Review of cytology and histopathology as part of the NHS Cervical Screening Programme audit of invasive cervical cancers

Cytopathology

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 13-22

  Castanon, A ^a   Ferryman, S ^b   Patnick, J ^c   Sasieni, P ^a  

^a QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS COVENTRY AND WARWICKSHIRE NHS TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^c NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Audit; Cervical screening; Cytology review; Histology review; Invasive cervical cancer

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER CELL; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER GRADING; CANCER INVASION; CANCER SCREENING; CERVIX GLANDULAR INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; CYTOLOGY; DYSKARYOSIS; HISTOLOGY; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU;

CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; CYTODIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; ENGLAND; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; MEDICAL AUDIT; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; STATE MEDICINE; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 84855927215     PISSN: 09565507     EISSN: 13652303     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2303.2011.00948.x     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. NHS Cervical Screening Programme. Audit of Invasive Cervical Cancers. NHSCSP Publication 28. Sheffield: 2006. Available from: (accessed 29 December 2011).
2. Johnson J, Patnick J, eds. Achievable standards, Benchmarks for reporting, and Criteria for evaluating cervical cytopathology. NHSCSP Publication No 1. Sheffield: 2000.Available from: (accessed 29 December 2011).
3. National Patient Safety Agency. NRES Leaflet: defining research 2009. Available from: (accessed 29 December 2011).
4. Renshaw AA, Davey DD, Birdsong GG et al. Precision in gynecologic cytologic interpretation: a study from the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2003;127:1413-20.
5. Coleman DV, Poznansky JJ. Review of cervical smears from 76 women with invasive cervical cancer: cytological findings and medicolegal implications. Cytopathology 2006;17:127-36.
6. Cuzick J, Clavel C, Petry KU et al. Overview of the European and North American studies on HPV testing in primary cervical cancer screening. Int J Cancer 2006;119:1095-101.
7. Sherman ME, Schiffman MH, Lorincz AT et al. Toward objective quality assurance in cervical cytopathology. Correlation of cytopathologic diagnoses with detection of high-risk human papillomavirus types. Am J Clin Pathol 1994;102:182-7.
8. 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.
9. Sasieni P, Castanon A, Cuzick J. Screening and adenocarcinoma of the cervix. Int J Cancer 2009;125:525-9.
10. Mitchell H, Medley G. Differences between Papanicolaou smears with correct and incorrect diagnoses. Cytopathology 1995;6:368-75.
11. Baker RW, O'Sullivan JP, Hanley J, Coleman DV. The characteristics of false negative cervical smears--implications for the UK cervical cancer screening programme. J Clin Pathol 1999;52:358-62.
12. O'Sullivan JP, A'Hern RP, Chapman PA et al. A case-control study of true-positive versus false-negative cervical smears in women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) III. Cytopathology 1998;9:155-61.
13. Herbert A, Anshu, Culora G et al. Invasive cervical cancer audit: why cancers developed in a high-risk population with an organised screening programme. BJOG 2010;117:736-45.
14. Sasieni P, Castanon A, Cuzick J. Effectiveness of cervical screening with age: population based case-control study of prospectively recorded data. BMJ 2009;339:b2968.