Manual liquid based cytology in primary screening for cervical cancer - A cost effective preposition for scarce resource settings

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

Volumn 13, Issue 8, 2012, Pages 3645-3651

  Nandini, N M ^a   Nandish, S M ^a   Pallavi, P ^a   Akshatha, S K ^a   Chandrashekhar, A P ^a   Anjali, S ^a   Dhar, Murali ^b  

^a JSS MEDICAL COLLEGE   (India)

^b MANIPAL UNIVERSITY   (India)

Author keywords

Cervical screening; Low cost method; Manual liquid based cytology; Pap smear

Indexed keywords

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; CYTOLOGY; DEVELOPING COUNTRY; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; INDIA; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; REPRODUCIBILITY; SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX TUMOR; VAGINA SMEAR;

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; AGED; CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; CYTOLOGICAL TECHNIQUES; DEVELOPING COUNTRIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; INDIA; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84873616776     PISSN: 15137368     EISSN: 2476762X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7314/APJCP.2012.13.8.3645     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Abulafia O, Pezzullo JC, Sherer DM (2003). Performance of Thin-prep liquid based cervicalcytology in comparison with conventionally prepared Papanicolaou smears: quantitative survey. Gynecol Oncol, 90, 137-44.
2. Alves VAF, Bibbo M, Schmitt FC, et al (2004). Comparison of manual and automated methods of liquid based cytology. A morphologic study. Acta Cytol, 48, 187-93.
3. Atkins KA (2003). Liquid based preparation in Gynaecological and non-gynaecological specimens, Ed Niael Kirsham, Neil A. Progress in Pathology, Chap 5; 6. Cambridge University Press, 101-14.
4. Austin RM, Ramzy I (1998). Increased detection of epithelial cell abnormalities by liquid based gynaecologic cytology preparations. A review of accumulated Data. Acta Cytol, 42, 178-84.
5. Baandrup U, Bishop JW, Bonfiglio TA, et al (2000). Sampling, sampling errors and specimen preparation. Acta Cytol, 44, 944-8.
6. Baker JJ (2002). Conventional and liquid based cervicovaginal cytology. A comparison study with clinical and histologic Follow-up. Diagn Cytopathology, 27, 185-8.
7. Bergeron C, Masseroli M, Ghezi A, et al (2000). Quality control of cervical cytology in high risk women PAPNET system compared with manual rescreening. Acta Cytol, 44, 151-7.
8. Bernstein SJ, Sanchez-Ramos L, Ndubisi B (2001). Liquid based cervical cytologic smear study and conventional papanicaloau smears a meta analysis of prospective studies comparing cytologic diagnosis and sample adequacy. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 185, 308-17.
9. Bishop JW, Bigner SH, Colgan TJ, et al (1998). Multicenter masked evaluation of autocyto PREP thin layers with matched conventional smears including initial biopsy results. Acta Cytol, 92, 189-97.
10. Crum CP (2007). The female genital tract: pathologic basis of disease. In Kumar V et al (Eds.) Robinson's Pathologic Basis of Disease. WB Saunders Company, Philadelphia, USA, 1073-5.
11. Davey D, Zarbo RJ (2003). Introduction and commentary, strategic science symposium. Arch Pathol Lab Med, 127, 927-9.
12. Deshou H, Changhua W, Quiyan L, et al (2009). Clinical utility of LiquiPrep cytology system for primary cervical cancer screening in a large urban hospital setting in China. J Cytology, 26, 20-5.
13. Ferlay J, Shin H, Bray F, et al (2010). Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer, 127, 2893-917.
14. Johnson T, Maksem JA, Belshein BL, et al (2000). Liquid based cervical cell collection with brushes and wooden spatulas. Diagn Cytopathol, 22, 86-91.
15. Kavatkar AN, Nagwamshi CA, Dabaks M (2008). Study of a manual method of liquid based cervical cytology. Indian J Pathology and Microbiology, 59, 190-4.
16. Lee, Kelly D, Gravitt PE, et al (2006). Validation of a low cost, liquid based screening method of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Obst & Gynaecology, 195, 965-70.
17. Maksem JA, Finnomore M, Belsheim BL, et al (2001). Manual method for liquid based cytology. A demonstration using 1,000 Gynaecological cytologies collected directly to vial and prepared by a smear - slide technique. Diagn Cytopathology, 25, 334-8.
18. McGoogan E, Colgan T, Remzy J, et al (1998). Cell preparation methods and criteria for sample adequacy. IAC Task Force summary. Acta Cytol, 42, 25-32.
19. NCCP (2006). Guidelines for cervical cancer screening programme, Department of Cytology & Gynaecological Pathology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
20. NCRP (2006). Consolidated report of population based cancer registries 2001-2004, Indian Council of Medical Research, New Delhi, India.
21. Papillo JL, Zarcka MA, StJohn TL (1998). Evaluation of the ThinPrep Pap test in clinical practice: A seven month, 16, 314-Case experience in northern Vermont. Acta Cytologica, 42, 203-8.
22. Park LA, Lee SN, Chae SW, et al (2001). Comparing the accuracy of ThinPrep Pap tests and Conventional Papanicolaou Smears on the basis of the histologic diagnosis. A clinical study of women with cervical abnormalities. Acta Cytol, 45, 525-31.
23. Richard K, Dziura B, Hornish A (1999). Cell block preparation as a diagnostic technique complimentary to fluid based monolayer cervico-vaginal specimens. Acta Cytol, 43, 69-73.
24. Pinto A P, Degen M, Villa L L, Cibas E S (2012). Immunomarkers in gynaecologic cytology the search for the ideal biomolecular papanicolaou test. Acta Cytol, 56, 109-21
25. Sherwani RK, Khan T, Aktar K, et al (2007). Conventional pap smear and liquid based cytology for cervical cancer screening-A comparative study. J Cytology, 24, 167-72.
26. Syrjanen K, Di Bonito L, Goncalves L, et al (2010). Cervical screening in Mediterranean countries: Implications for the future. Cytopathology, 21, 359-67.
27. Szarewski A, Ambroisine L, Cadman L, Austin J, Ho L, Terry G et al (2008).Comparison of predictors for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in women with abnormal smears. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 17, 3033-42