Present standards for cervical cancer screening

Current Opinion in Oncology

Volumn 14, Issue 5, 2002, Pages 505-511

  O'Meara, Anne T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER INVASION; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER SURVIVAL; FEMALE; HUMAN; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SCREENING TEST; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX DYSPLASIA; WART VIRUS;

CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; COLPOSCOPY; FEMALE; HIV INFECTIONS; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; PAPILLOMAVIRUS INFECTIONS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES; PROGNOSIS; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; RISK FACTORS; TRIAGE; TUMOR VIRUS INFECTIONS; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 0036736595     PISSN: 10408746     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00001622-200209000-00006     Document Type: Review

References (31)

1. Landis SH, Murray T, Bolden S, et al.: Cancer statistics 1998. Cancer J Clin 1998, 48:6-29.
2. Papanicolaou G, Treut H: The diagnostic value of vaginal smears in carcinoma of the uterus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1941, 42:193-206.
3. Sawaya GF, Brown AD, Washington AE, et al.: Current approaches to cervical-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 2001, 344:1603-1607.
4. Gay JD, Donaldson LD, Goellner TR: False negative results in cervical cytologic studies. Acta Cytol 1985, 29:1043-1046.
5. Bishop JW, Marshall CJ, Bentz JS: New technologies in gynecologic cytology. J Reprod Med 2000, 45:701-719.
6. Lee KR, Ashfaq R, Birdsong GG, et al.: Comparison of conventional Papanicolaou smears and a fluid-based, thin-layer system for cervical cancer screening. Obstet Gynecol 1997, 90:278-284.
7. Nanda K, McCrory DC, Myers ER, et al.: Accuracy of the Papanicolaou test in screening for end follow-up of cervical cytologic abnormalities: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2000, 132:810-819.
8. Bernstein SJ, Sanchez-Ramos L, Ndubisi B: Liquid-based cervical cytologic smear study and conventional Papanicolaou smears: a metaanalysis of prospective studies comparing cytologic diagnosis and sample adequacy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001, 185:308-317.
9. Hartmann KE, Nanda K, Hall S, et al.: Technologic advances for evaluation of cervical cytology: is newer better? Obstet Gynecol Surv 2001, 56:765-774.
10. Montz FJ, Farber FL, Bristow RE, et al.: Impact of increasing Papanicolaou test sensitivity and compliance: a modeled cost and outcomes analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2001, 97:781-788.
11. Bethesda System 2001. Available at: http://bethesda2001.cancer.gov.
12. American Society of Cytopathology: Cervical cytology practice guideline. Diagn Cytopathol 2001, 25:3-24.
13. Clinical laboratory improvement amendments of 1988: final rule. Fed Reg 1992, 57:493.
14. Wilbur DC, Bonfiglio TA, Rutkowski MA, et al.: Sensitivity of the AutoPap 300 QC system for cervical cytologic abnormalities: biopsy data confirmation. Acta Cytol 1996, 40:127-132.
15. Kok MR, Boon ME, Schreiner-Kok PG, et al.: Cytological recognition of invasive squamous cancer of the uterine cervix: comparison of conventional light microscopic screening and neural network-based screening. Hum Pathol 2000, 31:23-28.
16. Wilbur DC, Prey MU, Miller WM, et al.: The AutoPap system for primary screening in cervical cytology: comparing the results of a prospective, intended-use study with routine manual practice. Acta Cytol 1998, 42:214-220.
17. Stoler MH, Schiffman M: Interobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologic and histologic interpretations: realistic estimates from the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study. JAMA 2001, 285:1500-1505.
18. van den Akker-van Marle ME, van Ballegooijen M, van Oortmerssen GJ, et al.: Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening: comparison of screening policies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002, 94:193-204.
19. Ellerbrock TV, Chiasson MA, Bush TJ, et al.: Incidence of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions in HIV-infected women. JAMA 2000, 283:1031-1037.
20. USPHS/IDSA guidelines for the prevention of opportunistic infections in persons infected with the human immunodeficiency virus. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1999, 48:61-66.
21. Spitzer M: Lower genital tract intraepithelial neoplasia in HIV-infected women: guidelines for evaluation and management. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1999, 54:131-137.
22. Goldie SJ, Freedberg KA, Weinstein MC, et al.: Cost effectiveness of human papillomavirus testing to augment cervical cancer screening in women infected with the human immunodeficiency virus. Am J Med 2001, 111:140-149.
23. Manos M, Kinney WK, Sherman ME: Identifying women with cervical neoplasia: using human papillomavirus DNA testing for equivocal Papanicolaou results. JAMA 1999, 281:1605-1610.
24. Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance/Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions Triage Study (ALTS) Group: Human papillomavirus testing for triage of women with cytologic evidence of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions: baseline data from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000, 92:397-402.
25. Solomon D, Schiffman M, Tarone R, for the ALTS group: Comparison of three management strategies for patients with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: baseline results from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001, 93:293-299.
26. Cochand-Priollet B, Le Gales C, de Cremoux P, et al.: Cost-effectiveness of monolayers and human papillomavirus testing compared to that of conventional Papanicolaou smears for cervical cancer screening: protocol of the study of the French Society of Clinical Cytology. Diagn Cytopathol 2001, 24:412-420.
27. Rebello G, Hallam N, Smart G, et al.: Human papillomavirus testing and the management of women with mildly abnormal cervical smears: an observational study. BMJ 2001, 322:893-894.
28. Wright TC, Cox JT, Massad LS, et al.: 2001 Consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA 2002, 287:2120-2129.
29. Belinson J, Qiao YL, Pretorius R, et al.: Shanxi province cervical cancer screening study: a cross-sectional comparative trial of multiple techniques to detect cervical neoplasia. Gynecol Oncol 2001, 83:439-444.
30. Goldie SJ, Kuhn L, Denny L, et al.: Policy analysis of cervical cancer screening strategies in low-resource settings: clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness. JAMA 2001, 285:3107-3115.
31. Kuhn L, Denny L, Pollack A, et al.: Human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervical cancer screening in low-resource settings. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000, 92:818-825.