The promise and risk of a new technology: The Lehigh Valley Hospital's experience with liquid-based cervical cytology

Cancer

Volumn 84, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 202-207

  Dupree, William B ^a   Suprun, Harry Z ^a   Beckwith, David G ^a   Shane, John J ^a   Lucente, Vincent ^b  

^a Health Network Laboratories   (United States)

^b LEHIGH VALLEY HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER CYTODIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; FEMALE; GYNECOLOGIC CANCER; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SCREENING TEST; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MANAGED CARE PROGRAMS; PENNSYLVANIA; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 0032566411     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19980825)84:4<202::AID-CNCR4>3.0.CO;2-O     Document Type: Review

References (55)

1. Wilbur DC, Cibas ES, Merritt S, James LP, Berger BM, Bonfiglio TA. Thin Prep Processor: clinical trials demonstrate on increased detection rate of abnormal cervical cytology specimen. Am J Clin Pathol 1994;101:209-14.
2. Wingo PA, Tong T, Bolden S. Cancer statistics, 1995. CA Cancer J Clin 1995;45:8-30.
3. Richart RM, Meijer C, Greenberg MD, Schiffman MH, Cox JT. Using HPV tests to manage patients with abnormal Pap smears. Contemp Obstet Gynecol 1995;40:65-88.
4. Benedet JL, Anderson GH, Matisic IP. A comprehensive program for cervical cancer detection and management. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992;166:1254-9.
5. Sparen P, Gustafsson L, Friberg LG, Poten J, Bergstrom R, Adam HO. Improved control of invasive cervical cancer in Sweden over six decades, by earlier clinical detection and better treatment. J Clin Oncol 1995;13:715-25.
6. Walton RJ. Cervical cancer screening programs: II. Screening for carcinoma of the cervix. Can Med Assoc J 1976;114;1013-26.
7. Fidler HK, Boyes DA, Worth AJ. Cervical cancer detection in British Columbia. J Obstet Gynecol Br Commonw 1968;75:392-404.
8. Sheets EE. Clinical management of abnormal pap smears. In; Cibas E, Lee K, editors, recent advances in diagnostic cytology. Boston: Harvard Medical School, 1996:126-9.
9. Coppleson LW, Brown B. Estimation of screening error rate from the observed detection rates in repeated cervical cytology. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1974;119:953-8.
10. Dehner LP. Cervicovaginal cytology, false negative results and standards of practice. Am J Clin Pathol 1993;99:45-7.
11. Figge DC, Bennington JL, Schweid AI. Cervical cancer after initial negative and atypical vaginal cytology. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1970;108:422-8.
12. Frost JK. Diagnostic accuracy of "cervical smears." Obstet Gynecol Surv 1969;24:893-908.
13. Richart RM, Vaillant HW. Influence of cell collection techniques upon cytological diagnosis. Cancer 1965;18:1474-8.
14. Vooijs GP, Elias A, van der Graaf Y, Poelen-van de Berg M. The influence of sample takers on the cellular composition of cervical smears. Acta Cytol 1986;30:251-7.
15. Demay RM. To err is human - to sue, American. Diagn Cytoparhol 1996;15(3):iii-vi.
16. Chen F, Trapido EJ, Davis K. Differences in stage at presentation of breast and gynecologic cancers among whites, blacks and Hispanics. Cancer 1994;73:2838-42.
17. Carlson JW, Twiggs LB. Clinical applications of molecular biopsy screening for human papilloma virus. Obstet Gynecol 1992;35(1):13-6.
18. Ashfag R, Liang Y, Saborian MH. Evaluation of PAPNET® system for rescreening of negative cervical smears. Diagn Cytopathol 1995;13:31-6.
19. Birdsong GG. Automated rescreening of Papanicolaou smears: what are the implications? Diagn Cytopathol 1995;13:283-6.
20. Kurman RJ, Solomon D. The Bethesda system for reporting cervical/vaginal cytologic diagnoses. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1994:30-43.
21. Robb JA. The "ASCUS" swamp. Diagn Cytopathol 1994;11:319-20.
22. Lee KR, Manna EA, St. John T. Atypical endocervical glandular cells: accuracy of cytologic diagnosis. Diagn Cytopathol 1995;13:202-8.
23. Wilbur DC, Bonfiglio TA. Editorial comments: atypical squamous cells in cervical smears - resolving a controversy. Diagn Cytopathol 1993;9:423-9.
24. Sidawy MK, Tabbara SO. Reactive change and atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance in Papanicolaou smears: a cytohistologic correlation. Diagn Cytopathol 1993;9:423-9.
25. Genest D, Dean B, Galvane KE, Lee K, LaGuette J, Sheets E, et al. Subclassification of atypical Pap smears and the likelihood of squamous intra epithelial lesion (SIL) on subsequent biopsy [abstract]. Mod Pathol 1996;9:34A.
26. Frable WJ. Litigation cells: definition and observation on a cell type in cervical vaginal smears not addressed by the Bethesda System. Diagn Cytopathol 1994;11:213-5.
27. Voytek TM, Kannan V, Kline TS. Atypical parakeratosis. "A marker of dysplasia?" Diagn Cytopathol 1996;15:288-91.
28. Davey DD, Naryshkin S, Nielsen ML, Kline TS. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: interlaboratory comparison and quality assurance monitors. Diagn Cytopathol 1994;11(4):390-6.
29. Sherman ME, Schiffman MH, Lorincz AT, Manos MM, Scott DR, et al. Toward objective quality assurance in cytopathology. Am J Clin Pathol 1994;102:182-7.
30. Interlaboratory Comparison Program In Cervicovaginal Cytology. 1993 PAP supplemental questionnaire on laboratory practice: ASCUS. St. Louis, MO: College of American Pathologists, 1994.
31. Raffle AE, Alden B, MacKenzie EF. Detection rates for abnormal smears: what are we screening for? Lancet 1995;345:1469-73.
32. Herbst AL. The Bethesda system for cervical/vaginal cytologic diagnoses: a note of caution. Obstet Gynecol 1990;76:449-50.
33. Raab SS, Isacson C, Layfield LJ, Lenel JC, Flagel DB, Thomas PA. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance: cytologic criteria to separate clinically significant from benign lesions. Am J Clin Pathol 1995;104:574-82.
34. Selvaggi SM. Cytologic features of squamous cell carcinoma in situ involving endocervical glands in endocervical brush specimens. Acta Cytol 1994;38:687-92.
35. Wilbur DC, Mulford DM, Sickel JZ, Atkinson KM. The problem of endocervical atypia: new cytologic presentation of normal endocervical cells and squamous neoplasia. Acta Cytol 1994;38:808-12.
36. Babkowski RC, Wilbur DC, Rutkowski MA, Facik MS, Bonfiglio TA. The effects of endocervical canal topography, tubal metaplasia, and high canal sampling on the cytologic presentation of non-neoplastic endocervical cells. Am J Clin Pathol 1996;105:403-10.
37. Hutchinson ML, Isenstein LM, Goodman A, et al. Homogenous sampling accounts for increased diagnostic accuracy using the Thin Prep processor. Am J Clin Pathol 1994;101:215-9.
38. Joseph MG, Cragg F, Wright VC, Kontozoglou TE, Downing P, Marks FR. Cyto histological correlates in a colposcopic clinic: a 1-year perspective study. Diagn Cytopathol 1991;7(5):477-81.
39. 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.
40. Hutchinson ML, Agarual P, Denault T, Berger B, Cibas ES. A new look at cervical cytology: Thin Prep multicenter trial results. Acta Cytol 1992;36:499-504.
41. 4L Davey DD, Nielsen ML, Rosenstock W, Kline TS. Terminology and specimen adequacy in cervicovaginal cytology: the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program experience. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1992;116:903-7.
42. Noumoff JS. Atypia in cervical cytology as a risk factor for intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987;156:628-31.
43. Lindheim SR, Smith-Nguyen G. Aggressive evaluations for atypical squamous cells in Papanicolaou smears. J Reprod Med 1990;35:971-3.
44. Data on file, Cytyc Corporation
45. Rules and regulations. Federal Register 1992;57:7137-86.
46. Koss LG. Cervical (Pap) smear: new directions. Cancer 1993;71(Suppl):1406-12.
47. Sherman M, Solomon D, Kurman RJ, Stults M. Bethesda, MD: ALTS Study NCI Work in Progress.
48. Douglas KL. Thin Prep morphology reference manual. CYTYC Corp, 1994: 2-4.
49. Kurman RJ, Henson DE, Herbst A, Noller KL, Schiffman MH. Interim guidelines for management of abnormal cervical cytology. JAMA 1994;271:1866-9.
50. Goff BA, Atanasoff P, Brown E, Muntz HG, Bell DA, Rice LW. Endocervical glandular atypia in Papanicolaou smears. Obstet Gynecol 1992;79:101-4.
51. Pelehach L. Appraising the Pap smear. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1997;28:440-9.
52. Michel R. Losses from Pap smear testing may trigger higher test prices. Dark Rep 1996 April 8:1-15.
53. Chelmow D. Outcomes research applied to obstetrics - gynecology. Contemp Obstet Gynecol 1996;41:131-43.
54. Solomon D. Diagnostic cytology toward the 21st century. In: International Expert Conference, Proceedings of Task Force on ASCUS and AGUS Criteria, Position Paper, 1997.
55. Lee KR, Ashfaq R, Birdsong GC, et al. Comparison of conventional Papanicolaou smears and a fluid-based, thin-layer system for cervical cancer screening. Obstet Gynecol 1997;90(2):278-84.