Clinical impact (cost-effectiveness) of qualifying atypical squamous cells of undeterminate significance (ASCUS) in cases favoring a reactive or dysplastic process

Diagnostic Cytopathology

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 4-7

  Carozzi, F M ^a   Cariaggi, M P ^a   Bonardi, L ^a   Bulgaresi, P ^a   Cecchini, S ^a   Ciatto, S ^a   Cipparrone, I ^a   Galanti, L ^a   Maddau, C ^a   Matucci, M ^a   Rubeca, T ^a   Troni, G M ^a   Turco, P ^a   Zappa, M ^a   Confortini, M ^a  

^a CANCER RESEARCH AND PREVENTION INSTITUTE ISPO   (Italy)

Author keywords

ASCUS; CIN>; PPV

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATYPICAL SQUAMOUS CELLS OF UNDETERMINATE SIGNIFICANCE; CANCER CYTODIAGNOSIS; CANCER GRADING; COLPOSCOPY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NOMENCLATURE; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SQUAMOUS CELL; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; UTERINE CERVIX DYSPLASIA;

CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; CERVIX UTERI; COLPOSCOPY; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; UTERINE CERVICAL DYSPLASIA; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 10744231996     PISSN: 87551039     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/dc.10317     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. National Cancer Institute Workshop. The 1988 Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytological diagnoses. JAMA 1989;262: 931-934.
2. Cecchini S, Iossa A, Bonardi R, Ciatto S, Cariaggi P. Comparing two modalities of management of women with cytologic evidence of squamous or glandular atypia: early repeat cytology or colposcopy. Tumori 1997;81:732-734.
3. Stoler MH, Schiffman M. Intraobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologic and histologic interpretations. JAMA 2001;285:1500-1505.
4. Woodhouse SL, Stastny JF, Styler PE, et al. Interobserver variability in subclassification of squamous intraepithelial lesion: results of the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1999;123: 1079-1084.
5. Davey DD, Naryshkim S, Robb JA, Cohen T, Kline T. Atypical squamous cells of undeterminate significance: interlaboratory comparison and quality assurance monitors. Diagn Cytopathol 1994;11:390-396.
6. Selvaggi MS. Implications of low diagnostic reproducibility of cervical cytologic and histologic diagnoses. JAMA 2001;285:1506-1508.
7. Coleman D, Day N, Douglas G, Farmery E, Lynge E, Philip J, Segnan N. European Guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening. Eur J Cancer 1993;29:1-38.
8. Cecchini S, Iossa A, Ciatto S, Bonardi R, Confortini M, Cipparrone G, Taddei G, Cianferoni L, Scuderi A. Routine colposcopic survey of patients with squamous atypia. Acta Cytol 1990;34:788-790.
9. Solomon D, Schiffman M, Tarrone R. Comparison of three management strategies for patients with atypical squamous cells of undeterminate significance. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:293-299.
10. National Cancer Institute Workshop. The Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytologic diagnoses, Report of the 1991 Bethesda Workshop. JAMA 1992;267:1892.
11. Solomon D. Davey D, Kurman R, Moriarty A, O'Connor D, Prey M, Raab S, Sherman M, Wilbur D, Wright T, Young N. The 2001 Bethesda System. Terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002:287:21143-2119.