Evaluation of PAPNET testing as an ancillary tool to clarify the status of the 'atypical' cervical smear

Modern Pathology

Volumn 10, Issue 6, 1997, Pages 564-571

  Sherman, Mark E ^a,b   Schiffman, Mark H ^b   Mango, Laurie J ^c   Kelly, Deidra ^d   Acosta, Deborah ^e   Cason, Zelma ^f   Elgert, Paul ^g   Zaleski, Sue ^h   Scott, David R ⁱ   Kurman, Robert J ^d   Stoler, Mark ^j   Lorincz, Attila T ^k  

^a GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c BD Technologies   (United States)

^d DEPARTMENT OF PATHOLOGY   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^g MONTEFIORE MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

ⁱ KAISER PERMANENTE   (United States)

^j UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

^k Digene Corporation   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

ASCUS; Bethesda System; Cervix; Human papillomavirus; PAPNET; Reproducibility; Smear

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COLPOSCOPY; CYTOPATHOLOGY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DNA DETERMINATION; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELIABILITY; SQUAMOUS CELL; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; VIRUS DETECTION; WART VIRUS;

BIOPSY; CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; EVALUATION STUDIES; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; NEURAL NETWORKS (COMPUTER); OBSERVER VARIATION; PAPILLOMAVIRIDAE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVICAL DYSPLASIA; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 18744428453     PISSN: 08933952     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. National Cancer Institute Workshop. The revised Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal diagnoses: report of the 1991 Bethesda workshop. JAMA 1992;267:1892.
2. Davey DD, Naryshkin S, Nielsen ML, Kline TS. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: interlaboratory comparison and quality assurance monitors. Diagn Cytopathol 1994;11:390-6.
3. Sherman ME, Schiffman MH, Lorincz A, Manos MM, Scott DR, Kurman RJ, et al. Toward objective quality assurance in cervical cytopathology. Correlation of cytopathologic diagnoses with detection of high-risk human papillomavirus types. Am J Clin Pathol 1994;102:182-7.
4. Boon ME, Kok LP. Neural network processing can provide means to catch errors that slip through human screening of Pap smears. Diagn Cytopathol 1993;9:411-6.
5. Boon ME, Kok LP, Nygaard-Nielsen M, Holm K, Holund B. Neural network processing of cervical smears can lead to a decrease in diagnostic variability and an increase in screening efficacy: a study of 63 false negative smears. Mod Pathol 1994;7:957-61.
6. Koss LG, Lin E, Schreiber K, Elgert P, Mango L. Evaluation of PAPNET cytologic screening system for quality control of cervical smears. Am J Clin Pathol 1994;101:220-9.
7. Sherman ME, Mango LJ, Kelly D, Paull G, Ludvin V, Copeland C, et al. PAPNET analysis of reportedly negative smears preceding the diagnosis of a high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or carcinoma. Mod Pathol 1994;7:578-81.
8. Schiffman MH, Bauer HM, Hoover RN, Glass AG, Cadell DM, Rush BB, et al. Epidemiologic evidence that human papillomavirus causes most cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993;85:958-64.
9. Lorincz AT, Lancaster WD, Temple GF. Cloning and characterization of the DNA of a new human papillomavirus from a woman with dysplasia of the uterine cervix. J Virol 1986; 58:225-9.
10. Ryan MR, Stastny JF, Hemmers R, Pedigo MA, Cahill LA, Frable WJ. PAPNET-rescreening of cervicovaginal smears. A study of 101 cases of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Am J Clin Pathol 1996;105:711-8.
11. Husain OA, Butler EB, Nayagam M, Mango L, Alonzo A. An analysis of the variation of human interpretation: PAPNET, a mini-challenge. Anal Cell Pathol 1994;6:157-63.
12. Robb JA. The "ASCUS" swamp. Diagn Cytopathol 1994;11: 319-20.
13. Schiffman MH, Manos MM, Sherman ME, Scott DR, Glass AG. Human papillomavirus and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia [response]. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993;85:1868-70.
14. Cox JT, Lorincz AT, Schiffman MH, Sherman ME, Cullen A, Kurman RJ. 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.
15. Farthing A, Masterson P, Mason WP, Vousden KH. Human papillomavirus detection by hybrid capture and its possible clinical use. J Clin Pathol 1994;47:649-52.
16. Hatch KD, Schneider A, Abdel-Nour MW. An evaluation of human papillomavirus testing for intermediate- and high-risk types as triage before colposcopy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;172:1150-5.
17. Wright TC, Sun XW, Koulos J. Comparison of management algorithms for the evaluation of women with low-grade cytologic abnormalities. Obstet Gynecol 1995;85:202-10.
18. Wied GL, Bartels PH, Bibbo M, Gupta PK, Gurley AM, Hilgarth M, et al. Computer-assisted quality assurance. Acta Cytol 1996;40:1-3.
19. August N. Cervicography for evaluating the "atypical" Papanicolaou smear. J Reprod Med 1991;36:89-94.
20. Coibion M, Autier P, Vandam P, Delobelle A, Huet F, Hertens D, et al. Is there a role for cervicography in the detection of premalignant lesions of the cervix uteri? Br J Cancer 1994; 70:125-8.
21. Ferris DG, Payne P, Frisch LE, Milner FH, diPaola FM, Petry LJ. Cervicography: adjunctive cervical cancer screening by primary care clinicians. J Fam Pract 1993;37:158-64.
22. Reid R, Greenberg MD, Lorincz A, Jensen AB, Laverty CR, Husain M, et al. Should cervical cytologic testing be augmented by cervicography or human papillomavirus deoxyribonucleic acid detection? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991;164: 1461-9.
23. Kurman RJ, Henson DE, Herbst AL, Noller KL, Schiffman MH. Toward optimal laboratory use. Interim guidelines for management of abnormal cervical cytology. JAMA 1994;271: 1886-9.