Low proportion of false-negative smears in the Finnish program for cervical cancer screening

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 381-387

  Lönnberg, Stefan ^a,b   Anttila, Ahti ^a   Kotaniemi Talonen, Laura ^a   Kujari, Harry ^d   Melkko, Jukka ^e   Granroth, Gustav ^f   Vornanen, Martine ^g   Pietiläinen, Timo ^h   Sankila, Anna ^c   Arola, Johanna ^c   Luostarinen, Tapio ^a   Nieminen, Pekka ^b  

^a FINNISH CANCER REGISTRY   (Finland)

^b HELSINKI UNIVERSITY CENTRAL HOSPITAL   (Finland)

^c Syöpäjärjestöjen Poliklinikka   (Finland)

^d Lounais Suomen Patologian Laboratorio Oy   (Finland)

^e Suomen Syöpäyhdistyksen Sytologian Laboratorio   (Finland)

^f Syöpäjärjestöjen Sytologian Laboratorio   (Finland)

^g Kotkan Syöpäpoliklinikka   (Finland)

^h Puijon Solu Ja Kudoslaboratorio Oy   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER SCREENING; COLPOSCOPY; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FEMALE; FINLAND; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCIBILITY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SQUAMOUS EPITHELIUM; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; VALIDITY;

ADULT; CARCINOMA IN SITU; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; FINLAND; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 76149124210     PISSN: 10559965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-09-1038     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin 2005;55:74-108.
2. Finnish Cancer Registry [Internet]. [updated 23.9.2009; cited 23.9.2009]. Available from: http://www.cancerregistry.fi/stats/eng/veng0006i0.html.
3. van der Aa MA, Pukkala E, Coebergh JW, Anttila A, Siesling S. Mass screening programmes and trends in cervical cancer in Finland and the Netherlands. Int J Cancer 2008;122:1854-8.
4. Sasieni P, Cuzick J, Lynch-Farmery E, National Co-ordinating Network for Cervical Screening Working Group. Estimating the efficacy of screening by auditing smear histories of women with and without cervical cancer. Br J Cancer 1996;73:1001-5.
5. Saisieni P, Adams J, Cuzick J. Benefit of cervical screening at different ages: evidence from the UK audit of screening histories. Br J Cancer 2003;89:88-93.
6. International Agency for Research on Cancer Handbooks of Cancer Prevention. Cervix cancer screening. Lyon: IARC Press; 2005.
7. In: Arbyn M, Anttila A, Jordan J, et al., editors. European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening. 2nd ed. Luxembourg: Office for official publications of the European Communities; 2008.
8. Arbyn M, Raifu O, Weiderpass E, Bray F, Anttila A. Trends of cervical cancer mortality in the member states of the European Union. Eur J Cancer 2009;45:2640-8.
9. Andrae B, Kemetli L, Sparén P, et al. Screening-preventable cancer risks: evidence from a nationwide audit in Sweden. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008;100:622-9.
10. Bulk S, Rozendaal L, Zielinski GD, et al. High-risk human papillomavirus is present in cytologically false-negative smears: an analysis of "normal" smears preceding CIN2/3. J Clin Pathol 2008;61:385-9.
11. Ejersbo D, Dahl M-B, Hølund B. False negative Pap smears in a Danish material. Ugeskrift for laeger 2003;165:2391-4, Danish.
12. Koss LG, Sherman ME, Cohen MB, et al. Significant reduction in the rate of false-negative cervical smears with neural networkbased technology (PAPNET Testing System). Hum Pathol 1997;28: 1196-203.
13. Kenter GG, Schoonderwald EM, Koelma IA, Arentz N, Hermans J, Fleuren GJ. The cytological screening history of 469 patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix uteri; does interval carcinoma exist? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1996;75:400-3.
14. Anderson GH, Bendet JL, Le Richie JC, Matistic JP, Thompson JE. Invasive cancer of the cervix in British Columbia: a review of the demography and screening histories of 437 cases seen from 1985-88. Obstet Gynecol 1992;80:1-4.
15. Kristensen GB, Skyggebjerg KD, Hølund B, Holm K, Hansen MK. Analysis of cervical smears obtained within three years of the diagnosis of invasive cervical cancer. Acta Cytol 1991;35:47-50.
16. van der Graaf Y, Vooijs GP, Gaillard HL, Go DM. Screening errors in cervical cytologic screening. Acta Cytol 1987;31:434-8.
17. Rylander E. Negative smears in women developing invasive cervical cancer. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1977;56:115-8.
18. Ronco G, van Ballegooijen M, Becker N, et al. Process performance of cervical cancer screening programmes in Europe. Eur J Cancer 2009;45:2659-70.
19. Finnish Cancer Registry. Cancer in Finland 2004 and 2005. Cancer Society of Finland Publication No. 72. Helsinki, 2007.
20. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, et al., for the Forum Group Members and the Bethesda 2001 Workshop. The 2001 Bethesda system: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002; 287:2114-9.
21. Hakama M, Rasanen-Virtanen U. Effect of a mass screening program on the risk of cervical cancer. Am J Epidemiol 1976;103:512-7.
22. McCredie MR, Sharples KJ, Paul C, et al. Natural history of cervical neoplasia and risk of invasive cancer in women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol 2008;9:425-34.
23. Oortmarssen GJ, Habbema JD. Epidemiological evidence for age-dependent regression of pre-invasive cervical cancer. Br J Cancer 1991;64:559-65.
24. Nanda K, McCrory DC, Myers ER, et al. Accuracy of the Papanicolaou test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytological abnormalities: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2000;132:810-9.
25. Naucler P, Ryd W, Törnberg S, et al. Efficacy of HPV DNA testing with Cytology Triage and/or repeat HPV DNA testing in primary cervical cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009;101:88-99.
26. Kotaniemi-Talonen L, Anttila A, Malila N, et al. Screening with a primary human papillomavirus test does not increase detection of cervical cancer and intraepithelial neoplasia 3. Eur J Cancer 2008;44: 565-71.
27. Anttila A, Hakama M, Kotaniemi-Talonen L, Nieminen P. Alternative technologies in cervical cancer screening: a randomised evaluation trial. BMC Public Health 2006;6:252.