Histologic follow-up results in 662 patients with Pap test findings of atypical glandular cells: Results from a large academic womens hospital laboratory employing sensitive screening methods

Gynecologic Oncology

Volumn 114, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 383-389

  Zhao, Chengquan ^a   Florea, Anca ^a   Onisko, Agnieszka ^a   Austin, R Marshall ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

Atypical glandular cells; Gyncologic cytology; Histologic follow up

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; ARTICLE; ATYPICAL GLANDULAR CELL; CANCER SCREENING; CELL TYPE; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; CYTOPATHOLOGY; ENDOMETRITIS; ENDOMETRIUM; ENDOMETRIUM POLYP; ENDOMETRIUM TUMOR; FEMALE; HISTOLOGY; HOSPITAL LABORATORY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; HYSTERECTOMY; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; LABORATORY TEST; LIQUID BASED CYTOLOGY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; METAPLASIA; OVARY TUMOR; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRECANCER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; UTERINE CERVIX EPITHELIUM; UTERINE ENDOCERVIX;

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; CERVIX UTERI; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 67651155771     PISSN: 00908258     EISSN: 10956859     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2009.05.019     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Wood M.D., Horst J.A., and Bibbo M. Weeding atypical glandular cell look-alikes from the true atypical lesions in liquid-based Pap tests: a review. Diagn. Cytopathol. 35 (2007) 12-17
2. Kinney W., Sawaya G., Sung H., et al. Stage at diagnosis and mortality in patients with adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinoma of the cervix diagnosed as a consequence of cytologic screening. Acta Cytol. 47 (2003) 167-171
3. Syrjanen K. Is improved detection of adenocarcinoma in situ a key to reducing the incidence of endcoervical adenocarcinoma?. Acta Cytol. 48 (2004) 591-594
4. Mitchell H., Hocking J., and Saville M. Cervical cytology screening of women diagnosed with adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix: a case control study. Acta Cytol. 48 (2004) 595-600
5. Kalir T., Simsir A., Demopoulos H.B., and Demopoulos R.I. Obstacles to early detection of endocervical adenocarcinoma. Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 24 (2005) 399-403
6. Simsir A., Hwang S., Cangiarella J., et al. Glandular cell atypia on Papanicolaou smears: interobserver variability in the diagnosis and prediction of cell of origin. Cancer 99 (2003) 323-330
7. Lee K.R., Darragh T.M., Joste N.E., et al. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance (AGUS): interobserver reproducibility in cervical smears and corresponding thin-layer preparations. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 117 (2002) 96-102
8. Sherman M., Dasgupta A., Schiffman M., et al. The Bethesda Interobserver Reproducibility Study (BIRST): a web-based assessment of the Bethesda 2001 system for classifying cervical cytology. Cancer Cytopathol. 111 (2007) 15-25
9. Raab S.S., Geisinger K.R., Silverman J.F., et al. Interobserver variability of a Papanicolaou diagnosis of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 110 (1998) 653-659
10. DeMay R.M. The Pap Test. II. Cytology of Glandular Epithelium (2005), ASCP Press, Chicago 144-153
11. Zhao C., Austin R.M., Pan J., et al. Clinical significance of atypical glandular cells in conventional Pap smears in a large, high-risk, U.S. West Coast minority population. Acta Cytol. 53 (2009) 153-159
12. Schnatz P.F., Guile M., O'sullivan D.M., and Sorosky J.I. Clinical significance of atypical glandular cells on cervical cytology. Obstet. Gynecol. 107 (2006) 701-708
13. Smith H.O., Benwick M., Qualls C.F., Verschraegen C.F., and Wiggins C. 30 Year trends in cervical cancer incidence rates: a surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program population-based study. Abstract 196. Society of Gynecologic Oncologists' 2007 Meeting. March 4-7 (2007) San Diego, California
14. Linder J., Keene J., and Sheets E. Cervical cancer reduction through higher sensitivity Pap testing: observed vs. calculated effects. Cancer Cytopathol. 111 (2007) 369
15. Andrae B., Kermetli L., Sparen P., et al. Screening preventable cervical cancer risks: Evidence from a nationwide audit in Sweden. JNCI 100 (2008) 622-629
16. The International Collaboration of Epidemiological Studies of Cervical Cancer. Comparison of risk factors for Invasive squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the cervix: collaborative reanalysis of individual data on 8,097 women with squamous cell carcinoma and 1,374 women with adenocarcinoma from 12 epidemiological studies. Int. J. Cancer 120 (2006) 885-891 2006
17. Mitchell H., Hocking J., and Saville M. Improvement in protection against adenocarcinoma of the cervix resulting from participation in cervical screening. Cancer Cytopathol. 99 (2003) 336-341
18. Mitchell H., Giles G., and Medley G. Accuracy and survival benefit of cytological prediction of endometrial carcinoma on routine cervical smears. Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 12 (1993) 34-40
19. Davey D.D., Neal M.H., Wilbur D.C., et al. Bethesda 2001 implementation and reporting rates: 2003 practices of participants in the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 128 (2004) 1224-1229
20. Bibbo M., and Wilbur D. Comprehensive cytology. Chapter 9. Glandular Lesions of the Uterine Cervix (2008), Saunders Elsevier Publishers 230
21. Schooland M., Segal A., Allpress S., et al. Adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix. Sensitivity of detection by cervical smear. Cancer Cytopathol. 96 (2002) 330-337
22. Ruba S., Schooland M., Allpress S., et al. Adenocarcinoma in situ of the uterine cervix. Screening and diagnostic errors in Papanicolaou smears. Cancer Cytopathol. 102 (2004) 280-287
23. Geldenhuys L., and Murray M.L. Sensitivity and specificity of the Pap smear for glandular lesions of the cervix and endometrium. Acta Cytol. 51 (2007) 47-50
24. Krane J.F., Granter S.R., Trask C.E., et al. Papanicolaou smear sensitivity for the detection of adenocarcinoma of the cervix. A study of 49 cases. Cancer Cytopathol. 93 (2001) 8-15
25. Solomon D., Davey D., Kurman R., et al. The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA. 287 (2002) 2114-2119
26. Reuss E., Price J., and Koonings P. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance. subtyping as a predictor of outcome. J. Reprod. Med. 46 (2001) 701-775
27. Barreth D., Faught W., Schepansky A., et al. the relationship between atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance on Pap smear and a clinically significant histologic diagnosis. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Can. 26 (2004) 867-870
28. Austin R.M., and Holladay E.B. Chapter X. Lessons from litigation. In: DeMay R.M. (Ed). The Pap Test (2005), ASCP Press
29. DeSimone C.P., Day M.E., Towar M.M., et al. Rate of pathology from atypical glandular cell pap tests classified by the Bethesda 2001 nomenclature. Obstet. Gynecol. 107 (2006) 1285-1291
30. Holland-barkis P., Forjuoh S.N., Couchman G.R., et al. Primary care physicians' awareness and adherence to cervical cancer screening guidelines in Texas. Prev. Med. 42 (2006) 140-145
31. Sharpless K.E., Schnatz P.F., Mandavilli S., et al. Lack of adherence to practice guidelines for women with atypical glandular cells on cervical cytology. Obstet. Gynecol. (2005) 501-506
32. Noller K.L., Bettes B., Zinberg S., et al. Cervical cytology screening practices among obstericians-gynecologists. Obstet. Gynecol. 102 (2003) 259-265
33. U. S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS); http://www.census.gov/acs/www/ Last accessed December 1, 2008.
34. Dzura B., Quinn S., and Richard K. Performance of an imaging system vs. manual screening in the detection of squamous intraepithelial lesions of the cervix. Acta Cytol. 50 (2006) 309-311
35. Begg C.B., and Greenes R.A. Assessment of diagnostic tests when disease verification is subject to selection bias. Biometrics 39 (1983) 207-215
36. Wu J.M., Wechter M.E., Geller E.J., et al. Hysterectomy rates in the United States, 2003. Obstet. Gynecol. 110 (2007) 1091-1095
37. Druzdel M.J., and Diez F.J. Combining knowledge from different sources in causal probabilistic models. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 4 (2003) 295-316
38. Almonte M., Ferreccio C., Winkler J.L., et al. Cervical screening by visual inspection, HPV testing, liquid-based and conventional cytology in Amazonian Peru. Int. J. Cancer 121 (2007) 796-802
39. Castle P., Sideri M., and Jeronimo J. isk assessment to guide the prevention of cervical cancer. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 197 (2007) 356.e1-356.e6
40. Kurman R., Kaminski P., and Norris H.J. The behavior of endometrial hyperplasia. A long term study of "untreated" hyperplasia in 170 patients. Cancer 56 (1985) 403-412
41. Diaz-Montes T.P., Farinola M.A., Zahurak M.L., et al. Clinical utility of atypical glandular cells (AGC) classification: cytohistologic comparison and relationship to HPV results. Gynecologic. Oncol. 104 (2007) 366-371
42. Sharpless K.E., Schnatz P.F., Mandavilli S., Greene J.F., and Sorosky J.I. Dysplasia associated with atypical glandular cells on cervical cytology. Obstet. Gynecol. 105 (2005) 494-500
43. Chhieng D.C., and Cangiarella J.F. Atypical glandular cells. Clin. Lab. Med. 23 (2003) 633-657
44. Cangiarella J.F., and Chhieng D.C. Atypical glandular cells - an update. Diagn. Cytopathol. 29 (2003) 271-279
45. Barreth D., Faught W., Schepansky A., and Johnson G. The relationship between atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance on Pap smear and a clinically significant histologic diagnosis. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Cancer. 26 (2004) 867-870
46. Lai C.R., Hsu C.Y., Tsay S.H., et al. Clinical significance of atypical glandular cells by 2001 Bethesda system in cytohistologic correlation. Acta Cytol. 52 (2008) 563-567
47. Kumar N., Bongiovanni M., Molliet M.J., et al. Reclassification and analysis of clinical significance of atypical glandular cells on ThinPrep using The Bethesda 2001: Geneva experience. Swiss Med. Wkly. 137 (2007) 635-641
48. Wright Jr. T.C., Cox J.T., Massad L.S., et al. ASCCP sponsored consensus conference. 2001 Consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities (2001 ASCCP sponsored consensus conference). JAMA 287 (2002) 2120-2129
49. Wright Jr. T.C., Massad L.S., Dunton C.J., et al. Consensus guidelines for the management of women with abnormal cervical cancer screening tests (2006 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology-sponsored consensus conference). Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 197 (2007) 346-355 2006
50. Irvin W., Evans S.R., Andersen W., et al. The utility of HPV DNA triage in the management of cytological AGC. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 193 (2005) 559-567
51. Sherman M.E., Wang S.S., Tarone R., et al. Histopathologic extent of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3 lesions in the atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion triage study: implications for subject safety and lead-time bias. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 12 (2003) 372-379
52. Zhao C., Florea A., and Austin R.M. Clinical utility of adjunctive high risk HPV DNA Testing in women with pap test findings of atypical glandular cells. Submitted for publication to Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine on December 5 (2008)
53. Chhieng D.C., Elgert P., Cohen J.M., et al. Clinical significance of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance in postmenopausal women. Cancer Cytopathol. 93 (2001) 1-7
54. Saad R.S., Takei H., Liu Y.L., et al. Clinical significance of a cytologic diagnosis of atypical glandular cells, favor endometrial origin, in Pap smears. Acta Cytol. 50 (2006) 48-54
55. Chhieng D., Elgert P., Cohen J.M., et al. Clinical significance of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance, favor endometrial origin. Cancer Cytopathol. 93 (2001) 351-356
56. Ashfaq R., Gibbons D., Vela C., et al. ThinPrep Pap Test. Accuracy for glandular disease. Acta Cytol. 43 (1999) 81-85
57. Schorge J.O., Hossein Saboorian M., et al. ThinPrep detection of cervical and endometrial adenocarcinoma: a retrospective cohort study. Cancer Cytopathol. 96 (2002) 338-343
58. Nanda K., McCrory D.C., Myers E.R., et al. Accuracy of the Papanicolaou test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytological abnormalities: a systematic review. Ann. Intern. Med. 132 (2000) 810-819
59. Cuzik J., Clavel C., Petry K.U., et al. Overview of the European and North American studies on HPV testing in primary cervical cancer screening. Int. J. Cancer 119 (2006) 1095-1101
60. Belinsion J., Quao Y.L., Pretorius R., et al. Shanxi Province cervical cancer screening study: a cross-sectional comparative trial of multiple techniques to detect cervical neoplasia. Gynecol Oncol. 83 (2001) 439-444
61. Bernstein S.J., Sanchez-Ramos L., and Ndubisi B. Liquid-based cervical cytologic smear study and conventional Papanicolaou smears: a metaanalysis of prospective studies comparing cytologic diagnosis and sample adequacy. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 185 (2001) 308-317
62. Abulafia O., Pezzulo J., and Sherer D.M. Performance of ThinPrep liquid-based cervical cytology in comparison with conventionally prepared Papanicolaou smears: a quantitative survey. Gynecol. Oncol. 90 (2003) 137-144
63. Davey E., d'Assuncao J., Irwig L., et al. Accuracy of reading liquid based cytology slides using the ThinPrep Imager compared with conventional cytology: prospective study. BMJ 335 7609 (2007) 31 Epub 2007 Jun 29
64. Chivukula M., Mauser N., Dabbs D.J., et al. Relative impact of the ThinPrep Imaging System (TIS) as a quality tool and a productivity tool in academic medical centers. Cancer Cytopathol. 388A (2006) 108
65. Zhao C., Elishaev E.E., Yuan K., Yu J., and Austin R.M. Very low human papillomavirus DNA Prevalence in mature women with negative computer-imaged liquid-based Pap tests. Cancer Cytopathol. 111 (2007) 292-297
66. Austin R.M. Blinded rescreening versus biased retrospective review. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 127 (1997) 311-314
67. Ronco G., Cuzick J., Pierotti P., et al. Accuracy of liquid based versus conventional cytology: overall results of new technologies for cervical cancer screening: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 335 (2007) 28