Atypical glandular cells: Criteria to discriminate benign from neoplastic lesions and squamous from glandular neoplasia

Cytopathology

Volumn 16, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 295-302

  Torres, J C C ^a   Derchain, S F M ^a   Gontijo, Renata Clementino ^a,c   Do Amaral Westin, M C ^a   Zeferino, L C ^a   Angelo Andrade, L A L ^a   Rabelo Santos, S H ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMPINAS   (Brazil)

^b FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF GOIÁS   (Brazil)

^c NONE   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Atypical glandular cells; Cervical smear; Cyto morphological criteria; Intraepithelial or invasive neoplasia

Indexed keywords

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; AGED; CANCER CELL; CELL NUCLEUS; CELL NUCLEUS MEMBRANE; CELL STRUCTURE; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; CYTOPLASM; DECISION THEORY; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HYSTERECTOMY; INVASIVE CARCINOMA; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NUCLEOLUS; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX CONIZATION; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

ADULT; AGED; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; CERVIX UTERI; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; CYTODIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MIDDLE AGED; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 28944443652     PISSN: 09565507     EISSN: 13652303     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2303.2005.00300.x     Document Type: Review

References (26)

1. Burja IT, Thompson SK, Sawyer WL, Shurbaji MS. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance on cervical smears. A study with cytohistologic correlation. Acta Cytol 1999;43:351-6.
2. Chhieng DC, Elgert PA, Cangiarella JF, Cohen JM. Variation in the incidence of AGUS between different patient populations. Acta Cytol 2001;45:287-99.
3. Ha SY, Cho H, Oh YH, Lee JM, Suh KS. Cytologic and histologic correlation of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance. J Korean Med Sci 2001; 16:214-9.
4. Raab SS, Isacson C, Layfield LJ, Lenel JC, Slagel DD, Thomas PA. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance. Cytologic criteria to separate clinically significant from benign lesions. Am J Clin Pathol 1995; 104:574-82.
5. Geier CS, Wilson M, Creasman W. Clinical evaluation of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;184:64-9.
6. Koonings PP, Price JH. Evaluation of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance: is age important. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;84:1457-61.
7. Goff BA, Atanasoff P, Brown E, Muntz HG, Bell DA, Rice LW. Endocervical glandular atypia in Papanicolaou smears. Obstet Gynecol 1992;79:101-4.
8. Nasu I, Meurer W, Fu YS. Endocervical glandular atypia and adenocarcinoma: a correlation of cytology and histology. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1993;12:208-18.
9. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R et al. The 2001 Bethesda system. Terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002;287:2114-9.
10. Covell JL, Wilbur DC, Guidos B, Lee KR, Chhieng DC, Mody DR. Epithelial abnormalities: glandular. In: The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology: Definitions, Criteria and Explanatory Notes. Solomon D, Nayar R (eds). New York: Springer-Verlag; 2004: pp. 123-56.
11. BSCC. BSCC Terminology 2002, 28th August 2003 (Draft). UK: BSCC; 2003.
12. Nasuti J, Fleisher SR, Gupta PK. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance (AGUS): clinical consideration and cytohistologic correlation. Diagn Cytopathol 2002;26:186-90.
13. Wilbur DC. Endocervical glandular atypia: a "new" problem for the cytologist. Diagn Cytopathol 1995; 13:463-9.
14. Ronnett BM, Manos MM, Ransley JE et al. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance (AGUS): cytopathologic features, histopathologic results and human papillomavirus DNA detection. Hum Pathol 1999;30:816-25.
15. Wilbur D. Cytology of endocervix, endometrium, and upper female genital tract. In: Gynecologic Cytopathology. Bonfiglio TA, Erozan YS (eds). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven Publishers; 1997: pp. 107-56.
16. Scully RE, Bonfiglio TA, Kurman RJ, Silverberg SG, Wilkins EJ. Histological Typing of Female Genital Tract Tumors. World Health Organization - International Histological Classification of Tumors, 2nd edn. Berlin: Springler-Verlag; 1994: pp. 39-160.
17. Brieman L, Friedman JH, Olshen RA, Stone CJ. Classification and Regression Tress. Pacific Grove, CA: Wadworth & Brooks/Cole Advanced Books; 1984.
18. Siziopikou KP, Wang HH, Abu-Jawdeh G. Cytologic features of neoplastic lesions in endocervical glands. Diagn Cytopathol 1997;17:1-7.
19. Mulvani N, Östör A. Microinvasive adenocarcinoma of the cervix: a cytohistopathologic study of 40 cases. Diagn Cytopathol 1997;16:430-6.
20. Moriarty AT, Wilbur DC. Those gland problems in cervical cytology: faith or fact? Observations from the Bethesda 2001 terminology conference. Diagn Cytopathol 2003;28:171-4.
21. Chin AB, Bristow RE, Korst LM, Walts A, Lagasse LD. The significance of atypical glandular cells on routine cervical cytologic testing in a community-based population. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000;182:1278-83.
22. Soofer SB, Sidawy MK. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance: clinically significant lesions and means of patient follow-up. Cancer 2000;90:207-14.
23. Raab SS, Bishop NS, Zaleski MS. Effect of cervical disease history on outcomes of women who have a pap diagnosis of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance. Gynecol Oncol 1999;74:460-4.
24. Hare AA, Duncan AR, Sharp AJ. Cytology suggestive of glandular neoplasia: outcomes and suggested management. Cytopathology 2003;14:12-8.
25. Bose S, Kannan V, Kline TS. Abnormal endocervical cells. Really abnormal? Really endocervical? Am J Clin Pathol 1994;101:708-13.
26. Lee KR, Manna EA, St John T. Atypical endocervical glandular cells: accuracy of cytologic diagnosis. Diagn Cytopathol 1995;13:202-8.