Adjunctive high-risk human papillomavirus DNA testing is a useful option for disease risk assessment in patients with negative papanicolaou tests without an endocervical/transformation zone sample

Cancer

Volumn 114, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 242-248

  Zhao, Chengquan ^a   Austin, Marshall ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

Endocervical transformation zone; Human papillomavirus; Hybrid capture 2 test; Squamous intraepithelial lesion; ThinPrep pap test

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CARCINOMA IN SITU; CELL TRANSFORMATION; DNA DETERMINATION; ENDOCERVICAL TRANSFORMATION ZONE SAMPLE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SAMPLE; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; TISSUE DISTRIBUTION; TISSUE STRUCTURE; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; VAGINA SMEAR; WART VIRUS; AGE; ISOLATION AND PURIFICATION; MIDDLE AGED; PAPILLOMA VIRUS; PATHOLOGY; PRECANCER; UTERINE CERVIX; UTERINE CERVIX TUMOR;

VIRUS DNA;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; CELL TRANSFORMATION, NEOPLASTIC; CERVIX UTERI; DNA, VIRAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; PAPILLOMAVIRIDAE; PRECANCEROUS CONDITIONS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK ASSESSMENT; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 51649115363     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: 10970142     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23598     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Solomon D, Nayar R. The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology. 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag Publishers; 2004.
2. Raab SS, Andrew-Jaja C, Condel JL, Dabbs DJ. Improving Papanicolaou test quality and reducing medical errors by using Toyota Production System Methods. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194:57-64.
3. Kurman RJ, Solomon D. The Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytologic diagnoses. New York: Springer-Verlag Publishers; 1994.
4. Bos AB, van Ballegooijen M, Elske van den Akker-van Marie M, Hanselaar AG, van Oortmarssen GJ, Habbema JD. Endocervical status is not predictive of the incidence of cervical cancer in the years after negative smears. Am J Clin Pathol. 2001;115:851-855.
5. Mitchell H, Medley G. Longitudinal study of women with negative cervical smears according to endocervical status. Lancet. 1991;337:265-267.
6. Mitchell H. Longitudinal analysis of histologic high-grade disease after negative cervical cytology according to endocervical status. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol). 2001;93:237-240.
7. Kivlahan C, Ingram E. Papanicolaou smears without endocervical cells: are they inadequate? Acta Cytol. 1986;30:258-260.
8. Vooijs PG, Elias A, van der Graaf Y, Veling S. Relationship between the diagnosis of epithelial abnormalities and the composition of cervical smears. Acta Cytol. 1985;29:323-338.
9. [no authors listed]. The Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytologic diagnoses: revised after the second National Cancer Institute Workshop, April 29-30, 1991. Acta Cytol. 1993;37:115-124.
10. Alons-van Kordelaar JJM, Boon ME. Diagnostic accuracy of squamous cervical lesions studied in spatula-cytobrush smears. Acta Cytol. 1988;32:801-804.
11. Boon ME, Alons-van Kordelaar JJM, Rietveld-Scheffers PEM. Consequences of the introduction of combined spatula and cytobrush sampling for cervical cytology: improvements in smear quality and detection rates. Acta Cytol. 1986;30:264-270.
12. Boon ME, DeGraaff Guilloud JC, Rietveld WJ. Analysis of 5 sampling methods for the preparation of cervical smears. Acta Cytol. 1989;33:843-848.
13. Elias A, Linthorst G, Bekker B, Vooijs PG. The significance of endocervical cells in the diagnosis of cervical epithelial changes. Acta Cytol. 1983;27:225-229.
14. Frost JK. Diagnostic accuracy of "cervical smears." Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1969;24:893-908.
15. Mauney M, Eide D, Sotham J. Rates of condyloma and dysplasia in Papanicolaou smears with and without endocervical cells. Diagn Cytopathol. 1990;6:18-21.
16. Mintzer M, Curtis P, Resnick JC, Morrell D. The effect of the quality of Papanicolaou smears on the detection of cytologic abnormalities. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol). 1999;87:113-117.
17. Mitchell H, Medley G. Influence of endocervical status on the cytologic prediction of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Acta Cytol. 1992;36:875-880.
18. Richart RM, Vaillant HW. Influence of cell collection techniques upon cytological diagnosis. Cancer. 1965;18:1474-1478.
19. Robertson JH, Woodend B. Negative cytology preceding cervical cancer: causes and prevention. J Clin Pathol. 1993;46:700-702.
20. Wied GL. Importance of the site from which vaginal cytologic smears are taken. Am J Clin Pathol. 1955;25:742-750.
21. Woodman CB, Williams D, Yates M, Tomlinson K, Ward K, Luesley D. Indicators of effective cytological sampling of the uterine cervix. Lancet. 1989;2:88-90.
22. Davey DD, Austin RM, Birdsong G, et al. ASCCP Patient Management Guidelines: Pap Test Specimen Adequacy and Quality Indicators, J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2002;6:195-199.
23. Davey DD, Cox JT, Austin RM, et al. Cervical cytology specimen adequacy: patient management guidelines and optimizing specimen collection, J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2008;12:71-81.
24. Zhao C, Austin RM. Human papillomavirus DNA detection in ThinPrep Pap test vials is independent of cytologic sampling of the transformation zone. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;107:231-235.
25. Dzura B, Quinn S, Richard K. Performance of an imaging system vs. manual screening in the detection of squamous intraepithelial lesions of the cervix. Acta Cytol. 2006;50:309-311.
26. Castle PE, Lorincz AT, Scott DR, et al. Comparison between prototype hybrid capture 3 and hybrid capture 2 human papillomavirus DNA assays for detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cancer. J Clin Microbiol. 2003;42:4022-4030.
27. Oster AG. Natural history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a critical review. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1993;12:186-192.
28. Garcia F, Petry KU, Muderspach L, et al. ZYC101a for treatment of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;103:317-326.
29. Kristensen GB, Skyggebjerg KD, Holund B, et al. Analysis of cervical smears obtained within 3 years of the diagnosis of invasive cervical cancer. Acta Cytol. 1991;35:47-50.
30. Kalir T, Simsir A, Demopoulos HB, Demopoulos RI. Obstacles to early detection of endocervical adenocarcinoma. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2005;24:399-403.
31. Smith JS, Lindsay L, Hoots B, et al. Human papillomavirus distribution in invasive cervical cancer and high-grade lesions: a meta-analysis update. Int J Cancer. 2007;121:621-632.
32. Castellsague X, Diaz M, de Sanjose S, et al. Worldwide human papillomavirus etiology of cervical adenocarcinoma and its cofactors: implications for screening and prevention. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98:303-315.
33. Andersson S, Rylander E, Larsson B, et al. The role of human papillomavirus in cervical adenocarcinoma carcinogenesis. Eur J Cancer. 2001;37:246-250.
34. Bertrand M, Lickrish GM, Colgan TJ. The anatomic distribution of cervical adenocarcinoma in situ: implications for treatment. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1987;157:21-25.