Performance of liquid-based, thin-layer cervical cytology: Correlation with reference diagnoses and human papillomavirus testing

Modern Pathology

Volumn 11, Issue 9, 1998, Pages 837-843

  Sherman, Mark E ^a   Mendoza, Mayo ^b   Lee, Kenneth R ^c   Ashfaq, Raheela ^d   Birdsong, George G ^e   Corkill, Mary E ^f,g   McIntosh, Karen M ^h   Inhorn, Stanley L ⁱ   Zahniser, David J ^j   Baber, Gwen ^k   Barber, Cynthia ^k   Stoler, Mark H ^k,l  

^a DEPARTMENT OF PATHOLOGY   (United States)

^b GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^d PARKLAND HEALTH AND HOSPITAL SYSTEM   (United States)

^e GRADY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^f West Suburban Pathologists   (United States)

^g Planned Parenthood Rocky M   (United States)

^h KAISER PERMANENTE   (United States)

ⁱ WISCONSIN STATE LABORATORY OF HYGIENE   (United States)

^j Cytyc Corporation   (United States)

^k UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

^l UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

Cervical smears; Papillomavirus; Screening; Sensitivity; Specificity; ThinPrep

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DNA DETERMINATION; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HUMAN TISSUE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PAPILLOMA VIRUS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; VIRUS DETECTION;

CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; CYTOLOGICAL TECHNIQUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; PAPILLOMAVIRIDAE; PAPILLOMAVIRUS INFECTIONS; REFERENCE STANDARDS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TUMOR VIRUS INFECTIONS; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 0031661785     PISSN: 08933952     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Koss LG. The Papanicolaou test for cervical cancer detection: a triumph and a tragedy. JAMA 1989;261:737-43.
2. Aponte-Cipriani SL, Teplitz C, Rorat E, Savino A, Jacobs AJ. Cervical smears prepared by an automated device versus the conventional method: a comparative analysis. Acta Cytol 1995;39:623-30.
3. Bur M, Knowles K, Pekow P, Corral O, Donovan J, Donovan O. Comparison of ThinPrep preparations with conventional cervicovaginal smears: practical considerations. Acta Cytol 1995;39:631-42.
4. Ferenczy A, Robitaille J, Franco E, Arseneau J Richard RM, Wright TC. Conventional cervical cytologic smears vs. ThinPrep smears: a paired comparison study on cervical cytology. Acta Cytol 1996;40:1136-42.
5. Hutchinson ML, Cassin CM, Ball HG III. The efficacy of an automated preparation device for cervical cytology. Am J Clin Pathol 1991;96:300-5.
6. Roberts JM, Gurley AM, Thurloe JK, Bowditch R, Laverty CR. Evaluation of the ThinPrep test as an adjunct to the conventional Pap smear. Med J Aust 1997;167:460-7.
7. Tezuka F, Oikawa H, Shuki H, Higashiiwai H. Diagnostic efficacy and validity of the ThinPrep method in cervical cytology. Acta Cytol 1996;40:513-8.
8. Wilbur DC, Cibas ES, Merritt S, James LP, Berger BM, Bonfiglio TA. ThinPrep processor: clinical trials demonstrate an increased detection rate of abnormal cervical cytologic specimens. Am J Clin Pathol 1994;101:209-14.
9. Ferenczy A, Franco E, Arseneau J, Wright TC, Richart RM. Diagnostic performance of Hybrid Capture human papillomavirus deoxyribonucleic acid assay combined with liquid-based cytologic study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175:651-6.
10. Sherman ME, Schiffman MH, Lorincz AT, Herrero R, Hutchinson M, Bratti C, et al. Cervical specimens collected in liquid buffer are suitable for both cytologic screening and ancillary HPV testing. Cancer 1997;1:89-97.
11. Bosch FX, Manos MM, Munoz N, Sherman M, Jansen AM, Peto J, et al. Prevalence of human papillomavirus in cervical cancer: a worldwide perspective. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87: 796-802.
12. Schiffman MH, Bauer HM, Hoover RN, Glass AG, Cadell DM, Rush BB, et al. Epidemiologic evidence showing that human papillomavirus causes most cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993;85:958-64.
13. Lee KR, Ashfaq R, Birdsong GG, Corkill ME, McIntosh KM, Inborn SL. Comparison of conventional Papanicolaou smears and a fluid-based, thin-layer system for cervical cancer screening. Obstet Gynecol 1997;90:278-84.
14. The revised Bethesda system for reporting cervical/vaginal cytologic diagnoses: report of the 1991 Bethesda Workshop. Acta Cytol 1992;36:273-6.
15. Schiffman MH, Kiviat NB, Burk RD, Shah KV, Daniel RW, Lewis R, et al. Accuracy and reliability of human papillomavirus DNA testing by Hybrid Capture. J Clin Microbiol 1995; 33:545-50.
16. Sherman ME, Schiffman MH, Lorincz AT, Manos MM, Scott DR, Kurman RJ, et al. Toward objective quality assurance in cervical cytopathology: correlation of cytopathologic diagnoses with detection of high-risk human papillomavirus types. Am J Clin Pathol 1994;101:182-7.
17. McGoogan E, Reith A. Would monolayers provide more representative samples and improved preparations for cervical screening? Overview and evaluation of systems available. Acta Cytol 1996;49:107-19.