Current management of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, high-grade squamous epithelial lesion, and atypical glandular cells

Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 48, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 147-159

  Soto Wright, Valena ^a   Samuelson, Robert ^a   McLellan, Robert ^a  

^a LAHEY HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

VIRUS DNA;

ALGORITHM; CANCER SURGERY; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; COLPOSCOPY; CONDYLOMA; CONFERENCE PAPER; CYTOPATHOLOGY; DISEASE COURSE; DNA DETERMINATION; ELECTROSURGERY; EVALUATION; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FEMALE; GYNECOLOGIC SURGERY; HUMAN; NOMENCLATURE; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; UTERINE CERVIX DYSPLASIA; UTERINE CERVIX EPITHELIUM; WART VIRUS;

ADENOCARCINOMA; CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; FEMALE; HUMANS; PRECANCEROUS CONDITIONS; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 14844346478     PISSN: 00099201     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.grf.0000152020.79383.ec     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (49)

1. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, et al. The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA. 2002;287:2114-2119.
2. Jones HW 3rd. Impact of the Bethesda System. Cancer. 1995;76:1914-1918.
3. Jones BA, Davey DD. Quality management in gynecologic cytology using intralaboratory comparison. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2000;124:672-681.
4. Solomon D, Schiffman M, Tarone R, et al, for the ALTS group. Comparison of three management strategies for patients with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: baseline results from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93: 293-299.
5. Wright TC Jr, Cox JT, Massad LS, et al, for the 2001 ASCCP-sponsored Consensus Conference. 2001 consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA. 2002;287: 2120-2129.
6. Wright TC Jr, Cox JT, Massad LS, et al, for the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology. 2001 consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;189:295-304.
7. Walboomers JM, Jacobs MV, Manos MM, et al. Human papilloma virus is a necessary cause of invasive cervical cancer worldwide. J Pathol. 1999;189:12-19.
8. Liaw KL, Glass AG, Manos MM, et al. Detection of human papilloma virus DNA in cytologically normal women and subsequent cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999;91:954-960.
9. Sherman ME, Lorincz AT, Scott DR, et al. Baseline cytology, human papilloma virus testing, and risk for cervical neoplasia: a 10-year cohort analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95:46-52.
10. Schiffman M, Castle PE. Human papilloma virus epidemiology and public health. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2003;127:930-934.
11. Ho GY, Bierman R, Beardsley L, et al. Natural history of cervicovaginal papilloma virus infection in young women. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:423-428.
12. Moscicki A, Shiboski S, Broering J, et al. The natural history of HPV as measured by repeat DNA testing in adolescent and young women. J Pediatr. 1998;132:277-284.
13. Sellers JW, Karwalajrys TL, Kaczorowski JA, et al, for the Survey of HPV in Ontario Women Group. Prevalence of infection with carcinogenic human papillomavirus among older women. Can Med Assoc J. 2002;167: 871-873.
14. Saslow D, Runowicz CD, Solomon D, et al, for the American Cancer Society. American Cancer Society guideline for the early detection of cervical neoplasia and cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2002;52:342-362.
15. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Cervical cytology screening. ACOG Practice Bulletin, No. 45. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;102:417-427.
16. Wright TC Jr, Schiffman M, Solomon D, et al. Interim guidance for the use of human papilloma virus DNA testing as an adjunct to cervical cytology for screening. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;103:304-309.
17. Wright TC Jr, Cox JT, Massad LS, et al. 2001 consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2002;6:127-143.
18. Guido R, Schiffman M, Solomon D, et al. Post-colposcopy management strategies for women referred with low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or human papilloma virus DNA-positive atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: a two-year prospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;188:1401-1405.
19. Cox JT, Schiffman M, Solomon D, et al, for the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study (ALTS) Group. Prospective follow-up suggests similar risk of subsequent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3 among women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 or negative colposcopy and directed biopsy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;188:1406-1412.
20. Montz FJ, Monk BJ, Fowler JM, et al. Natural history of the minimally abnormal Papanicolaou smear. Obstet Gynecol. 1992;80: 385-388.
21. Holowary P, Miller AB, Rohan T, et al. Natural history of dysplasia of the uterine cervix. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999;91:252-258.
22. Östör A. Natural history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a critical review. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1993;12:186-192.
23. Melnikow J, Nuovo J, Willan AR, et al. Natural history of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 1998;92:727-735.
24. Mitchell MF, Tortolero-Luna G, Wright T, et al. Cervical HPV infection and intraepithelial neoplasia: a review. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1996;21:17-25.
25. Duggan BD, Felix JC, Muderspach LI, et al. Cold-knife conization versus conization by the loop electro surgical excision procedure: a randomized, prospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;180:276-282.
26. Ferenczy A, Choukroun D, Arseneau J. Loop electrosurgical excision procedure for squamous intraepithelial lesions of the cervix: advantages and potential pitfalls. Obstet Gynecol. 1996;87:332-337.
27. Naumann RW, Bell MC, Alvarez RD, et al. LLETZ is an acceptable alternative to diagnostic cold-knife conization. Gynecol Oncol. 1994;55:224-228.
28. Martin-Hirsch PL, Paraskevaidis E, Kitchener H. Surgery for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;2:CD001318.
29. Economes K, Perez Veridiano N, Delke I, et al. Abnormal cervical cytology in pregnancy, a 17-year experience. Obstet Gynecol. 1993;81:915-918.
30. Fine BA, Feinstein GT, Sabella V, et al. The pre and postoperative value of endocervical curettage in the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and invasive cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 1998;71:46-49.
31. Kobak WH, Roman LD, Felix JC, et al. The role of endocervical curettage at cervical conization for high-grade dysplasia. Obstet Gynecol. 1995;85:197-201.
32. Soofer SB, Sidawy MK. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance. Cancer. 2000;90:207-214.
33. Kim TJ, Kim HS, Park CT, et al. Clinical evaluation of follow-up methods and results of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance (AGUS) detected on cervicovaginal pap smears. Gynecol Oncol. 2000;73: 292-298.
34. Ronnett BM, Manos MM, Ransley JE, et al. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance (AGUS). Hum Pathol. 1999; 30:816-825.
35. Cullimore JE, Luesley DM, Rollason TP, et al. A prospective study of conization of the cervix in the management of cervical intraepithelial glandular neoplasia (CIGN): a preliminary report. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1992; 99:314-318.
36. Wolf JK, Levenback C, Malpica A, et al. Adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix: significance of cone biopsy margins. Obstet Gynecol. 1996;88:82-86.
37. Ostor AC, Duncan A, Quinn M, et al. Adenocarcinoma in situ of the uterine cervix: an experience with 100 cases. Gynecol Oncol. 2000;79:207-210.
38. Widrich T, Kennedy AW, Myers TM, et al. Adenocarcinoma in situ of the uterine cervix: management and outcomes. Gynecol Oncol. 1996;61:304-308.
39. Muntz HG, Bell DA, Lage JM, et al. Adenocarcinoma in situ of the uterine cervix. Obstet Gynecol. 1992;80:935-939.
40. Zweizig S, Noller K, Reale F, et al. Neoplasia associated with atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance on cervical cytology. Gynecol Oncol. 1997;65:314-318.
41. Koonings PP, Price JH. Evaluation of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance: is age important? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;184:1457-1459.
42. Chhieng DC, Elgert P, Cohen JM, et al. Clinical significance of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance in postmenopausal women. Cancer. 2001;93:1-7.
43. Veljovich DS, Stoler MH, Andersen WA, et al. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance: a five-year retrospective histopathologic study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998;179:382-390.
44. Lee KR, Manna EA, St John T. Atypical endocervical glandular cells; accuracy of cytologic diagnosis. Diagn Cytopathol. 1995; 13:202-208.
45. Laverty CR, Farnsworth A, Thurloe JK, et al. Reliability of a cytologic prediction of cervical adenocarcinoma in situ. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynecol. 1988;28:307-312.
46. Denehy TR, Gregori CA, Breen JL. Endocervical curettage, cone margins, and residual adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;90:1-6.
47. Kuohung W, Shapter AP, Silverman ML, et al. Adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;95(Suppl 1):S50.
48. Lea JS, Shin CH, Sheets EE, et al. Endocervical curettage at conization to predict residual cervical adenocarcinoma in situ. Gynecol Oncol. 2002;87:129-132.
49. McHale MT, Le TD, Burger RA, et al. Fertility sparing treatment for in situ and early invasive adenocarcinoma of the cervix. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;98:726-731.