Why CIN3 and CIN2 should be distinguished on histological reports [4]

Cytopathology

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 63-64

  Herbert, A ^a   Arbyn, M ^b   Bergeron, C ^c  

^a ST THOMAS HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b SCIENTIFIC INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (Belgium)

^c LABORATOIRE CERBA   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; CYTODIAGNOSIS; HUMAN; LETTER; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU;

CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; FEMALE; GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 38149000855     PISSN: 09565507     EISSN: 13652303     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2303.2006.00539.x     Document Type: Letter

References (6)

1. Smith JHF, Desai MS. Euroepan guidelines on cervical screening. Cytopathology 2007 18 : 211 2.
2. Herbert A, Bergeron C, Wiener H et al. European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening: recommendations for cervical cytology terminology. Cytopathology 2007 18 : 213 9.
3. Ismail SM, Colclough AB, Dinnen JS et al. Observer variation in histopathological diagnosis and grading of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Br Med J 1989 298 : 707 10.
4. Holowaty P, Miller AB, Rohan T, To T. Natural history of dysplasia of the uterine cervix. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999 91 : 252 8.
5. International Agency for Research on Cancer. Cervix Cancer Screening. IARC Handbooks of Cancer Prevention, Vol. 10. Lyon : IARC Press 2005.
6. Arbyn M, Dillner J, Schenck U et al. Chapter 3: Methods for Screening and Diagnosis. In : European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Cervical Cancer Screening, 2nd edn. Arbyn M, Anttila A, Jordan J et al. (eds). Luxembourg : Office for Official Publications of the European Communities in press).