Significance of benign endometrial cells in Papanicolaou tests from women aged ≥ 40 years

Cancer

Volumn 105, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 207-216

  Thrall, Michael J ^a   Kjeldahl, Klint S ^b   Savik, Kay ^c   Gulbahce, H Evin ^a   Pambuccian, Stefan E ^a,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Atypical endometrial cells; Benign endometrial cells; Early detection; Endometrial malignancy; Papanicolaou test; Screening

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; ENDOMETRIUM CANCER; ENDOMETRIUM CARCINOMA; ENDOMETRIUM CELL; ENDOMETRIUM HYPERPLASIA; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; POSTMENOPAUSE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SAMPLING;

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; ENDOMETRIAL HYPERPLASIA; ENDOMETRIAL NEOPLASMS; ENDOMETRIUM; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; PROGNOSIS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 23844508813     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.21156     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Jemal A, Tiwari RC, Murray T, et al. Cancer statistics, 2004. CA Cancer J Clin. 2004;54:8-29.
2. Morantz C. ACS guidelines for early detection of cancer. Am Fam Physician. 2004;69:2013.
3. Vooijs GP, van der Graaf Y, Vooijs MA. The presence of endometrial cells in cervical smears in relation to the day of the menstrual cycle and the method of contraception. Acta Cytol 1987;31:427-433.
4. Liu W, Barrow MJ, Spitler MF, Kochis AF. Normal exfoliation of endometrial cells in premenopausal women. Acta Cytol. 1963;11:211-214.
5. Ng AB. The cellular detection of endometrial carcinoma and its precursors. Gynecol Oncol 1974;2:162-179.
6. Ng AB, Reagan JW, Hawliczek S, Wentz BW. Significance of endometrial cells in the detection of endometrial carcinoma and its precursors. Acta Cytol. 1974;18:356-361.
7. Gondos B, King EB. Significance of endometrial cells in cervicovaginal smears. Ann Clin Lab Sci 1977;7:486-490.
8. Zucker PK, Kasdon EJ, Feldstein ML. The validity of Pap smear parameters as predictors of endometrial pathology in menopausal women. Cancer. 1985;56:2256-2263.
9. Cherkis RC, Patten SF Jr., Dickinson JC, Dekanich AS. Significance of atypical endometrial cells detected by cervical cytology. Obstet Gynecol. 1987;69:786-789.
10. Cherkis RC, Patten SF Jr., Andrews TJ, Dickinson JC, Patten FW. Significance of normal endometrial cells detected by cervical cytology. Obstet Gynecol. 1988;71:242-244.
11. Yancey M, Magelssen D, Demaurez A, Lee RB. Classification of endometrial cells on cervical cytology. Obstet Gynecol. 1990;76:1000-1005.
12. DuBeshter B, Warshal DP, Angel C, Dvoretsky PM, Lin JY, Raubertas RF. Endometrial carcinoma: the relevance of cervical cytology. Obstet Gynecol. 1991;77:458-462.
13. Doornewaard H, Sie-Go DM, Woudt JM, Kooijman CD. [The significance of endometrial cells in the cervical smear.] Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1993;137:868-872.
14. Kerpsack JT, Finan MA, Kline RC. Correlation between endometrial cells on Papanicolaou smear and endometrial carcinoma. South Med J. 1998;91:749-752.
15. Van den Bosch T, Vandendael A, Wranz PA, Lombard CJ. Cervical cytology in menopausal women at high risk for endometrial disease. Eur J Cancer Prev. 1998;7:149-152.
16. DuBeshter B. Endometrial cancer: predictive value of cervical cytology. Gynecol Oncol. 1999;72:271-272.
17. Gomez-Fernandez CR, Ganjei-Azar P, Capote-Dishaw J, Averette HE, Nadji M. Reporting normal endometrial cells in Pap smears: an outcome appraisal. Gynecol Oncol. 1999;74:381-384.
18. Gray JA, Nguyen GK. Cytologic detection of endometrial pathology by Pap smears. Diagn Cytopathol. 1999;20:181-182.
19. Gomez-Fernandez CR, Ganjei-Azar P, Behshid K, Averette HE, Nadji M. Normal endometrial cells in Papanicolaou smears: prevalence in women with and without endometrial disease. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;96:874-878.
20. Ashfaq R, Sharma S, Dulley T, Saboorian MH, Siddiqui MT, Warner C. Clinical relevance of benign endometrial cells in postmenopausal women. Diagn Cytopathol. 2001;25:235-238.
21. Chang A, Sandweiss L, Bose S. Cytologically benign endometrial cells in the Papanicolaou smears of postmenopausal women. Gynecol Oncol. 2001;80:37-43.
22. Montz FJ. Significance of "normal" endometrial cells in cervical cytology from asymptomatic postmenopausal women receiving hormone replacement therapy. Gynecol Oncol. 2001;81:33-39.
23. Sarode VR, Rader AE, Rose PG, Rodriguez M, Abdul-Karim FW. Significance of cytologically normal endometrial cells in cervical smears from postmenopausal women. Acta Cytol. 2001;45:153-156.
24. Wu HH, Schuetz MJ, 3rd, Cramer H. Significance of benign endometrial cells in Pap smears from postmenopausal women. J Reprod Med. 2001;46:795-798.
25. Zucker PK, Kasdon EJ. Normal endometrial cells in Papanicolaou smears: prevalence in women with and without endometrial disease. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97:798-799.
26. Brogi E, Tambouret R, Bell DA. Classification of benign endometrial glandular cells in cervical smears from postmenopausal women. Cancer. 2002;96:60-66.
27. Karim BO, Burroughs FH, Rosenthal DL, Ali SZ. Endometrial-type cells in cervico-vaginal smears: clinical significance and cytopathologic correlates. Diagn Cytopathol. 2002;26:123-127.
28. Mount SL, Wegner EK, Eltabbakh GH, Olmstead JI, Drejet AE. Significant increase of benign endometrial cells on Papanicolaou smears in women using hormone replacement therapy. Obstet Gynecol 2002;100:445-450.
29. Cai N, Spitzer M, Wasserman PG. Endometrial cells in Pap smears of postmenopausal women: Cytohistologic correlation. J Low Gen Tract Dis. 2003;7:250-253.
30. Reed SL, Frain BM, Moriarty AT. The significance of endometrial cells shed at 40 years or older [abstract]. Acta Cytol. 2003;47:901-902.
31. Simsir A, Hwang S, Cangiarella J, et al. Glandular cell atypia on Papanicolaou smears: interobserver variability in the diagnosis and prediction of cell of origin. Cancer. 2003;99:323-330.
32. Bean S, Connolly K, Roberson J, Eltoum I, Chhieng DC. Incidence and clinical significance of normal endometrial cells in patients 40 years or older [abstract]. Acta Cytol. 2004;48:677.
33. Carter W, Elgert P, Simsir A, Cangiarella J. Clinical significance of reporting endometrial cells in patients over the age forty: Assessing modifications of Bethesda 2001 [abstract]. Mod Pathol. 2004;17:63A.
34. Chang BS, Browne T-J, Cibas ES, Genest DR. Benign-appearing endometrial cells (BEMC) in women 40 years age: Did the 2001 Bethesda revision influence the biopsy rate and the detection of EM cancer? [abstract]. Mod Pathol. 2004;17:64A.
35. Ely KA, Bregman S, Arnott CK. Clinical significance of reporting endometrial cells in patients over the age of 40 and its influence on the decision to biopsy [abstract]. Acta Cytol. 2004;48:678.
36. Kurella S, Gupta C, Mazzara PF. Clinical significance of the presence of cytologically benign endometrial cells on Papanicolaou sears in women age 40 and above: Experience at a community hospital [abstract]. Mod Pathol. 2004;17:73A.
37. Long DK, Biscotti C. An analysis of the Bethesda System 2001 guideline for reporting benign endometrial cells [abstract]. Acta Cytol. 2004;48:676-677.
38. Papillo JL, Harmon ML, Mount SL, Copley-Woods N. Reporting of endometrial cells in women 40-50 results in increased endometrial biopsies with low yield [abstract]. Acta Cytol. 2004;48:677-678.
39. Petcu EB, Assaad MW, Hornish M, Lorenzana R, Goulart RA. Endometrial biopsy results in patients with endometrial cells on Pap test utilizing Bethesda System 2001 [abstract]. Mod Pathol. 2004;17:78A.
40. Saad RS, Mahdavy M, Takei H, Ruiz B. Endometrial cells in cervical specimens of women > 40 years of age [abstract]. Acta Cytol. 2004;48:678-679.
41. Xu C, Pisharodi L. Clinical significance of endometrial cells in women 40 years of age in Pap smear: analysis of 817 cases [abstract]. Mod Pathol. 2004;17:87A
42. Raab SS. Can glandular lesions be diagnosed in Pap smear cytology? Diagn Cytopathol. 2000;23:127-133.
43. Moriarty AT, Cibas E, Gill GW, et al. Bethesda 2001 post-workshop recommendations- Bethesda 2001 endometrial forum group workshop summary, 2001. URL: http:// bethesda2001.cancer.gov/postwrkshp_recs.html [accession date December 14, 2004].
44. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, et al. The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA. 2002;287:2114-2119.
45. Chhieng DC, Elgert P, Cohen JM, Cangiarella JF. Clinical implications of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance, favor endometrial origin. Cancer. 2001;93:351-356.
46. Stelow EB, Gulbahce HE, Kjeldahl K, Oprea GM, Savik K, Pambuccian SE. Interpretive yields of screening Pap tests and diagnostic Pap tests. Diagn Cytopathol. 2004;31:427-429.
47. Mutter GL. Diagnosis of premalignant endometrial disease. J Clin Pathol. 2002;55:326-331.
48. DeMay RM. Hyperchromatic crowded groups: pitfalls in Pap smear diagnosis. Am J Clin Pathol. 2000;114(Suppl):S36-S43.
49. Opjorden SL, Caudill JL, Humphrey SK, Salomao DR. Small cells in cervical-vaginal smears of patients treated with tamoxifen. Cancer. 2001;93:23-28.
50. Guidos BJ, Selvaggi SM. Detection of endometrial adenocarcinoma with the ThinPrep Pap test. Diagn Cytopathol. 2000;23:260-265.
51. Schorge JO, Hossein Saboorian M, Hynan L, Ashfaq R. Thin-Prep detection of cervical and endometrial adenocarcinoma: a retrospective cohort study. Cancer. 2002;96:338-343.
52. Babkowski RC, Wilbur DC, Rutkowski MA, Facik MS, Bonfiglio TA. The effects of endocervical canal topography, tubal metaplasia, and high canal sampling on the cytologic presentation of nonneoplastic endocervical cells. Am J Clin Pathol 1996;105:403-410.
53. de Peralta-Venturino MN, Purslow MJ, Kini SR. Endometrial cells of the "lower uterine segment" (LUS) in cervical smears obtained by endocervical brushings: a source of potential diagnostic pitfall. Diagn Cytopathol 1995;12:263-268; discussion 268-271.
54. Prendiville W. Large loop excision of the transformation zone. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1995;38:622-639.
55. Duggan BD, Felix JC, Muderspach LI, et al. Cold-knife conization versus conization by the loop electrosurgical excision procedure: a randomized, prospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;180:276-282.
56. Ismail SM. Cone biopsy causes cervical endometriosis and tubo-endometrioid metaplasia. Histopathol. 1991;18:107-114.
57. Lundeen SJ, Horwitz CA, Larson CJ, Stanley MW. Abnormal cervicovaginal smears due to endometriosis: a continuing problem. Diagn Cytopathol. 2002;26:35-40.
58. Moriarty AT, Wilbur D. Those gland problems in cervical cytology: faith or fact? Observations from the Bethesda 2001 terminology conference. Diagn Cytopathol. 2003;28:171-174.
59. Jobo T, Arai T, Sato R, Kuramoto H. Clinicopathologic relevance of asymptomatic endometrial carcinoma. Acta Cytol. 2003;47:611-615.
60. Lozowski MS, Mishriki Y, Solitare GB. Factors determining the degree of endometrial exfoliation and their diagnostic implications in endometrial adenocarcinoma. Acta Cytol. 1986;30:623-627.
61. Larson DM, Johnson KK, Reyes CN Jr., Broste SK. Prognostic significance of malignant cervical cytology in patients with endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 1994;84:399-403.
62. Eddy GL, Wojtowycz MA, Piraino PS, Mazur MT. Papanicolaou smears by the Bethesda system in endometrial malignancy, utility and prognostic importance. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;90:999-1003.
63. DuBeshter B, Deuel C, Gillis S, Glantz C, Angel C, Guzick D. Endometrial cancer: the potential role of cervical cytology in current surgical staging. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;101:445-450.