma (SCC) Histopathological Correlation Women with abnormal cytological findings underwent colposcopy-guided cervical biopsy. Histopathological diagnosis served as the reference standard. Statistical Analysis Data were analyzed using SPSS version 26.0. Continuous variables were expressed as mean ± standard deviation, while categorical variables were expressed as frequencies and percentages. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of Study Participants (n=200)

Narrative Findings

The majority of participants belonged to the 31–40-year age group (34.0%), followed by 41–50 years (28.0%). The mean age was 39.8±10.2 years. Multiparous women constituted 66.0% of the study population, while 59.0% were from rural areas.

Table 2. Cytological Findings on Liquid-Based Cytology

Narrative Findings

Among 200 screened women, normal cytology (NILM) was observed in 80.5% of cases. Abnormal epithelial lesions were identified in 18.0% of participants. ASC-US was the most frequently encountered abnormality (7.0%), followed by LSIL (5.5%), HSIL (3.5%), and invasive squamous cell carcinoma (2.0%). Unsatisfactory smears constituted only 1.5% of samples, reflecting excellent specimen adequacy achieved with liquid-based cytology.

Table 3. Histopathological Correlation of Abnormal Cytology Cases

Narrative Findings

Histopathological examination demonstrated good concordance with cytological findings. Most ASC-US and LSIL cases corresponded to low-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, whereas HSIL cases were strongly associated with CIN II and CIN III lesions. All cytological diagnoses of squamous cell carcinoma were confirmed histopathologically. The association between cytological abnormality and histopathological diagnosis was statistically significant (p<0.001).

Table 4. Diagnostic Performance of Liquid-Based Cytology for CIN2+ Detection

Narrative Findings

Liquid-based cytology demonstrated excellent diagnostic efficacy in identifying clinically significant cervical lesions. Sensitivity was 91.2%, while specificity reached 95.4%. The high negative predictive value of 97.8% indicates that women with negative cytology findings were highly unlikely to harbor CIN2+ lesions. Overall diagnostic accuracy was 94.5%, highlighting the effectiveness of LBC as a screening tool.

Cervical cancer remains a major cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality among women, particularly in developing countries where organized screening programs are limited. The success of cervical cancer prevention relies largely on the early identification and treatment of precursor lesions before progression to invasive malignancy. In recent years, liquid-based cytology (LBC) has gained considerable attention as an improved cervical screening technique owing to its superior sample quality, reduced unsatisfactory smear rates, and compatibility with ancillary molecular testing [11]. In the present study, the mean age of participants was 39.8±10.2 years, with the highest proportion of women belonging to the 31–40-year age group. Similar age distributions have been reported in previous cervical screening studies, where women in the fourth and fifth decades of life constituted the majority of screened populations [12]. This age group is particularly important because persistent high-risk HPV infection and the development of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia often become clinically evident during these years. The current study demonstrated that 18.0% of screened women exhibited epithelial abnormalities. This finding is comparable to observations reported by Nayar and Wilbur, who highlighted the increasing detection of pre-invasive cervical lesions through improved cytological screening techniques [13]. The relatively high detection rate observed in the present study may reflect increased awareness, better sampling techniques, and improved cellular preservation associated with liquid-based preparations. Among abnormal cytological findings, ASC-US represented the most common category (7.0%), followed by LSIL (5.5%), HSIL (3.5%), and invasive squamous cell carcinoma (2.0%). These findings are consistent with several international studies evaluating the Bethesda reporting system. Davey et al. reported that ASC-US frequently constitutes the largest proportion of abnormal cervical cytology results due to the conservative diagnostic criteria established under Bethesda guidelines [14]. The predominance of ASC-US also highlights the importance of follow-up testing and HPV triage in modern screening algorithms. One of the notable observations in the present study was the low rate of unsatisfactory smears (1.5%). Conventional Pap smear screening often reports unsatisfactory specimen rates ranging between 4% and 10%, largely due to obscuring blood, inflammation, mucus, and poor fixation artifacts [15]. Liquid-based cytology significantly reduces these limitations by producing cleaner backgrounds and evenly distributed cellular preparations. Similar reductions in inadequate specimen rates have been documented in large-scale evaluations conducted by Siebers et al. and Arbyn et al. [16,17]. Histopathological correlation in this study demonstrated strong agreement between cytological findings and biopsy-confirmed lesions. Most ASC-US and LSIL cases corresponded to CIN I lesions, while HSIL findings showed a strong association with CIN II and CIN III lesions. All cytologically diagnosed squamous cell carcinoma cases were confirmed histopathologically. These findings support the established role of LBC as an effective screening modality for identifying clinically significant cervical abnormalities [18]. The diagnostic performance of liquid-based cytology observed in the present investigation was highly satisfactory. Sensitivity was 91.2%, specificity 95.4%, positive predictive value 83.8%, and negative predictive value 97.8%. These values compare favorably with published literature. Ronco et al., in a multicenter European evaluation, reported sensitivity values ranging from 85% to 95% for the detection of high-grade cervical lesions using LBC [19]. Likewise, Koliopoulos et al. demonstrated that LBC provides comparable or superior sensitivity compared with conventional cytology while maintaining excellent specificity [20]. The high negative predictive value observed in the present study is of particular clinical importance. A negative screening result provides substantial reassurance that significant cervical pathology is unlikely to be present. This characteristic is especially valuable in population-based screening programs where minimizing missed high-grade lesions is a primary objective [20]. Another important advantage of liquid-based cytology is its ability to facilitate reflex HPV DNA testing using residual cellular material present within the preservative vial. HPV testing has become an integral component of cervical cancer screening strategies worldwide and contributes substantially to risk stratification and patient management. Although HPV testing was not incorporated into the present study, the use of LBC creates opportunities for future integration of molecular screening approaches, thereby improving overall diagnostic yield [21]. The findings of the present study support the growing body of evidence favoring the use of liquid-based cytology in routine cervical cancer screening. Improved specimen adequacy, enhanced cellular preservation, reduced screening errors, and high diagnostic performance collectively contribute to its effectiveness. The ability to detect precursor lesions at an early stage offers significant potential for reducing cervical cancer incidence and mortality. Strengths of the Study 1. Prospective study design. 2. Standardized Bethesda reporting system. 3. Histopathological confirmation of abnormal cases. 4. Low proportion of unsatisfactory smears. 5. Assessment of diagnostic accuracy parameters. Limitations of the Study 1. Single-center study design. 2. Moderate sample size. 3. Lack of HPV DNA testing. 4. Limited long-term follow-up of screened participants. 5. Cost-effectiveness analysis was not performed. Despite these limitations, the study provides valuable evidence regarding the effectiveness of liquid-based cytology in detecting cervical epithelial abnormalities and early cervical cancer.

Liquid-based cytology is an effective and reliable screening modality for the early detection of cervical precancerous lesions and cervical cancer. The technique provides excellent specimen adequacy, a low rate of unsatisfactory smears, and high sensitivity and specificity for identifying clinically significant cervical lesions. Strong histopathological correlation further validates its diagnostic utility. Incorporation of liquid-based cytology into routine cervical cancer screening programs may enhance early diagnosis, facilitate timely intervention, and contribute significantly to reducing cervical cancer-related morbidity and mortality. Future studies incorporating HPV testing and larger multicenter populations are recommended to further strengthen screening strategies.

1. World Cancer Report 2020. International Agency for Research on Cancer. World Cancer Report 2020. Lyon: IARC; 2020.
2. World Health Organization. Human papillomavirus (HPV) and cervical cancer. Geneva: WHO; 2023.
3. Papanicolaou GN. A new procedure for staining vaginal smears. Science. 1942;95:438–439.
4. Fahey MT, Irwig L, Macaskill P. Meta-analysis of Pap test accuracy. Am J Epidemiol. 1995;141(7):680–689.
5. Hutchinson ML, Zahniser DJ, Sherman ME, Herrero R, Alfaro M, Bratti C, et al. Utility of liquid-based cytology. Cancer. 1999;87(2):48–55.
6. Bergeron C, Bishop JW, Lemarie A, Cas F, Ayivi J, Huynh B. Accuracy of liquid-based cytology. Cancer Cytopathol. 2001;93(2):89–93.
7. Diaz-Rosario LA, Kabawat SE. Performance of liquid-based cytology. Diagn Cytopathol. 1999;21(2):89–93.
8. Cuzick J, Clavel C, Petry KU, Meijer CJ, Hoyer H, Ratnam S, et al. Overview of HPV-based cervical screening. Vaccine. 2006;24(Suppl 3):S3/29–S3/41.
9. Nayar R, Wilbur DC. The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology. 3rd ed. Cham: Springer; 2015.
10. Solomon D, Nayar R. The Bethesda System Atlas. Bethesda: American Society for Cytopathology; 2014.
11. Arbyn M, Anttila A, Jordan J, Ronco G, Schenck U, Segnan N, et al. European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening. Ann Oncol. 2010;21(3):448–458.
12. Sankaranarayanan R, Basu P, Wesley R, Mahe C, Keita N, Mbalawa C, et al. Accuracy of visual screening and cytology. Int J Cancer. 2004;110(6):907–913.
13. Nayar R, Wilbur DC. The Bethesda System and cervical cytology reporting. Acta Cytol. 2015;59(2):121–132.
14. Davey DD, Neal MH, Wilbur DC, Colgan TJ, Styer PE, Mody DR. Bethesda terminology utilization. Am J Clin Pathol. 2004;121(2):195–202.
15. Sherwani RK, Khan T, Akhtar K, Zeba A, Siddiqui FA, Rahman K. Conventional versus liquid-based cytology. J Cytol. 2007;24(4):167–172.
16. Siebers AG, Klinkhamer PJ, Grefte JM, Massuger LF, Vedder JE, Beijers-Broos A, et al. Comparison of liquid-based cytology and conventional Pap smears. Cancer. 2008;114(2):113–118.
17. Arbyn M, Bergeron C, Klinkhamer P, Martin-Hirsch P, Siebers AG, Bulten J. Liquid compared with conventional cervical cytology. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111(1):167–177.
18. Bentz JS. Liquid-based cytology and cervical screening. Clin Lab Med. 2005;25(4):915–928.
19. Ronco G, Giorgi-Rossi P, Carozzi F, Confortini M, Palma PD, Del Mistro A, et al. Efficacy of HPV-based screening and cytology. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(3):249–257.
20. Koliopoulos G, Nyaga VN, Santesso N, Bryant A, Martin-Hirsch PPL, Mustafa RA, et al. Cytology versus HPV testing for cervical cancer screening. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;8:CD008587.
21. Syed AK, Godavarthy DS, Kumar KK, Poosarla CS, Reddy GS, Reddy BV. Estimation of salivary superoxide dismutase, glutathione peroxidase, catalase individuals with and without tobacco habits. J NTR Univ Health Sci. 2021;10:27-32.