Significant reduction in the rate of false-negative cervical smears with neural network-based technology (PAPNET testing system)

Human Pathology

Volumn 28, Issue 10, 1997, Pages 1196-1203

  Koss, Leopold G ^a   Sherman, Mark E ^b   Cohen, Michael B ^b   Anes, Allen R ^b   Darragh, Teresa M ^b   Lemos, Luciano B ^b   Mcclellan, Betty Jane ^b   Rosenthal, Dorothy L ^b   Keyhani Rofagha, Sedigheh ^b   Schreiber, Klaus ^b   Valente, Philip T ^b  

^a MONTEFIORE MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

Cervical cytology; Cervical smear screening; Computer aided diagnosis; False negatives; Neural networks; Papanicolaou smears; PAPNET

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER INVASION; CANCER SCREENING; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; NERVE CELL NETWORK; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

EID: 12644256648     PISSN: 00468177     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0046-8177(97)90258-6     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Anderson GH, Boyes DA, Benedet JL, et al: Organization and results of the cervical cytology screening programme in British Columbia. Br Med J 296:975-978, 1988
2. Geirsson G: Organization of screening in technically advanced countries: Iceland, in Hakama M, Miller AB, Day NE (eds): Screening for Cancer of the Uterine Cervix. Lyons, IARC, 1986, pp 239-250
3. Hakama M, Louhivuori K: A screening programme for cervical cancer that worked. Cancer Survey 7:403-416, 1988
4. Kristensen GB, Skyggebjerg KD, Holund B, et al: Analysis of cervical smears obtained within three years of the diagnosis of invasive cervical cancer. Acta Cytol 35:47-50, 1991
5. Attwood ME, Woodman CBJ, Luesley D, et al: Previous cytology in patients with invasive carcinoma of the cervix. Acta Cytol 29:108-110, 1985
6. Rylander E: Negative smears in women developing invasive cervical cancer. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 56:115-118, 1977
7. Bogdanich W: Lax laboratories. The Pap test misses much cervical cancer through lab's errors. Wall Street Journal, November 2:1, 1987
8. Clark M, Gosnell M: Questions about the pap test. Is it accurate and should it be done every year? Newsweek, January 25:54-56, 1988
9. Associated Press: Homicide charges are recommended in misread Pap tests. The New York Times, April 11:5, 1995
10. Kolata G: Medical laboratory faces charges in cancer deaths. The New York Times, April 13:16, 1995
11. Voelker R: Milwaukee deaths reignite critical issues in cervical cancer screening. JAMA 273:1559-60, 1995
12. Larsen NS: Invasive cervical cancer rising in young white females. JNCI 86:6-7, 1994
13. Shingleton HM, Patrick RL, Johnston WW, et al: The current status of the Papanicolaou smear. CA 45:305-320, 1995
14. Koss LG: The Papanicolaou test for cervical cancer detection. A triumph and a tragedy. JAMA 261:737-743, 1989
15. Sherman ME, Kelly D: High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and invasive carcinoma following the report of three negative Papanicolaou smears: Screening failures or rapid progression? Mod Pathol 5:337-342, 1992
16. Hatem F, Wilbur DC: High grade squamous cervical lesions following negative Papanicolaou smears: False-negative cervical cytology or rapid progression? Diagn Cytopathol 12:135-141, 1995
17. Mitchell H, Medley G: Differences between Papanicolaou smears with correct and incorrect diagnoses. Cytopathology 6:368-375, 1995
18. Husain OAN: The history of automated cell scanners, in Grohs HK, Husain OAN (eds): Automated Cervical Cancer Screening. Tokyo, Igaku Shoin, 1994
19. Koss LG: Analytical and quantitative cytology: A historical perspective. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 4:251-256, 1982
20. Koss LG: Automated cytology and histology: A historical perspective. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 9:369-374, 1987
21. Rosenthal DL, Mango LJ: Applications of neural networks for interactive diagnosis of anatomic pathology specimens, in Wied GL, Bartels PH, Rosenthal DL, Schenck U (eds): Compendium on the Computerized Cytology and Histology Laboratory, (pp 173-184) Chicago, Tutorials of Cytology, 1994
22. Hecht-Nielsen R: Neurocomputing: picking the human brain. IEEE Spectrum, March, 1988, pp 36-41
23. Hammerstrom D: Neural networks at work. IEEE Spectrum 30:26-32, 1993
24. Doi K, Giger ML, Nishikawa RM, et al: Digital radiography. A useful clinical tool for computer-aided diagnosis by quantitative analysis of radiographic images. Acta Radiologica 34:426-39, 1993
25. Chan HP, Lo SC, Sahiner B, Lam KL, et al: Computer-aided detection of mammographic microcalcifications: pattern recognition with an artificial neural network. Med Phys 22:1555-1567, 1995
26. Vyborny CJ, Giger ML: Computer vision and artificial intelligence in mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 162:699-708, 1994
27. Wu Y, Giger ML, Doi K, et al: Artificial neural networks in mammography: Application to decision making in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Radiology 187:81-87, 1993
28. Baker JA, Kornguth PJ, Lo JY, et al: Breast cancer: Prediction with artificial neural network based on BI-RADS standardized lexicon. Radiology 196:817-822, 1995
29. Koss LG, Lin E, Schreiber K, et al: Evaluation of the PAPNET cytologic screening system for quality control of cervical smears. Am J Clin Pathol 101:220-229, 1994
30. Mango LJ. Computer-assisted cervical cancer screening using neural networks. Cancer Lett 77:155-162, 1994
31. Kurman RJ, Solomon D: The Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal smears. New York, NY, Springer-Verlag, 1994
32. Sherman ME, Schiffman MH, Lorincz AT, et al: Toward objective quality assurance in cervical cytopathology. Anatomic Pathol 102:182-187, 1994
33. Gay JD, Donaldson LD, Goellner JR: False-negative results in cervical cytologic studies. Acta Cytol 29:1043-1046, 1985
34. Colton T: Statistics in Medicine. Boston, Little, Brown & Co., 1974
35. Jones BA: Recscreening in gynecologic cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 119:1097-1103, 1995
36. Allen AK, Zaleski S, Cohen MB: Review of negative Papanicolaou tests: Is the retrospective 5-year review necessary? Am J Clin Pathol 101:19-21, 1994
37. Sidawy MK, Solomon D: Pitfalls in diagnostic cervicovaginal cytology, in: Koss LG, Linder J (eds): Errors and Pitfalls in Diagnostic Cytology. Baltimore, Williams and Wilkins, 1997
38. Koss LG, Stewart FW, Foote FW, et al: Some histological aspects of behavior of epidermoid carcinoma in situ and related lesions of the uterine cervix. Cancer 16:1160-1211, 1963
39. Melamed MR: Quality control in the cytology laboratory. Acta Cytol 20:203-206, 1976
40. Melamed MR, Flehinger BJ: Reevaluation of quality assurance in the cytology laboratory. Acta Cytol 36:461-465, 1992
41. Slagel DD, Zaleski S, Cohen MB: The efficacy of automated cervical cytology screening. Diagn Cytopathol 13:26-30, 1995
42. Kok MR, Boon ME: Consequences of neural network technology for cervical screening. Cancer 78:111-118, 1996
43. Schechter CB: Cost-effectiveness of rescreening conventionally prepared cervical smears by PAPNET testing. Acta Cytol 40:1272-1282, 1996
44. Muller C, MandelblattJ, Schechter CB, et al: Costs and effectiveness of cervical cancer screening in elderly women. U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment, Publication OTA-BP-H-65, 1990
45. Weinstein MC: Estrogen use in postmenopausal women: Costs, risks, and benefits. N Engl J Med 303:308-316, 1980
46. Krahn MD, Mahoney JE, Eckman MH, et al: Screening for prostate cancer. A decision analytic view. JAMA 272:773-780, 1994
47. Astion ML, Wilding P: The application of backpropagation neural networks to problems in pathology and laboratory medicine. Arch Pathol Lab Med 116:995-1001, 1992
48. Sherman ME, Mango LJ, Kelly D, et al: PAPNET analysis of reportedly negative smears preceding the diagnosis of a high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or carcinoma. Mod Pathol 7:578-581, 1994
49. Keyhani-Rofagha S, Palma T, O'Toole RV: Automated screening for quality control using PAPNET: A study of 638 negative smears. Diagn Cytopathol 14:316-320, 1996