Is there any clinical advantage in separating CIN 2 from CIN 3 in the current two-tiered cytological classification?

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 115-118

  Boonlikit, Sathone ^a   Srisantiroj, Nattinee ^a  

^a RANGSIT UNIVERSITY   (Thailand)

Author keywords

Cervix cancer; CIN2 CIN3; Colposcopy; Cytology; Histopathological diagnosis

Indexed keywords

EID: 67650901818     PISSN: 15137368     EISSN: 2476762X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Anderson CE, Lee AJ, McLaren KM, et al, (2004). Level of agreement and biopsy correlation using two- and three-tiered systems to grade cervical dyskaryosis. Cytopathology, 15, 256-62.
2. Harry VN, Narayansingh GV, Parkin DE, (2008). Is this the end of the line for the moderate dyskaryotic smear? J Low Genit Tract Dis, 12, 20-3.
3. Herbert A, (2004). BSCC terminology for cervical cytology: two or three tiers? Why not five,seven or even 14? Cytopathology, 15, 245-51.
4. Herbert A, Bergeron C, Wiener H, et al, (2007). European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening: recommendations for cervical cytology terminology. Cytopathology, 18, 213-9.
5. Herbert A, Arbyn M, Bergeron C, (2008). Why CIN3 and CIN2 should be distinguished on histological reports. Cytopathology,19,63-4.
6. Kocjan G, Priollet BC, Desai M, et al, (2005). BSCC, Bethesda or other? Terminology in cervical cytology European panel discussion. Cytopathology, 16, 113-9.
7. National Health and Medical Research Council, (2005). Screening to prevent cervical cancer: guidelines for the management of asymptomatic women with screen detected abnormalities. [cited 2008 May 2]. Available at: http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/publications.
8. National Health Service Cervical Screening Program.Guidelines for the NHS cervical screening program publication, (2003). [cited 2008 June 10]. Available at: http://www.cancernetwork.de/cervical/guidelines/chap3/.
9. Nobbenhuis MA, Helmerhorst TJ, van den Brule AJ, et al, (2001). Cytological regression and clearance of high-risk human papillomavirus in women with an abnormal cervical smear. Lancet, 358, 1782-3.
10. Ostör AG, (1993). Natural history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a critical review. Int J Gynecol Pathol, 12, 186- 92.
11. Robertson J, Anderson JM, Beck JS, et al, (1989). Observer variablility in histopathological reporting of cervical biopsy specimens. J Clin Pathol, 42, 231-8.
12. Schiffman M, Kjaer SK, (2003). Chapter 2: Natural history of anogenital human papillomavirus infection and neoplasia. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr, 31, 14-9.
13. Spitzer M, Johnson C, (2002). The Papanicolaou smear. In: Apgar BS, Brotzman GL, Spitzer M (eds). Colposcopy: Principle and Practice: An Integrated Text Book and Atlas. W.B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, pp 41-68.
14. Wadehra V, Johnson SJ, (2003). An audit of the positive predictive value of high-grade dyskaryosis in cervical smears: 2001- 2002. Cytopathology, 14, 107-14.
15. Wright TC Jr, Massad LS, Dunton CJ, et al, (2007). 2006 consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or adenocarcinoma in situ. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 197, 340-5.
16. Wright TC Jr, Massad LS, Dunton CJ, et al, (2007). 2006 consensus guidelines for the management of women with abnormal cervical cancer screening tests. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 197, 346-55.