Sensitivity of the pap test in detecting high grade lesions: What should be the acceptable cytologic threshold for colposcopic referral?

Acta Cytologica

Volumn 50, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 181-184

  Sodhani, Pushpa ^a   Gupta, Sanjay ^a   Singh, Veena ^a   Sehgal, Ashok ^a   Halder, Kaushik ^a   Parashari, Aditya ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF CYTOLOGY AND PREVENTIVE ONCOLOGY   (India)

Author keywords

Cervix neoplasms; Colposcopy; Papanicolaou test; Referral

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CANCER SCREENING; COLPOSCOPY; CYTOLOGY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INDIA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PATIENT REFERRAL; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STANDARD; SYMPTOM; UTERINE CERVIX BIOPSY; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU;

EID: 33645472713     PISSN: 00015547     EISSN: 19382650     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000325928     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. National Cancer Institute Workshop: The 1988 Bethesda system for reporting cervical/vaginal cytology diagnoses. JAMA 1989;262:931-932
2. Holowaty P, Miller AB, Rohan T, To T: Natural history of dysplasia of the uterine cervix. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999;91:252-258
3. Ferris DG, Wright TC, Litakerve S: Triage of women with ASCUS and LSIL Pap reports: Management by repeat Pap smear, HPV testing or colposcopy? J Fam Pract 1998;46:125-134
4. Zuna RE, Sienko A, Lightfoot S, Gaiser M: Cervical smear interpretations in women with a histologic diagnosis of severe dysplasia: Factors associated with discrepant interpretations. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2002;96:218-224
5. Gupta S, Sodhani P: Why is high grade squamous intraepithelial neoplasia underdiagnosed on cytology in a quarter of cases? Analysis of smear characteristics in discrepant cases. Ind J Cancer 2004;41:104-108
6. The Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytological diagnoses. Acta Cytol 1993;37:115-124
7. Klinkhamer P, Vooijs GP, de Haan AFJ: Intraobserver and interobserver variability in the diagnosis of epithelial abnormalities in cervical smears. Acta Cytol 1988;32:794-800
8. Renshaw AA, Lee KR, Granter SR: Use of statistical analysis of cytologic interpretation to determine the causes of interobserver disagreement and in quality improvement. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 1997;81:212-219
9. Cibas EA, Dean B, Maffeo N, Allred EN: Quality assurance in gynecologic cytology: The value of cytotechnologist-cytopathologist discrepancy logs. Am J Clin Pathol 2001;115:512-516
10. Gupta DK, Kmaromy Killer G, Rab SS, Nath ME: Interobserver and intraobserver variability in the cytologic diagnosis of normal and abnormal metaplastic cells in Pap smears. Acta Cytol 2001;45:687-703
11. Hutchinson ML, Zahniser DJ, Sherman ME: Cytology for cervical carcinoma screening: Results of a population based study conducted in a region of Costa Rica with a high incidence of cervical carcinoma. Cancer 1999;87:48-55
12. Baldauf JJ, Dreyfus M, Lehmanmann M, Ritter J, Phillippe E: Cervical cancer screening with cervicography and cytology. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1995;58:33-39
13. Friedell GH: Addendum. In Genital and Mammary Pathology Decennial. Edited by SC Sommers. New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1995, pp 49-53
14. Renshaw AA: Measuring sensitivity in gynecologic cytology: A review. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2002;96:210-217
15. Wilbur DC, Prey MU, Miller WM, Pawlick GF, Colagan FJ, Taylor DD: Detection of high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and tumors using the Auto Pap system. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 1999;87:354-358
16. ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study (ALTS) Group: Results of a randomized trial on the management of cytology interpretations of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188:1383-1392
17. Sodhani P, Gupta S, Singh V, Sehgal A, Mitra AB: Eliminating the "atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance" diagnosis: Impact on the accuracy of the Pap test. Acta Cytol 2004:783-787