In vitro conventional cytology: Historical strengths and current limitations

Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinics of North America

Volumn 29, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 673-683

  Spitzer, Mark ^a  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SCREENING; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; MORBIDITY; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; UNITED STATES; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 0036925482     PISSN: 08898545     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0889-8545(02)00025-6     Document Type: Review

References (71)

1. Papanicolaou GN, Traut HF. The diagnostic value of vaginal smears in carcinoma of the uterus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1941;42:193-206.
2. Ayre JE. Selective cytology smear for diagnosis of cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1947;53:609-17.
3. Sherris JD, Wells ES, Tsu VD, Bishop A. Cervical cancer in developing countries: A situation analysis. World Bank Women's Health and Nutrition Work Program, 1993.
4. World Health Organization. Control of cancer of the cervix uteri. Bull World Health Organ 1986;64:607-18.
5. Laara E, Day NE, Hakama M. Trends in mortality from cervical cancer in the Nordic countries: Association with organised screening programmes. Lancet 1987;i:1247-59.
6. Johannesson G, Geirsson G, Day N. The effect of mass screening in Iceland, 1965-1974, on the incidence and mortality of cervical carcinoma. Int J Cancer 1978;21:418-25.
7. Hakama M. Effect of population screening for carcinoma of the uterine cervix in Finland. Maturitas 1985;7:3-10.
8. Hakama M, Magnus K, Petterson F, et al. Effect of organized screening on the risk of cervical cancer in the Nordic countries. In: Miller AB, Chamberlain J, Day NE, et al, editors. Cancer Screening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991.
9. Magnus K, Langmark F, Andersen A. Mass screening for cervical cancer in Ostfold County of Norway: 1959-77. Int J Cancer 1987;39:311-6.
10. Gardner JW, Lyon JL. Efficacy of cervical cytologic screening in the control of cervical cancer. Prev Med 1997;6:487-99.
11. American Cancer Society. Statistics for Selected Cancers. Available: www.cancer.org/statistics/cff2000/selectedcancers.html#cervix. Accessed 13 March 2000.
12. Ries LAG, Kosary CL, Hankey BF, Miller BA, Clegg L, Edwards BK, editors. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1973-1996. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 1999.
13. Cannistra SA, Niloff JM. Cancer of the uterine cervix. NEJM 1996;334:1030-8.
14. Shingleton HM, Patrick RL, Johnston WW, Smith RA. The current status of the Papanicolaou smear. CA Cancer J Clin 1995;45:305-20.
15. US Preventive Services Task Force, Guide to Clinical Preventive Services. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1996.
16. Schwartz PE, Hadjimichael O, Lowell DM, Merino MJ, Janerich D. Rapidly progressive cervical cancer: The Connecticut experience. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175:1105-9.
17. Kenter GG, Schoonderwald EM, Koelma IA, Arentz N, Hermans J, Fleuren GJ. The cytological screening history of 469 patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix uteri: Does interval carcinoma exist? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1996;75:400-3.
18. Kreuger FA, Beerman H. The screening history of women with cervical cancer in the Rotterdam area. Eur J Epidemiol 2000;16:641-5.
19. Stuart GC, McGregor SE, Duggan MA, Nation JG. Review of the screening history of Alberta women with invasive cervical cancer. CMAJ 1997;157:513-9.
20. Shingleton HM, Patrick RL, Johnston WW, Smith RA. The current status of the Papanicolaou smear. CA Cancer J Clin 1995;45:305-20.
21. Anderson LM, May DS. Has the use of cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening increased in the United States? Am J Public Health 1995;85:840-2.
22. Holmquist ND. Revisiting the effect of the Pap test on cervical cancer. Am J Public Health 2000;90:620-3.
23. Black-white differences in cervical cancer mortality - United States 1980-1987. MMWR 1990;39:245-8.
24. Miller DK, Homan SM. Determining transition probabilities: Confusion and suggestions. Med Decis Making 1994;14:52-8.
25. Carey P, Gjerdingen DK. Follow-up of abnormal Papanicolaou smears among women of different races. J Fam Pract 1993;37:583-7.
26. Kaplan C, Bastani R, Marcus A, Breslow L, Nasseri K, Chen L. Low-income women with cervical abnormalities: Individual and system factors affecting follow-up. J Womens Health 1995;4:179-88.
27. Laedtke II TW, Dignan M. Compliance with therapy for cervical dysplasia among women of low socioeconomic status. South Med J 1992;85:5-8.
28. Marcus AC, Crane LA, Kaplan CP, Reading AE, Savage E, Gunning J, et al. Improving adherence to screening follow-up among women with abnormal Pap smears: Results from a large clinic-based trial of three intervention strategies. Med Care 1992;30:216-30.
29. Lavin C, Goodman E, Perlman S, Kelly L, Emans S. Follow-up of abnormal Papanicolaou smears in a hospital-based adolescent clinic. J Ped Adol Gynecol 1997;10:141-5.
30. Sanders G, Craddock C, Wagstaff I. Factors influencing default at a hospital colposcopy clinic. Qual Health Care 1992;1:236-40.
31. Lerman D, Hanjani P, Caputo C, Miller S, Delmoor E, Nolte S, et al. Telephone counseling improves adherence to colposcopy among lower-income minority women. J Clin Oncol 1992;10:330-3.
32. Hunt L, de Voogd K, Akana L, Browner C. Abnormal Pap screening among Mexican-American women: Impediments to receiving and reporting follow-up care. Oncol Nuts Forum 1998;25:1743-9.
33. Paskett ED, Phillips K, Miller M. Improving compliance among women with abnormal Papanicolaou smears. Obstet Gynecol 1995;86:353-9.
34. Schofield MJ, Sanson-Fisher R, Halpin S, Redman S. Notification and follow-up of Pap test results: Current practice and women's preferences. Prev Med 1994;23:276-83.
35. Navratil E, Burghardt E, Bajardi F, Nash W. Simultaneous colposcopy and cytology used in the screening for carcinoma-in-situ of the cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1958;75:1292-7.
36. Limburg H. Comparison between cytology and colposcopy in the diagnosis of early cervical carcinoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1958;75:1297-301.
37. Kern G. Colposcopic findings in carcinoma-in-situ. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1961;82:1409-14.
38. Campion MJ, McCance DJ, Cuzick J, Singer A. Progressive potential of mild cervical atypia: Prospective cytological, colposcopic, and virological study. Lancet 1986;ii:237-40.
39. Schneider A, Sawada E, Gissman L, Shah K. Human papillomaviruses in women with a history of abnormal Papanicolaou smears and their male partners. Obstet Gynecol 1987;69:554-62.
40. Spitzer M. Cervical cancer screening adjuncts. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998;179:544-56.
41. Stafl A. Cervicography: A new method for cervical cancer detection. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1981;139:815-25.
42. Tawa K, Forsythe A, Cove K, Saltz A, Peters HW, Watring WG. A comparison of the Papanicolaou smear and the cervigram: Sensitivity, specificity, and cost analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1988;71:229-35.
43. Richart RM, Vaillant HW. Influence of cell collection techniques upon cytological diagnosis. Cancer (Phila) 1965;18:1474-8.
44. Coppelson LW, Brown B. Estimation of screening rate from the observed detection rates in repeated cervical cytology. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1974;119:953-8.
45. Koss LG. Dysplasia - A real concept or a misnomer? Obstet Gynecol 1978;51:374.
46. Sedlis A, Walters AT, Balin H, et al. Evaluation of two simultaneously obtained cervical smears. A comparison study. Acta Cytol 1974;18:291-6.
47. Berkowitz RS, Ehrmann RL, Lavizzo-Maurey R, et al. Invasive cervical carcinoma in young women. Gynecol Oncol 1979;8:311-6.
48. American Cancer Society. Guidelines for the Cancer-Related Checkup: An Update. New York, NY: The Society; 1993.
49. McCrory DC, Matchar BB, Bastain L, et al. Evaluation of cervical cytology. Evidence Report Technology Assessment No. 5 (Prepared by Duke University under contract No. 290-97-0014.) AHCPR Publication No. 99-E010, Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Policy and Research. February 1999.
50. Baldauf JJ, Dreyfus M, Lehmann M, Ritter J, Philippe E. Cervical cancer screening with cervicography and cytology. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1995;58:33-9.
51. Davison JM, Marty JJ. Detecting premalignant cervical lesions. Contribution of screening colposcopy to cytology. J Reprod Med 1994;39:388-92.
52. Hockstad RL. A comparison of simultaneous cervical cytology, HPV testing, and colposcopy. Fam Pract Res J 1992;12:53-60.
53. Fahey MT, Irwig L, Macaskill P. Meta-analysis of Pap test accuracy. Am J Epidemiol 1995;141:680-9.
54. Hutchinson ML, Isenstein LM, Goodman A, et al. Homogeneous sampling accounts for the increased diagnostic accuracy using the ThinPrep processor. Am J Clin Path 1994;101:215-9.
55. Lindner J, Zahniser D. ThinPrep Papanicolaou testing to reduce false-negative cervical cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1998;122:139-44.
56. Falcone T, Ferenczy A. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and condyloma: An analysis of diagnostic accuracy of posttreatment followup methods. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1986;154:260-4.
57. Eisenberger D, Hernandez E, Tener T, et al. Order of endocervical and ectocervical cytologic sampling and the quality of the Papanicolaou smear. Obstet Gynecol 1997;90:755-8.
58. Bogdanich W. False negative. The Wall Street Journal, 2 February 1987. p. 1.
59. Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA 88) (Public Law 100-578). Fed Reg 1990;55:9538-9574. Available: http://frwebgate4.access.gPo.gov/ogi-bin. Available: www.hcfa.gov/medicaid/clia/cliahome.htm.
60. Bosch MMC, Petronella EM, Rietveld-Scheffers CT, Boon ME. Characteristics of false negative smears tested in the normal screening situation. Acta Cytol 1992;36:711-6.
61. Patten SF, Lee JSJ. Comparative detection rates of true false negative gynecologic cytology cases by the Neopath AutoPap 300 QC System and a 10% or 20% random re-screen of so-called negative cases [abstract]. Analyt Quant Cytol Histol 1994;16:63.
62. Mitchell H, Medley G. Differences between Papanicolaou smears with correct and incorrect diagnosis. Cytopathology 1996;6:368-75.
63. Hatem F, Wilbur D. High-grade cervical lesions following negative Papanicolaou smears: False negative cervical cytology or rapid progression. Diagn Cytopathol 1995;12:135-41.
64. Koss LG. Cervical (Pap) smear: New directions. Cancer 1993;71:1406-12.
65. DeMay RM. Cytopathology of false negatives preceding cervical carcinoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175:1110-3.
66. Austin RM. Results of blinded rescreening of Papanicolaou smears versus biased retrospective review. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1997;121:311-4.
67. DeMay RM. Common problems in Papanicolaou smear interpretation. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1997;121:229-38.
68. Eddy DM. Screening for cervical cancer. Ann Intern Med 1990;113:214-26.
69. Fahs MC, Mandelblatt J, Schechter C, Muller C. Cost effectiveness of cervical cancer screening for the elderly. Ann Intern Med 1992;117:520-7.
70. US Congress Office of Technology Assessment. Allocating Costs and Benefits in Disease Prevention Programs: An Application to Cervical Cancer Screening. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office; 1981.
71. Koopmanschap MA, van Oortmarssen GJ, van Agt HM, van Ballegooijen M, Habbema JD, Lubbe KT. Cervical cancer screening: Attendance and cost-effectiveness. Int J Cancer 1990;45:410-5.