FocalPoint Slide Classification Algorithms Show Robust Performance in Classification of High-Grade Lesions on SurePath Liquid-Based Cervical Cytology Slides

Diagnostic Cytopathology

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 107-110

  Parker, Elizabeth M ^a   Foti, Joseph A ^a   Wilbur, David C ^b  

^a ViaHealth   (United States)

^b MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Automation; AutoPap; Cervical cytology; FocalPoint

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; AUTOANALYZER; CANCER GRADING; CONTROLLED STUDY; CYTODIAGNOSIS; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; QUALITY CONTROL; SCORING SYSTEM; SCREENING; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ALGORITHMS; AUTOMATION; CYTODIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 0742287886     PISSN: 87551039     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/dc.10358     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Wilbur DC, Prey MU, Miller WM, Pawlick GF, Colgan TJ. 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.
2. PREPStain™, product insert. TriPath Imaging, Inc., 2002.
3. Huang TW, Lin T S-M, Lee J S-J. Sensitivity studies of AutoPap® system location-guided screening of cervical-vaginal cytologic smears. Acta Cytol 1999;43:363-368.
4. Chang AR, Lin WF, Chang A, Chong KS. Can technology expedite the cervical cancer screening process? A Hong Kong experience utilizing the AutoPap primary screening system with location guided screening capability. Am J Clin Pathol 2002;117:437-443.
5. FocalPoint™, product insert, export only version. TriPath Imaging, Inc., 2002.
6. Wilbur DC, Parker EM, Foti JA. Location guided screening of liquid-based cervical cytology specimens: a potential improvement in accuracy and productivity is demonstrated in a preclinical feasibility trial. Am J Clin Pathol 2002;118:399-407.
7. Patten SF, Lee JSJ, Wilbur DC, et al. The AutoPap 300 QC system multicenter clinical trials for use in quality control rescreening of cervical smears. I. Prospective intended use study. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 1997;81:343-347.
8. Vassilakos P, Carrel S, Petignat P, Boulvain M, Campana A. Use of automated primary screening on liquid-based, thin-layer preparations. Acta Cytol 2002;46:291-295.
9. Tench WD. Validation of AutoPap primary screening system sensitivity and high-risk performance. Acta Cytol 2002;46:296-302.
10. Stevens MW, Milne AJ, James KA, Brancheau D, Ellison D, Kuan L. Effectiveness of automated cervical cytology rescreening using the AutoPap 300 QC system. Diagn Cytopathol 1997;16:505-512.
11. Marshall CJ, Rowe L, Bentz JS. Improved quality-control detection of false-negative Pap smears using the AutoPap 300 QC system. Diagn Cytopathol 1999;20:170-174.
12. Nieminen P, Hakama M, Viikki M, Tarkkanen J, Anttila A. Prospective and randomised public-health trial on neural network-assisted screening for cervical cancer in Finland: results of the first year. Int J Cancer 2003;103:422-426.