Atypical squamous cells: Update on current concepts

Clinics in Laboratory Medicine

Volumn 23, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 605-632

  Nayar, Ritu ^a,b   Tabbara, Sana O ^c,d  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NORTHWESTERN MEMORIAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

^d GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER VACCINE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; WART VIRUS VACCINE;

CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; CYTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SQUAMOUS CELL; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; WART VIRUS;

EID: 0141731377     PISSN: 02722712     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0272-2712(03)00061-1     Document Type: Review

References (65)

1. Papanicolaou GN, Traut HF. Diagnosis of uterine cancer by the vaginal smear. New York: The Commonwealth Fund; 1943.
2. The National Cancer Institute Workshop. The 1988 Bethesda system for reporting cervical/vaginal cytological diagnoses. JAMA 1989;262(7):931.
3. Kurman R, Solomon D. The Bethesda System for cervico-vaginal cytology. New York: Springer Verlag; 1994.
4. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, et al. The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002;287:2114-9.
5. Frable WJ. ASCUS! ASCUS! Down the rabbit hole. Cancer Cytopathol 1999;87(6):319-21.
6. Stoler MH. Does every little cell count? Don't ASCUS [editorial]. Cancer 1999;87:45-7.
7. Sheils LA, Wilbur DC. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: stratification of the risk of association with, or progression to, squamous intraepithelial lesions based on morphologic subcategorization. Acta Cytol 1997;41:1065-72.
8. Stoler MH, Schiffman M. Interobserver variability of cervical cytologic and histologic interpretations: realistic estimates from the ASCUS-LSIL triage study. JAMA 2001;285:1500-5.
9. Pitman MB, Cibas ES, Powers CN, et al. Reducing or eliminating use of the category of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance decreases the diagnostic accuracy of the Papanicolaou smear. Cancer Cytopathol 2002;96:128-34.
10. Renshaw AA, Genest DR, Cibas ES. Should atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) be subcategorized?. Am J Clin Pathol 2001;116:692-5.
11. Kinney WK, Manos MM, Hurley LB, et al. Where's the high-grade cervical neoplasia? The importance of minimally abnormal Papanicolaou diagnoses. Obstet Gynecol 1998;91:973-6.
12. Solomon D, Schiffman M, Tarone RThe ALTS Group. Comparison of three management strategies for patients with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: baseline data from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:293-99.
13. Kline MJ, Davey DD. Atypical squamous cells qualified: a follow-up study. Diagn Cytopathol 1996;14:380-4.
14. Collins LC, Wang HH, Abu-Jawdek GM. Qualifiers of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance help in patient management. Mod Pathol 1996;6:677-81.
15. Genest DR, Dean B, Lee KR, et al. Qualifying the cytologic diagnosis of "atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance" affects the predictive value of squamous intraepithelial lesion on biopsy. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1998;122:338-41.
16. Gonzalez D, Hernandez E, Anderson L, et al. Clinical significance of a cervical cytologic diagnosis of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Favoring a reactive process or low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion. J Reprod Med 1996;41:719-23.
17. Malik SN, Wilkinson EJ, Drew PA, et al. Do qualifiers of ASCUS distinguish between low and high risk patients? Acta Cytol 1999;43:376-80.
18. Anton RC, Ramzy I, Schwartz MR, et al. Should the cytologic diagnosis of "atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance" be qualified? Cancer Cytopathol 2001;93(2):93-9.
19. Crum CP, Genest DR, Krane JF, et al. Subclassifying atypical squamous cells in thin prep cervical cytology correlates with detection of high-risk human papillomavirus DNA. Am J Clin Pathol 1999;112:384-90.
20. Barr Soofer S, Sidawy MK. Reactive cellular change: is there an increased risk for squamous intraepithelial lesion? Cancer Cytopathol 1997;81:144-7.
21. Malik SN, Wilkinson EJ, Drew PA, et al. Benign cellular changes in Papanicolaou smears: causes and significance. Acta Cytol 2001;45:5-8.
22. McKee MD, Schechter C, Burton W, et al. Predictors of follow up of atypical and ASCUS Papanicolaou test results in a high-risk population. J Fam Pract 2001;50(7):609.
23. Kurman RJ, Henson DE, Herbst AL, et al. Interim guidelines for management of abnormal cervical cytology: the 1992 National Cancer Institute Workshop. JAMA 1994;271:1866-9.
24. Ho GYF, Bierman R, Beardsley L, et al. Natural history of cervicovaginal papillomavirus infection in young woman. N Engl J Med 1998;338:423-8.
25. Sherman M, Solomon D, Schiffman M for the ALTS group. Qualification of ASCUS: a comparison of equivocal LSIL and equivocal HSIL cervical cytology in the ASCUS-LSIL triage study. Am J Clin Pathol 2001;116:386-94.
26. Schneider A, Meinhardt G, DeVilliers EM, et al. Sensitivity of the cytologic diagnosis of cervical condyloma in comparison with HPV-DNA hybridization studies. Diagn Cytopathol 1987;3:250.
27. Nayar R, De Frias VS. Upgrading ASCUS (suggestive of HPV) to LGSIL: is there enough justification? Acta Cytol 1999;43(5):917.
28. Quddus MR, Sung CJ, Steinhoff MM, et al. Atypical squamous metaplastic cells: reproducibility, outcome, and diagnostic features on Thinprep Pap test. Cancer Cytopathol 2001;93:16-22.
29. Sherman ME, Tabbara SO, Scott DR, et al. ASCUS, rule out HSIL: cytologic features, histologic correlates and human Papilloma virus detection. Mod Pathol 1999;12:335-42.
30. Patten SF. Diagnostic cytology of the uterine cervix, 2nd edition. Basel, Switzerland: S Karger; 1978.
31. Wilbur DC, Dressel DM. Metaplastic variants of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: diagnosis and patient management issues. Pathol Case Rev 1997;2:53-7.
32. Hatem F, Wilbur DC. High-grade squamous cervical lesions following negative Papanicolaou smears: false negative cervical cytology or rapid progression. Diagn Cytopathol 1995;12:135-41.
33. Scholland M, Sterrett GF, Knowles SAS, et al. The "inconclusive -possible high grade epithelial abnormality" category in Papanicolaou smear reporting. Cancer Cytopathol 1998;84:208-17.
34. Dressel DM, Wilbur DC. Atypical immature squamous metaplastic cells associated with high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) and carcinoma of the cervix. Acta Cytol 1992;36:630.
35. Frable WJ. Litigation cells: definition and observations on a cell type in cervicovaginal smears not addressed by the Bethesda System. Diagn Cytopathol 1994;11:213-5.
36. DeMay RM. The art and science of cytopathology. Chicago (IL): ASCP Press; 1994.
37. Flynn K, Rimm DL. Diagnosis of "ASCUS" in women over age 50 is less likely to be associated with dysplasia. Diagn Cytopathol 2000;24:132-6.
38. Keating JT, Wang HH. Significance of a diagnosis of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance for Papanicolaou smears in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women. Cancer Cytopathol 2001;93(2):100-5.
39. Rader AE, Rose PG, Rodriguez M, et al. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance in women over 55: comparison with the general population and implications for management. Acta Cytol 1999;43:357-62.
40. Volk EE, Jax JM, Kuntzman TJ. Cytologic findings in cervical smears in patients using intramuscular medroxyprogesterone acetate (depo-provera) for contraception. Diagn Cytopathol 2000;23:161-4.
41. Menezes GA, Wakely PE, Stripe DM. Increased incidence of atypical Papanicolaou tests from Thinpreps of postmenopausal women receiving hormone replacement therapy. Cancer Cytopathol 2001;93(6):357-63.
42. Jovanovic AS, McLachlin CM, Shen L, et al. Postmenopausal squamous atypia: a spectrum including pseudokoilocytosis. Mod Pathol 1995;8:408-12.
43. Stoler MH. HPV for cervical cancer screening: is the era of the molecular Pap smear upon us? J Histochem Cytochem 2001;49:1197-8.
44. Kim JJ, Wright TC, Goldie SJ. Cost-effectiveness of alternative triage strategies for atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. JAMA 2002;287(18):2382-90.
45. 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;111:140-9.
46. Swan DC, Tucker RA, Tortolero-Luna G, et al. Human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA number is dependant on grade of cervical disease and HPV type. J Clin Microbiol 1999;37:1030-4.
47. Cox JT, Lorincz AT, Schiffman MH, et al. Human papillomavirus testing by hybrid capture appears to be useful in triaging women with a cytologic diagnosis of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;172:946-54.
48. Sherman ME, Schiffman M, Cox JT. Effects of age on human papilloma viral load on colposcopy triage: data from the randomized atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance/low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion triage study (ALTS). J Natl Can Inst 2002;94(2):102-7.
49. Wright TC, Cox JT, Stewart L, et al. 2001 Consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA 2002;287:2120-9.
50. Manos MM, Kinney WK, Hurley LB, et al. Identifying women with cervical neoplasia using human papillomavirus DNA testing for equivocal Papanicolaou results. JAMA 1999;281:1605-10.
51. Bergeron C, Jeannel D, Poveda J, et al. Human papillomavirus testing in women with mild cytologic atypia. Obstet Gynecol 2000;95:821-7.
52. Jones HW. Impact of the Bethesda System. Cancer 1995;76(Suppl 10):1914-8.
53. Jones BA, Davey D. Quality management in gynecologic cytology using interlaboratory comparison. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000;124:672-81.
54. Bonfiglio TA. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. A continuing controversy. Cancer Cytopathol 2002;96:125-7.
55. McGrath CM. ASCUS in Papanicolaou smears: problems, controversies, and potential future directions. Am J Clin Pathol 2002;117(Suppl 1):S62-75.
56. Davey DD, Woodhouse S, Styer P, et al. Atypical epithelial cells and specimen adequacy: current laboratory practices of participants in the College of American Pathologists interlaboratory comparison program in cervicovaginal cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000;124(2):203-11.
57. Davey DD, Nielsen ML, Naryshkin S, et al. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Current laboratory practices of participants in the College of American Pathologists interlaboratory comparison program in cervicovaginal cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1996;120(5):440-4.
58. Davey DD, Naryshkin S, Nielsen ML, et al. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: interlaboratory comparison and quality assurance monitors. Diagn Cytopathol 1994;11:390-6.
59. Tabbara SO, Faser C, Frost AR, et al. Toward establishing a target value for the ASCUS:SIL ratio [abstract]. Acta Cytol 1995;39:989.
60. Raab SS. Subcategorization of Papanicolaou tests diagnosed as atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Am J Clin Pathol 2001;116(5):631-4.
61. Juskevicius R, Zou KH, Cibas ES. An analysis of factors that influence the ASCUS/SIL ratio of pathologists. Am J Clin Pathol 2001;116:331-5.
62. The ASCUS-LSIL triage study (ALTS) Group. Results of a randomized trial for the management of cytology interpretations of atypical cells of undetermined significance. J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188:1383-92.
63. Zuna RE, Moore W, Dunn ST. HPV DNA testing of the residual sample of liquid based Pap test: utility as a quality assurance monitor. Mod Pathol 2001;14:147-51.
64. Saslow D, Runowicz CD, Solomon D, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cervical cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 2002;52:342-62.
65. Koutsky LA, Ault KA, Wheeler CM, et al. A controlled trial of a human papillomavirus type 16 vaccine. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1645-51.