Papanicolaou smear history in women with low-grade cytology before cervical cancer diagnosis

Cancer

Volumn 111, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 210-216

  Bofin, Anna M ^a   Nygård, Jan F ^b   Skare, Gry B ^b   Dybdahl, Britt Mona ^c   Westerhagen, Unni ^d   Sauer, Torill ^e  

^a NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Norway)

^b CANCER REGISTRY OF NORWAY   (Norway)

^c STAVANGER UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^d AKERSHUS UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^e ULLEVÅL UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

Author keywords

Cervix; False negative; Papanicolaou smear; Screening program

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANAMNESIS; ARTICLE; CANCER INVASION; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CYTOPATHOLOGY; CYTOTECHNOLOGIST; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; FEMALE; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; NORWAY; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 34548134153     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: 10970142     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.22865     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Sankaranarayanan R, Ferlay J. Worldwide burden of gynaecological cancer: the size of the problem. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2006;20:207-225.
2. Cancer in Norway 2002. The Cancer Registry of Norway. Olso; 2003:39.
3. Parkin DM. International variation. Oncogene. 2004;23:6329-6340.
4. Gustafsson L, Ponten J, Zack M, Adami H-O. International incidence rates of invasive cervical cancer after introduction of cytological screening. Cancer Causes Control. 1997;8:755-763.
5. Nygard JF, Skare GB, Thoresen SO. The cervical cancer screening programme in Norway, 1992-2000: changes in Pap smear coverage and incidence of cervical cancer. J Med Screen. 2002;9:86-91.
6. Peto J, Gilham C, Deacon J, et al. Cervical HPV infection and neoplasia in a large population-based prospective study: the Manchester cohort. Br J Cancer. 2004;91:942-953.
7. Nanda K, McCrory DC, Myers ER, et al. Accuracy of the Papanicolaou test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytologic abnormalities: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2000;132:810-819.
8. Fahey MT, Irwig L, Macaskill P. Meta-analysis of Pap test accuracy. Am J Epidemiol. 1995;141:680-689.
9. Cote RA, Robboy S. Progress in medical information management. Systematized nomenclature of medicine (SNOMED). JAMA. 1980;243:756-762.
10. The 1988 Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytological diagnoses: National Cancer Institute Workshop. JAMA. 1989;262:931-934.
11. Nygard JF, Sauer T, Skjeldestad FE, Skare GB, Thoresen SO. CIN2/3 and cervical cancer after an ASCUS Pap smear: a 7-year prospective study of the Norwegian population-based, Coordinated Screening Programme. Acta Cytol. 2003;47:991-1000.
12. Nygard JF, Nygard M, Skare GB, Thoresen SO. Screening histories of women with CIN2/3 compared with women diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer: a retrospective analysis of the Norwegian Coordinated Cervical Screening Programme. Cancer Causes Control. 2005;16:463-474.
13. Sung H-Y, Kearney KA, Miller M, Kinney W, Sawaya GF, Hiatt RA. Papanicolaou smear history and diagnosis of invasive cervical carcinoma among members of a large prepaid health plan. Cancer. 2000;88:2283-2289.
14. Austin RM. Public expectations, achievable cervical screening sensitivity and the standard of practice. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol). 2003;99:1-3.
15. Janerich DT, Hadjimichael O, Schwartz PE, et al. The screening histories of women with invasive cervical cancer, Connecticut. Am J Public Health. 1995;85:791-794.
16. Macgregor JE, Campbell MK, Mann EM, Swanson KY. Screening for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in north east Scotland shows fall in incidence and mortality from invasive cancer with concomitant rise in preinvasive disease. BMJ. 1994;308:1407-1411.
17. Paterson ME, Peel KR, Joslin CA. Cervical smear histories of 500 women with invasive cervical cancer in Yorkshire. BMJ. 1984;289:896-898.
18. Gupta S, Sodhani P. Why is high grade squamous intraepithelial neoplasia under-diagnosed on cytology in a quarter of cases? Analysis of smear characteristics in discrepant cases. Indian J Cancer. 2004;41:104-108.
19. Ejersbo D, Dahl MB, Holund B. False negative Pap smears in a Danish material. Ugeskr Laeger. 2003;165:2391-2394.
20. Phadnis SV, Doshi JS, Ogunnaike OO, Padwick ML, Sanusi FA. Inadequate cervical smear: what do we do? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2005;84:486-488.
21. Hock YL, Ramaiah S, Wall ES, et al. Outcome of women with inadequate cervical smears followed up for five years. J Clin Pathol. 2003;56:592-595.
22. Nygard JF, Sauer T, Skare GB, Thoresen SO. CIN 2/3 and cervical cancer in an organised screening programme after an unsatisfactory or a normal Pap smear: a seven-year prospective study of the Norwegian population-based screening programme. J Med Screening. 2004;11;70-76.
23. Renshaw AA, Young ML, Holladay EB. Blinded review of Papanicolaou smears in the context of litigation. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol). 2004;102:136-141.
24. Renshaw AA. Measuring sensitivity in gynaecologic cytology. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol). 2002;96:210-217.
25. Arbyn M, Schenck U, Ellison E, Hanselaar A. Metaanalysis of the accuracy of rapid prescreening relative to full screening of Pap smears. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol). 2003;99:9-16.
26. Michelow P, McKee G, Hlongwane H. Rapid rescreening of cervical smears as a quality control method in a high-risk population. Cytopathology 2006;17:110-115.
27. Houliston DC, Boyd CM, Nicholas CS, Smith JA. Personal performance profiles: a useful adjunct to quality assurance in cervical cytology. Cytopathology. 1998;9:162-170.
28. Lynge E, Poll P. Incidence of cervical cancer following a negative smear. A cohort study from Maribo County, Denmark. Am J Epidemiol. 1986;124:345-352.
29. Troxel DB. An insurer's perspective on error and loss in pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2005;129:1234-1236.
30. Coleman DV, Poznansky JJR. Review of cervical smears from 76 women with invasive cervical cancer: cytological findings and medicolegal implications. Cytopathology. 2006;17:127-136.
31. Renshaw AA, Mody DR, Lozano RL, et al. Detection of adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix in Papanicolaou tests: comparison of diagnostic accuracy with other high grade lesions. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2004;128:153-157.
32. Bernstein SJ, Sanchez-Ramos L, Ndubisi B. Liquid-based cervical smear study and conventional Papanicolaou smears: a metaanalysis of prospective studies comparing cytologic diagnosis and sample adequacy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;185:308-317.
33. Abulafia O, Pezzullo JC, Sherer DM. Performance of Thin-Prep liquid-based cervical cytology in comparison with conventionally prepared Papanicolaou smears: a quantitative survey. Gynecol Oncol. 2003;90:137-144.
34. Biscotti CV, Dawson AE, Dziura B, et al. Assisted primary screening using the automated ThinPrep imaging system. Am J Clin Pathol. 2005;123:281-287.
35. Lozano R. Comparison of computer-assisted and manual screening of cervical cytology. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;104:134-138.
36. Chivukula M, Saad RS, Elishaev E, White S, Mauser N, Dabbs DJ. Introduction of the Thin Prep Imaging System™ (TIS): experience in a high volume academic practice. Cytojournal. 2007;4:6.
37. 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.
38. Doorbar J, Cubie H. Molecular basis for advances in cervical screening. Mol Diagn. 2005;9:129-142.
39. International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC Handbook of Cancer Prevention. Cervix Cancer Screening: IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Cancer. Preventive Strategies. Lyon, France: IARC; 2004.
40. Arbyn M, Buntinx F, Van Ranst M, Paraskevaidis E, Martin-Hirsch P, Dillner J. Virologic versus cytologic triage of women with equivocal Pap smears: a meta-analysis of the accuracy to detect high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96:280-293.
41. Bidus MA, Maxwell GL, Kulasingam S, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of liquid-based cytology and human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screening. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107:997-1005.