Risk of invasive cervical cancer in relation to clinical investigation and treatment after abnormal cytology: A population-based case-control study

International Journal of Cancer

Volumn 129, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 1450-1458

  Silfverdal, Lena ^a   Kemetli, Levent ^b   Sparén, Pär ^c   Andrae, Bengt ^d   Strander, Björn ^e   Ryd, Walter ^f   Dillner, Joakim ^c   Törnberg, Sven ^b  

^a UMEÅ UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^b KAROLINSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^c KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

^d UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^e SAHLGRENSKA ACADEMY AT UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

^f SAHLGRENSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

Author keywords

abnormal Pap smear results; cervical cancer risk; clinical investigation; population based case control study; treatment

Indexed keywords

ABLATION THERAPY; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CANCER INVASION; CANCER MORPHOLOGY; CANCER RISK; CANCER SURGERY; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; CURETTAGE; FEMALE; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; POPULATION BASED CASE CONTROL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUNCH BIOPSY; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK REDUCTION; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CONIZATION; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; UTERUS SURGERY;

ADULT; BIOPSY; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; CONIZATION; DISEASE MANAGEMENT; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; HUMANS; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; PRECANCEROUS CONDITIONS; RISK; SWEDEN; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 79960929600     PISSN: 00207136     EISSN: 10970215     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ijc.25749     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Gustafsson L, Ponten J, Zack M, Adami HO,. International incidence rates of invasive cervical cancer after introduction of cytological screening. Cancer Causes Control 1997; 8: 755-63. (Pubitemid 27404646)
2. Andrae B, Kemetli L, Sparen P, Silfverdal L, Strander B, Ryd W, Dillner J, Törnberg S,. Screening-preventable cervical cancer risks: evidence from a nationwide audit in Sweden. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008; 100: 622-9.
3. Sasieni PD, Cuzick J, Lynch-Farmery E,. Estimating the efficacy of screening by auditing smear histories of women with and without cervical cancer. The national co-ordinating network for cervical screening working group. Br J Cancer 1996; 73: 1001-5. (Pubitemid 26116757)
4. Andersson-Ellstrom A, Seidal T, Grannas M, Hagmar B,. The pap-smear history of women with invasive cervical squamous carcinoma. A case-control study from Sweden. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2000; 79: 221-6. (Pubitemid 30119796)
5. Arbyn M, Rebolj M, de Kok IM, Becker N, O'Reilly M, Andrae B,. The challenges of organising cervical screening programmes in the 15 old member states of the European Union. Eur J Cancer 2009; 45: 2671-8.
6. National Board of Health and Welfare. Guidelines for cervical screening (in Swedish), Report 1998:15. Stockholm: National Board of Health and Welfare, 1998. 67 p.
7. Arbyn M, Anttila A, Jordan J, Ronco G, Schenck U, Segnan N, Wiener H, Herbert A, von Karsa L, European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening. Second edition-summary document. Ann Oncol 2010; 21: 448-58.
8. Sparén S,. Cervical cancer screening in Sweden (In Swedish). Report 2006. Stockholm: Swedish National Cervical Screening Register, 2007. 67 p. Avalialbe at:. Accessed on January 10, 2010.
9. Kjellberg L, Tavelin B,. "See and treat" regime by LEEP conisation is a safe and time saving procedure among women with cytological high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2007; 86: 1140-4. (Pubitemid 47345781)
10. Cardenas-Turanzas M, Follen M, Benedet JL, Cantor SB,. See-and-treat strategy for diagnosis and management of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions. Lancet Oncol 2005; 6: 43-50. (Pubitemid 40089718)
11. Swedish Society of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. To prevent cervical, vaginal and vulvar cancer-guidelines (In Swedish), Report no. 34. Stockholm: Swedish Society of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1997. 67 p.
12. Martin-Hirsch PL, Paraskevaidis E, Kitchener H,. Surgery for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000: CD001318.
13. Arbyn M, Kyrgiou M, Simoens C, Raifu AO, Koliopoulos G, Martin-Hirsch P, Prendiville W, Paraskevaidis E,. Perinatal mortality and other severe adverse pregnancy outcomes associated with treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: meta-analysis. BMJ 2008; 337: a1284, doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1284.
14. Risberg B, Andersson A, Lie KA, Nordin B, Zetterberg C,. Histology corresponding to mildly dyskaryotic smears-a study of 190 laser cone biopsied patients. Gynecol Oncol 1998; 68: 193-7. (Pubitemid 28150773)
15. Silfverdal L, Kemetli L, Andrae B, Sparen P, Ryd W, Dillner J, Strander B, Törnberg S,. Risk of invasive cervical cancer in relation to management of abnormal Pap smear results. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009; 201: 188.e1-188.e7.
16. Walter R,. Document for exfoliative cytology, vaginal cytology (In Swedish), 2nd edn. Gothenburg: Swedish Society of Pathology and Swedish Society of Clinical Cytology, 2006. 15 p. Available at:. Accessed on June 15, 2010.
17. Barlow L, Westergren K, Holmberg L, Talback M,. The completeness of the Swedish Cancer Register: a sample survey for year 1998. Acta Oncol 2009; 48: 27-33.
18. Soutter WP, de Barros Lopes A, Fletcher A, Monaghan JM, Duncan ID, Paraskevaidis E, Kitchener HC,. Invasive cervical cancer after conservative therapy for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Lancet 1997; 349: 978-80. (Pubitemid 27149800)
19. McCredie MR, Sharples KJ, Paul C, Baranyai J, Medley G, Jones RW, Skegg DC,. 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.
20. Viikki M, Pukkala E, Hakama M,. Risk of cervical cancer subsequent to a positive screening cytology: follow-up study in Finland. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2000; 79: 576-9. (Pubitemid 30433596)
21. Chase DM, Kalouyan M, DiSaia PJ,. Colposcopy to evaluate abnormal cervical cytology in 2008. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009; 200: 472-80.
22. Ostor AG, Duncan A, Quinn M, Rome R,. Adenocarcinoma in situ of the uterine cervix: an experience with 100 cases. Gynecol Oncol 2000; 79: 207-10.
23. Luesley DM, Jordan JA, Woodman CB, Watson N, Williams DR, Waddell C,. A retrospective review of adenocarcinoma-in-situ and glandular atypia of the uterine cervix. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1987; 94: 699-703. (Pubitemid 17093791)
24. Massad LS, Jeronimo J, Schiffman M,. Interobserver agreement in the assessment of components of colposcopic grading. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 111: 1279-84.
25. Stoler MH, Schiffman M,. Interobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologic and histologic interpretations: realistic estimates from the ASCUS-LSIL triage study. JAMA 2001; 285: 1500-5. (Pubitemid 32221899)
26. Da Forno PD, Holbrook MR, Nunns D, Shaw PA,. Long-term follow-up of patients following negative colposcopy: a new gold standard and its implications for cervical screening. Cytopathology 2003; 14: 281-6. (Pubitemid 37249278)
27. Mogensen ST, Bak M, Dueholm M, Frost L, Knoblauch NO, Praest J, Svanholm H,. Cytobrush and endocervical curettage in the diagnosis of dysplasia and malignancy of the uterine cervix. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1997; 76: 69-73. (Pubitemid 27050975)
28. Bigrigg MA, Codling BW, Pearson P, Read MD, Swingler GR,. Colposcopic diagnosis and treatment of cervical dysplasia at a single clinic visit. Experience of low-voltage diathermy loop in 1000 patients. Lancet 1990; 336: 229-31. (Pubitemid 20229069)
29. Kennedy AW, Salmieri SS, Wirth SL, Biscotti CV, Tuason LJ, Travarca MJ,. Results of the clinical evaluation of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance (AGCUS) detected on cervical cytology screening. Gynecol Oncol 1996; 63: 14-18. (Pubitemid 26337958)
30. Mohammed DK, Lavie O, de B Lopez A, Cross P, Monaghan JM,. A clinical review of borderline glandular cells on cervical cytology. BJOG 2000; 107: 605-9. (Pubitemid 30242852)
31. Melnikow J, Nuovo J, Willan AR, Chan BK, Howell LP,. Natural history of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 92: 727-35. (Pubitemid 28440819)
32. Howe DT, Vincenti AC,. Is large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) more accurate than colposcopically directed punch biopsy in the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia? Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1991; 98: 588-91.
33. Castle PE, Sideri M, Jeronimo J, Solomon D, Schiffman M,. Risk assessment to guide the prevention of cervical cancer. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2008; 12: 1-7.
34. Phadnis SV, Atilade A, Young MP, Evans H, Walker PG,. The volume perspective: a comparison of two excisional treatments for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (laser versus LLETZ). BJOG 2010; 117: 615-19.
35. Strander B, Andersson-Ellstrom A, Milsom I, Sparen P,. Long term risk of invasive cancer after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3: population based cohort study. BMJ 2007; 335: 1077, doi: 10.1136/bmj.39363. 471806.BE. (Pubitemid 350206279)
36. Melnikow J, McGahan C, Sawaya GF, Ehlen T, Coldman A,. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia outcomes after treatment: long-term follow-up from the British Columbia Cohort Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009; 101: 721-8.
37. Arbyn M, Sasieni P, Meijer CJ, Clavel C, Koliopoulos G, Dillner J,. Chapter 9: clinical applications of HPV testing: a summary of meta-analyses. Vaccine 2006; 24 (Suppl 3): S3/78-S3/89.