The cost-effectiveness of cervical-vaginal rescreening

American Journal of Clinical Pathology

Volumn 108, Issue 5, 1997, Pages 525-536

  Raab, Stephen S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOWA HOSPITALS AND CLINICS   (United States)

Author keywords

Cervical cancer; Cervical vaginal smear; Cost analysis; Cytology; Dysplasia; Probability; Rescreening

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CASE REPORT; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; FEMALE; GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; LIFE EXPECTANCY; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

EID: 0030720505     PISSN: 00029173     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ajcp/108.5.525     Document Type: Article

References (115)

1. Melamed MR. Rescreening for quality control in cytology. Acta Cytol. 1996;40:12-13.
2. Hutchinson ML. Assessing the costs and benefits of alternative rescreening strategies. Acta Cytol. 1996;40:4-8.
3. Husain OAN. Quality control in cytological screening for cervical cancer. Tumori. 1976;62:303-314.
4. Burns KR, Allen KA, Radio SJ. Efficacy of the 10% rescreen of negative gynecologic smears as a quality control measure. Acta Cytol. 1996;40:1050-1051.
5. Baker A, Melcher D. Rapid rescreening of cervical smears: an effective method of quality control. Acta Cytol. 1995;39:273.
6. Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988, Pub L No. 100-578. Congressional Record. 1988;134:3828-3863.
7. Schenck U, Reuter B. Workload in the cytology laboratory. In: Wied GL, Keebler CM, Rosenthal DL, Schenck U, Somrak TM, Vooijs GP, eds. Compendium on Quality Assurance, Proficiency Testing and Workload Limitations in Clinical Cytology. Chicago, Ill: Tutorials of Cytology; 1995:223-230.
8. Mango LJ. Neuromedical Systems, Inc. Acta Cytol. 1996;40:53-59.
9. Patten SF, Lee JSJ, Nelson AC. NeoPath, Inc: NeoPath AutoPap 300 Automatic Pap Screener System. Acta Cytol. 1996;40:45-52.
10. Nagy GK, Collins DN, Wilson TA. Sample size calculations for rescreening cytologic smears. Acta Cytol. 1996;10:501-505.
11. Kaminsky FC, Burke RJ, Haberle KR, Mullins DL. Rescreening policies in cervical cytology and their effect on detecting the truly positive patient. Acta Cytol. 1995;39:239-245.
12. Kaminsky FC, Burke RJ, Haberle KR, Mullins DL. An economic model for comparing alternative policies for cervical cytologie smear screening. Acta Cytol. 1995;39:232-238.
13. Yobs AR, Plott AE, Hicklin MD, et al. Retrospective evaluation of gynecologic cytodiagnosis, II: interlaboratory reproducibility as shown in rescreening large consecutive samples of reported cases. Acta Cytol. 1987;31:900-910.
14. Slagel DD, Zaleski S, Cohen MB. The efficacy of automated cervical cytology screening. Diagn Cytopathol. 1995;13:26-30.
15. Pairwuti S. False-negative Papanicolaou smears from women with cancerous and precancerous lesions of the uterine cervix. Acta Cytol. 1991;35:40-46.
16. Gay JD, Donaldson LD, Goellner JR. False-negative results in cervical cytologic studies. Acta Cytol. 1985;29:1043-1046.
17. Peters RK, Thomas D, Skultin G, Henderson BE. Invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix after recent negative cytologic test results: a distinct subgroup? J Obstet Gynecol. 1988;158:926-935.
18. Morell ND, Taylor JR, Snyder RN, et al. False-negative cytology rates in patients in whom invasive cervical cancer subsequently developed. Obstet Gynecol. 1982;60:41-45.
19. Bosch MMC, Rietveld-Scheffers PEM, Boon ME. Characteristics of false-negative smears tested in the normal screening situation. Acta Cytol. 1992;36:711-716.
20. Kristensen GB, Skyggebjerg K-D, Holund B, Holm K, Hansen MK. Analysis of cervical smears obtained within three years of the diagnosis of invasive cervical cancer. Acta Cytol. 1991;35:47-50.
21. Rylander E. Negative smears in women developing invasive cervical cancer. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1977;56:115-118.
22. Cecchini S, Palli D, Casini A. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia III: an estimate of screening error rates and optimal screening interval. Acta Cytol. 1985;29:329-333.
23. Van der Graaf Y, Vooijs GP. False negative rate in cervical cytology. J Clin Pathol. 1987;40:438-142.
24. Eddy DM. The frequency of cervical cancer screening: comparison of a mathematical model with empirical data. Cancer. 1987;60:1117-1122.
25. Weinstein MC, Fineberg HV. Clinical Decision Analysis. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Co; 1980:12-36.
26. Sherman ME, Schiffman MH, Erozan YS, Wacholder S, Kurman RJ. The Bethesda System: a proposal for reporting abnormal cervical smears based on the reproducibility of cytopathologic diagnoses. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1992;116:1155-1158.
27. The Bethesda Committee. The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical/Vaginal Diagnoses. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 1994.
28. Wright TC, Richart RM. Controversies in the management of low grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Cancer. 1993;71:1413-1421.
29. Wright TC, Richart RM. Pathogenesis and diagnosis of preinvasive lesions of the lower genital tract. In: Hoskins WJ, Perez CA, Young RC, eds. Principles and Practice of Gynecologic Oncology. Philadelphia, Pa: JB Lippincott; 1992:509-536.
30. Johnson N, Sutton J, Thornton JG, et al. Decision analysis for best management of mildly dyskaryotic smear. Lancet. 1993;342:91-96.
31. Jones MH, Jenkins D, Cuzick J, et al. Mild cervical dyskaryosis: safety of cytological surveillance. Lancet. 1992;339:1440-1443.
32. Lindheim SR, Smith-Nguyen G. Aggressive evaluation for atypical squamous cells in Papanicolaou smears. J Reprod Med. 1990;35:971.
33. Lozowski MS, Mishriki Y, Talebian F, Solitare G. The combined use of cytology and colposcopy in enhancing diagnostic accuracy in preclinical lesions of the uterine cervix. Acta Cytol. 1982;26:285-291.
34. Lonky NM, Mann WJ, Massad LS, et al. Ability of visual tests to predict underlying cervical neoplasia: colposcopy and speculoscopy. J Reprod Med. 1995;40:530-536.
35. Mayeaux EJ, Harper MB, Abreo F, Pope JB, Phillips GS. A comparison of the reliability of repeat cervical smears and colposcopy in patients with abnormal cervical smears and colposcopy in patients with abnormal cervical cytology. J Fam Pract. 1995;40:57-62.
36. Helmerhorst TJM, Dijkhuizen GH, Calame JJ, Kwikkel HJ, Stolk JG. The accuracy of colposcopically directed biopsy in diagnosis of CIN. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1987;24:221-229.
37. Lipscomb J. Time preference for health in cost effectiveness analysis. Med Care. 1989;27(suppl 3):S233-S252.
38. Weinstein MC, Siegel JE, Gold MR, Kamlet MS, Russell LB. Recommendations of the panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA. 1996;276:1253-1258.
39. Warner K, Luce B. Cost-benefit and Cost-effectiveness Analysis in Health Care: Principles, Practice and Potential. Ann Arbor, Mich: Health Administration Press; 1982:1-100.
40. Owens DK, Sanders GD, Harris RA, et al. Cost-effectiveness of implantable cardioverter defibrillators relative to amiodarone for prevention of sudden cardiac death. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126:1-12.
41. Russell LB. Some of the tough decisions required by a national health plan. Science. 1989;246:892-896.
42. Laupacis A, Feeny D, Detsky AS, Tugwell PX. How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. Can Med Assoc J. 1992;146:473-481.
43. Gafni A, Birch S. Guidelines for the adoption of new technologies: a prescription for uncontrolled growth in expenditures and how to avoid the problem. Can Med Assoc J. 1993;148:913-917.
44. Naylor CD, Williams HI, Basinski A, Goel V. Technology assessment and cost-effectiveness analysis: misguided guidelines? Can Med Assoc J. 1993;148:921-924.
45. Laupacis A, Feeny D, Detsky AS, Tugwell PX. Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations revisited. Can Med Assoc J. 1993;148:927-929.
46. Tritz DM, Weeks JA, Spires SE, et al. Etiologies for non-correlating cervical cytologies and biopsies. Am J Clin Pathol. 1995;103:594-597.
47. Taylor RR, Guerrieri JP, Nash JD, Henry MR, O'Connor DM. Atypical cervical cytology: colposcopy follow-up using the Bethesda system. J Reprod Med. 1993;38:443-447.
48. Brown MD, Phillips GL. Management of the mildly abnormal Pap smear: a conservative approach. Gynecol Oncol. 1985;22:149.
49. Kaminski PF, Stevens CW, Wheelock JB. Squamous atypia on cytology. J Reprod Med. 1989;34:617.
50. Kohan S, Noumoff J, Beckman EM, et al. Colposcopic screening of women with atypical Papanicolaou smears. J Reprod Med. 1985;30:383.
51. Jones DED, Creasman WT, Dombroski RA, et al. Evaluation of the atypical pap smear. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1987;157:544.
52. Howell LP, Davis RL. Follow-up of Papanicolaou smears diagnosed as atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Diagn Cytopathol. 1996;14:20-24.
53. Oeberst JL, Geisinger KR. Histologic and cytologic follow-up in teenagers with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) on cervical smears. Acta Cytol. 1996;40:1032. Abstract.
54. Stastny JE, Pedigo MA, Ryan M, et al. ASCUS: comparative review of original and automated rescreen diagnosis with long term follow-up. Acta Cytol. 1996;40:1039. Abstract.
55. Bowlin RB, Grillo D, Pittman KP, Lemos LB, Baliga M. Correlation of two ASCUS with cervical biopsy diagnoses: 492 cases from the Mississippi State Department of Health. Acta Cytol. 1996;40:1041. Abstract.
56. Slawson DC, Bennett JH, Herman JM. Follow-up Papanicolaou smear for cervical atypia: are we missing significant disease? a HARNET study. J Fam Pract. 1993;36:289-293.
57. DeMay RM. The Pap smear. In: The Art and Science of Cytopathology. Chicago, Ill: ASCP Press; 1996:61-206.
58. Davey DD, Naryshkin S, Nielsen ML, Kline TS. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: interlaboratory comparison and quality assurance monitors. Diagn Cytopathol. 1994;11:390-396.
59. Giles JA; Deery A, Crow J, Walker P. The accuracy of repeat cytology in women with mildly dyskaryotic smears. Br J Obstet Gynecol. 1989;96:1067-1070.
60. Kosary CL, Ries LAG, Miller BA, Hankey BF, Harras A, Edwards BK, eds. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1973-1992: Tables and Graphs. Bethesda, Md: National Cancer Institute; 1995:145. NIH publication 96-2789.
61. Burghardt E, Girardi F, Lahousen M, et al. Microinvasive carcinoma of the uterine cervix (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IA). Cancer. 1991;67:1037-1045.
62. Coppelson M. Early invasive squamous and adenocarcinoma of the cervix (F160 stage 1a): clinical features and management. In: Coppelson M, ed. Gynecological Oncology. Edinburgh, Scotland: Churchill Livingstone; 1992:631-648.
63. Cohen C, Shulman G, Budgeon LR. Endocervical and endometrial adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 1982;6:151-157.
64. Peters RK, Chao A, Mack TM, et al. Increased frequency of adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix in young women in Los Angeles County. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1986;76:423-128.
65. Craner DW. The role of cervical cytology in the declining morbidity and mortality of cervical cancer. Cancer. 1984;34:2018-2027.
66. Cervical cancer screening programs: summary of the 1982 Canadian task force report. Can Med Assoc J. 1982;127:581-589.
67. Barron BA, Cahill MC, Richart RM. A statistical model of the natural history of cervical neoplastic disease: the duration of carcinoma in situ. Gynecol Oncol. 1978;6:196-205.
68. Richart RM, Barron BA. A follow-up study of patients with cervical dysplasia. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1969;105:386-393.
69. Narod SA, Thompson DW, Jain M, et al. Dysplasia and the natural history of cervical cancer: early results of the Toronto Cohort Study. Eur J Cancer. 1991;27:1411-1416.
70. Silcocks PBS, Moss SM. Rapidly progressive cervical cancer: is it a real problem? Br J Obstet Gynecol. 1988;95:1111-1116.
71. Shy K, Chu J, Mandelson M, Greer B, Figge D. Papanicolaou smear screening interval and risk of cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 1989;74:838-843.
72. Ostor AG. Natural history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a critical review. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1993;12:186-192.
73. Chang AR. Carcinoma in situ of the cervix and its malignant potential: a lesson from New Zealand. Cytopathology. 1990;1:321-328.
74. Robertson JH, Woodend BE, Crozier EH, Hutchinson J. Risk of cervical cancer associated with mild dyskaryosis. BMJ. 1988;297:18-21.
75. Cotton RE, Elwood JM, Jones GM. Results of delayed follow up of abnormal cervical smears. BMJ. 1986;292:799-880.
76. Nasiell K, Roger V, Nasiell M. Behaviour of mild cervical dysplasia during long-term follow-up. Obstet Gynecol. 1986;67:665-669.
77. Santa UV. Diagnosis and prognosis of cervical dysplasia. Obstet Gynecol. 1981;38:811-816.
78. Sedlis A, Cohen A, Sall S. The fate of cervical dysplasia. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1970;107:1065-1070.
79. Nasiell K, Nasiell M, Vaclavinkova V. Behaviour of moderate cervical dysplasia during long-term follow-up. Obstet Gynecol. 1983;61:609-614.
80. Fox CH. Biologic behavior of dysplasia and carcinoma in situ. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1967;99:960-974.
81. Noda K. Follow-up study of cervical dysplasia. Nippon Ganka Gakkai Zasshi. 1966;18:875-877.
82. Fletcher A, Metaxas N, Grubb C, Chamberlain J. Four and a half year followup of women with dyskaryotic cervical smears. BMJ. 1990;301:641-644.
83. Old JW, Jones DG. Squamous carcinoma in situ of the uterine cervix, III: a long-term follow-up of 23 unsuspected cases of 6- to 10-year duration without interim treatment. Cancer. 1965;18:1622-1630.
84. Kolstad P, Lem V. Long-term followup of 1121 cases of carcinoma in situ. Obstet Gynecol. 1987;48:125-129.
85. Gad C. The management and natural history of severe dysplasia and carcinoma in situ of the uterine cervix. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1976;83:554-559.
86. McIndoe WA, McLean MR. Jones RW, Mullins P. The invasive potential of carcinoma in situ of the cervix. Obstet Gynecol. 1984;64:451-458.
87. Smith KHS, Bostrom SG, Galey WT. Correlation between cervical cytology and biopsy in an Air Force colposcopy clinic. J Reprod Med. 1985;30:681-684.
88. Contreras-Melendez L, Herbert A, Millward-Sadler GH, et al. Assessment of the accuracy of cytology in women referred for colposcopy and biopsy: the results of a 1 year audit. Cytopathology. 1992;3:267-274.
89. Jones MH, Jenkins D, Singer A. Regular audit of colposcopic biopsies from women with a mildly dyskaryotic or borderline cervical smear results in fewer cases of CINIII. Cytopathology. 1996;7:17-24.
90. Hall S, Wu TC, Soudi N, Sherman ME. Low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions: cytologic predictors of biopsy confirmation. Diagn Cytopathol. 1994;10:3-9.
91. Joseph MG, Cragg F, Wright VC, et al. Cyto-histological correlates in a colposcopic clinic: a 1-year prospective study. Diagn Cytopathol. 1991;7:477-481.
92. Selvaggi SM. Cytologic detection of condylomas and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of the uterine cervix with histologic correlation. Cancer. 1986;58:2076-2081.
93. Soost H-J, Lange H-J, Lehmacher W, Ruffing-Kullmann B. The validation of cervical cytology: sensitivity, specificity and predictive values. Acta Cytol. 1991;35:8-14.
94. Rasbridge SA, Nayagam M. Discordance between cytologic and histologic reports in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: results of a one-year audit. Acta Cytol. 1995;39:648-653.
95. Widra EA, Dookhan D, Jordan A, et al. Evaluation of the atypical cytologic smear: validity of the 1991 Bethesda System. J Reprod Med. 1994;39:682-684.
96. Lonky NM, Navarre GL, Saunders S, Sadeghi M, Wolde-Tsadik G. Low-grade Papanicolaou smears and the Bethesda System: a prospective cytohistopathologic analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 1995;85:716-620.
97. Kierkegaard O, Byrjalsen C, Frandsen KH, Hansen KC, Frydenberg M. Diagnostic accuracy of cytology and colposcopy in cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1994;73:648-651.
98. Spitzer M, Krumholz BA, Chernys AE, Seltzer V, Lightman AR. Comparative utility of repeat Papanicolaou smears, cervicography, and colposcopy in the evaluation of atypical Papanicolaou smears. Obstet Gynecol. 1987;69:731-735.
99. Young NA, Naryshkin S, Atkinson BF, et al. Interobserver variability of cervical smears with squamous-cell abnormalities: a Philadelphia study. Diagn Cytopathol. 1994;11:352-357.
100. Matsuura Y, Kawagoe T, Toki N, Sugihara K, Kashimura M. Early cervical neoplasia confirmed conization: diagnostic accuracy of cytology, colposcopy and punch biopsy. Acta Cytol. 1996;40:241-246.
101. Kohan S, Noumoff J, Beckman EM, et al. Colposcopic screening of women with atypical Papanicolaou smears. J Reprod Med. 1985;30:383-387.
102. Sidawy MK, Siriaunkgul S, Frost AR. Retrospective analysis of non-correlating cervical smears and colposcopically directed biopsies. Diagn Cytopathol. 1994;11:343-347.
103. Lyall H, Duncan ID. Inaccuracy of cytologic diagnosis in high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (CIN3). Acta Cytol. 1995;39:50-54.
104. Raab SS, Isacson C, Layfield LJ, et al. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance: cytologic criteria to separate clinically significant from benign lesions. Am J Clin Pathol. 1995;104:574-582.
105. College of American Pathologists Staff. Workload Recording Method and Personnel Management Manual. Northfield, Ill: College of American Pathologists Press; 1992:89-91.
106. Ouwerkerk-Noordam E, Boon M, Beck S. Computer-assisted primary screening of cervical smears using the PAPNET method: comparison with conventional screening and evaluation of the role of the cytologist. Cytopathology. 1994;5:211-218.
107. Ashfaz R, Solares B, Liu G, Saboorian MH. Directed rescreening of negative cervical smears by the PAPNET system in high-risk population. Acta Cytol. 1996;40:1022-1023.
108. Eddy DM. Screening for cervical cancer. Ann Intern Med. 1990;113:214-226.
109. Cannistra SA, Niloff JM. Cancer of the uterine cervix. N Engl J Med. 1996;334:1030-1038.
110. Wied GL, Bartels PH, Bibbo M, Keebler CM. Frequency and reliability of diagnostic cytology of the female genital tract. Acta Cytol. 1981;25:543-549.
111. van der Graaf Y, Zielhuis GA, Peer PGM, Vooijs PG. The effectiveness of cervical screening: a population-based case-control study. J Clin Epidemiol. 1988;41:21-26.
112. van der Graaf Y, Vooijs CP, Zielhuis GA. Cervical screening revisited. Acta Cytol. 1990;34:366-372.
113. IARC Working Group on Evaluation of Cervical Cancer Screening Programs. Screening for squamous cervical cancer: duration of low risk after negative results of cervical cytology and its implication for screening policies. BMJ. 1986;293:659-664.
114. Kirby AJ, Spiegelhalter DJ, Day NE, et al. Conservative treatment of mild /moderate cervical dyskaryosis: long term outcome. Lancet. 1992;339:828-831.
115. Soutter WP, Brough AK, Monaghan JM. Should patients with mild atypia in a cervical smear be referred for colposcopy? Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1986;93:70-74.