Superior performance of liquid-based versus conventional cytology in a population-based cervical cancer screening program

Gynecologic Oncology

Volumn 112, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 572-576

  Beerman, H ^a   van Dorst, E B L ^b   Kuenen Boumeester, V ^c   Hogendoorn, P C W ^d  

^a Maasstad Hospital Rotterdam   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^c ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^d LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Cervical cytology; Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN); Liquid based cytology; Papanicolaou smear; Population screening; SurePath

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONVENTIONAL CYTOLOGY; CYTOLOGY; DATA BASE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH PROGRAM; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LABORATORY TEST; LIQUID BASED CYTOLOGY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER;

ADULT; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; COHORT STUDIES; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 60449098293     PISSN: 00908258     EISSN: 10956859     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.12.012     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. IARC Handbooks of Cancer Prevention, WHO, Volume 10, Cervix Cancer Screening, IARC Press 2005.
2. Bishop J.W., Bigner S.H., Colagn T.J., et al. Multicenter masked evaluation of AutoCyte PREP thin layers with matched conventional smears including initial biopsy results. Acta Cytol. 42 (1998) 189-197
3. Vassilakos P., Surel J., and Rondez R. Direct-to-vial use of the AutoCyte PREP liquid-based preparation for cervical-vaginal specimens in three European laboratories. Acta Cytol. 43 (1999) 65-68
4. Grace A., McBrearty P., Troost S., et al. Comparative study: conventional cervical and ThinPrep Pap tests in a routine clinical setting. Cytopathol. 13 4 (2002) 200-205
5. Baker J.J. Conventional and liquid-based cervicovaginal cytology: a comparison with clinical and histologic follow-up. Diagn. Cytopatho. 27 (2002) 185-188
6. Cheung A.N.Y., Szeto E.F., Leung B.S.Y., Khoo U.S., and Ng A.W.Y. Liquid-based cytology and conventional cervical smears: a comparison study in an Asian screening population. Cancer Cytopathol. 99 (2003) 331-335
7. Limaye A., Connor A.J., Huang X., and Luff R. Comparative analysis of conventional Papanicalaou tests and a fluid-based thin-layer method. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 127 2 (2003) 200-204
8. Fremont-Smith M., Marino J., Griffin B., Spencer L., and Bolic D. Comparison of the SurePath™ liquid-based Papanicolaou smear with conventional Papanicolaou smear in a mulisite direct-to-vial study. Cancer Cytopathol. 102 (2004) 269-279
9. Sass M. Use of a liquid-based, thin-layer Pap test in a community hospital: impact of cytology performance and productivity. Acta Cytol. 48 (2004) 17-22
10. Colgan T.J., McLachlin C.M., Cotterchio M., et al. Results of the implementation of liquid-based cytology - surepath in the Ontario screening program. Cancer Cytopathol. 102 (2004) 362-367
11. Tuncer Z.S., Basaran M., Sezgin Y., Firat P., and Mocan Kuzey G. Clinical results of a split sample liquid-based cytology (ThinPrep) study of 4,322 patients in a Turkish institution. Eur J. Gynaecol. Oncol. 26 6 (2005) 646-648
12. Duggan M.A., Khalil M., Brasher P.M., and Nation J.G. Comparative study of the ThinPrep Pap test and conventional cytology results in a Canadian cohort. Cytopathology 17 2 (2006) 73-81
13. Nance K.V. Evolution of Pap testing at a community hospital - a ten year experience. Diagnostic Cytopathol. 35 (2006) 148-153
14. van Leeuwen AWFM. Cervical screening program in South West Netherlands. Stichting Bevolkingsonderzoek Baarmoederhalskanker Zuidwest- Nederland (SBBZN P.O. box 3051. 3130 CB Vlaardingen The Netherlands).
15. Van Leeuwen A.W., de Nooijer P., and Hop W.C. Screening for cervical carcinoma. Cancer 105 5 (2005) 270-276
16. Kreuger F.A.F., and Beerman H. The screening of women with cervical cancer of the Rotterdam area. Eur. J. Epidemio. 16 7 (2000) 641-645
17. Klinkhamer P.J.J.M., et al. Liquid-based cervical cytology. A review of the literature with methods of evidence-based medicine. Cancer Cytopathol. 99 5 (2003) 263-271
18. Davey E., et al. Effect of study design and quality on unsatisfactory rates, cytological classificatios, and accuracy in liquid-based versus conventional cervical cytology: a systematic review. Lancet 367 (2006) 122-132
19. Hanselaar AGJM et al. Guidelines Cervical Cytology. Application of automated screening, LBC and detection of HPV in the cervical cytology screening program. Dutch Society of Pathology. 2002. (NVVP richtlijn bevolkingsonderzoek. SBBZN P.O. box 3051. 3130 CB Vlaardingen The Netherlands).
20. Hutchinson M.L., Zahniser D.J., Shermann M.E., et al. Utility of a liquid-based 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 87 (1999) 48-55
21. Vassilakos P., Schwartz D., de Maraval F., et al. Biopsy-based comparison of liquid-based, thin-layer preparations to conventional Pap smears. J. Reprod. Med. 45 1 (2000) 11-16
22. Coste J., Cochand-Priiollet B., de Cremoux P., et al. Cross-sectional study of conventional cervical smear, monolayer cytology, and human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervical cancer screening. BMJ 326 (2003) 733-737
23. Hussein T., Desai M., Tomlinson A., and Kitchener H.C. The comparative diagnostic accuracy of conventional and liquid-based cytology in a colposcopic setting. BJOG 112 11 (2005) 1542-1546
24. Taylor S., Kuhn L., Dupree W., et al. Direct comparison of liquid-based and conventional cytology in a South African screening trial. Int. J. Cancer 118 (2005) 957-962
25. Howell L., Davis R., Belk T., Agdigos R., and Lowe J. The AutoCyte preparation system for gynecologic cytology. Acta Cytologica 42 (1998) 171-177
26. Marino J.F., and Fremont-Smith M. Direct-to-vail experience with AutoCyte PREP in a small new England Regional Cytology Practice. J. Reprod. Med. 46 (2001) 353-358
27. Sweeney B.J., Haq Z., Happel J.F., Weinstein B., and Schneider D. Comparison of the effectiveness of two liquid-based Papanicolauo systems in the handling of adverse limiting factors, such as excessive blood. Cancer Cytopathol. 108 1 (2006) 27-31
28. Luthra U.K., Chrishti M., Dey P., et al. Performance of monolayered cervical smears in a gynecology outpatient setting in Kuwait. Acta Cytol. 46 2 (2002) 303-310