BD FocalPoint Slide Profiler performance with atypical glandular cells on SurePath Papanicolaou smears

Cancer Cytopathology

Volumn 118, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 68-74

  Chute, Deborah J ^a   Lim, Harumi ^b   Kong, Christina S ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Adenocarcinoma; Atypical glandular cells; Cytologichistologic correlation; FocalPoint slide profiler; Papanicolaou test

Indexed keywords

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX DYSPLASIA; UTERINE CERVIX TUMOR; VAGINA SMEAR;

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MIDDLE AGED; UTERINE CERVICAL DYSPLASIA; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 77952560826     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19346638     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncy.20067     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Patten SF Jr, Lee JS, Wilbur DC, et al. The AutoPap 300 QC system multicenter clinical trials for use in quality control rescreening of cervical smears: I. A prospective intended use study. Cancer. 1997;81:337-342.
2. Patten SF Jr, Lee JS, Wilbur DC, et al. The AutoPap 300 QC system multicenter clinical trials for use in quality control rescreening of cervical smears: II. Prospective and archival sensitivity studies. Cancer. 1997;81:343-347.
3. Lee JS, Kuan L, Oh S, Patten FW, Wilbur DC. A feasibility study of the AutoPap system location-guided screening. Acta Cytol. 1998;42:221-226.
4. Wilbur DC, Prey MU, Miller WM, Pawlick GF, Colgan TJ. The AutoPap system for primary screening in cervical cytology: comparing the results of a prospective, intendeduse study with routine manual practice. Acta Cytol. 1998; 42:214-220.
5. Alasio LM, Alphandery C, Grassi P, Ruggeri M, De Palo G, Pilotti S. Performance of the AutoPap primary screening system in the detection of high-risk cases in cervicovaginal smears. Acta Cytol. 2001;45:704-708.
6. Tench WD. Validation of AutoPap primary screening system sensitivity and high-risk performance. Acta Cytol. 2002; 46:296-302.
7. Wilbur DC, Bonfiglio TA, Rutkowski MA, et al. Sensitivity of the AutoPap 300 QC system for cervical cytologic abnormalities: biopsy data confirmation. Acta Cytol. 1996;40:127-132.
8. Kardos TF. The FocalPoint system: FocalPoint Slide Profiler and FocalPoint GS. Cancer. 2004;102:334-339.
9. FocalPointSlide Profiler product insert. Burlington, VT: Tri-Path Imaging. Available at: http://www.bd.com/tripath/downloads/msds-pi/focalpoint/ focalpoint-pi.pdf Accessed on November 1, 2008.
10. Vassilakos P, Carrel S, Petignat P, Boulvain M, Campana A. Use of automated primary screening on liquid-based, thin-layer preparations. Acta Cytol. 2002;46:291-295.
11. Hughes T, Kardos TF. Performance characteristics of the FocalPoint Slide Profiler examination with SurePath pap test: experience with 9,186 cases with 100% cytotechnologist review. Acta Cytol. 2002;46:960.
12. Troni GM, Cariaggi MP, Bulgaresi P, Houssami N, Ciatto S. Reliability of sparing Papanicolaou test conventional reading in cases reported as no further review at AutoPapassisted cytological screening: survey of 30,658 cases with follow-up cytological screening. Cancer. 2007;111:93-98.
13. Davis-Devine S, Adams CL, Madison-Henness D. TriPath care technologies FocalPoint slide imager is very effective at identifying abnormal gyn cervical cytology using SurePath prepared slides. Acta Cytol. 2002;46:951.
14. Christopherson WM, Scott MA. Trends in mortality from uterine cancer in relation to mass screening. Acta Cytol. 1977;21:5-9.
15. Cramer DW. The role of cervical cytology in the declining morbidity and mortality of cervical cancer. Cancer. 1974; 34:2018-2027.
16. Zheng T, Holford TR, Ma Z, et al. The continuing increase in adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix: a birth cohort phenomenon. Int J Epidemiol. 1996;25:252-258.
17. Smith HO, Tiffany MF, Qualls CR, Key CR. The rising incidence of adenocarcinoma relative to squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix in the United States - a 24-year population-based study. Gynecol Oncol. 2000;78:97-105.
18. Kim TJ, Kim HS, Park CT, et al. Clinical evaluation of follow-up methods and results of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance (AGUS) detected on cervicovaginal Pap smears. Gynecol Oncol. 1999;73:292-298.
19. Kumar N, Bongiovanni M, Molliet MJ, Pelte MF, Egger JF, Pache JC. Reclassification and analysis of clinical significance of atypical glandular cells on ThinPrep using Bethesda 2001: Geneva experience. Swiss Med Wkly. 2007;137:635-641.
20. Schnatz PF, Guile M, O'Sullivan DM, Sorosky JI. Clinical significance of atypical glandular cells on cervical cytology. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107:701-708.
21. Liu S, Semenciw R, Probert A, Mao Y. Cervical cancer in Canada: changing patterns in incidence and mortality. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2001;11:24-31.
22. Herbert A, Singh N, Smith JA. Adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix compared with squamous cell carcinoma: a 12-year study in Southampton and South-west Hampshire. Cytopathology. 2001;12:26-36.
23. Hemminki K, Li X, Vaittinen P. Time trends in the incidence of cervical and other genital squamous cell carcinomas and adenocarcinomas in Sweden, 1958-1996. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2002;101:64-69.
24. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, et al. The 2001 Bethesda system: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA. 2002;287:2114-2119.
25. Sherman ME, Dasgupta A, Schiffman M, Nayar R, Solomon D. The Bethesda interobserver reproducibility study (BIRST): a Web-based assessment of the Bethesda 2001 system for classifying cervical cytology. Cancer. 2007;111:15-25.
26. 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. 2003;99:323-330.
27. Confortini M, Di Bonito L, Carozzi F, et al. Interlaboratory reproducibility of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance: a national survey. Cytopathology. 2006;17:353-360.
28. Wilbur DC, Parker EM, Foti JA. Location-guided screening of liquid-based cervical cytology specimens: a potential improvement in accuracy and productivity is demonstrated in a preclinical feasibility trial. Am J Clin Pathol. 2002;118: 399-407.
29. Walts AE, Thomas P. Endometrial cells and the AutoPap system for primary screening of cervicovaginal pap smears. Diagn Cytopathol. 2002;27:232-237.
30. ThinPrepimaging system product insert. Marlborough, MA: Cytyc Corporation; 2006. Available at: http://www.thinprep.com/pdfs/thinprep-package- insert-imaging.pdf Accessed on November 1, 2008.
31. 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. 2007;335:31.
32. Friedlander MA, Rudomina D, Lin O. Effectiveness of the Thin Prep imaging system in the detection of adenocarcinoma of the gynecologic system. Cancer. 2008;114:7-12.
33. Zhao C, Florea A, Onisko A, Austin RM. 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. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;114:383-389.