The diagnostic value of the thinprep pap test in endometrial carcinoma: A prospective study with histological follow-up

Diagnostic Cytopathology

Volumn 41, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 408-412

  Zhou, Jianhong ^a   Tomashefski Jr , Joseph F ^b   Sawady, Joram ^b   Ferrer, Hector ^b   Khiyami, Amer ^b  

^a WINTHROP UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b METROHEALTH MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Atypical endometrial cells (AEC); atypical glandular cells (AGC); endometrial adenocarcinoma; ThinPrep Pap test

Indexed keywords

CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CLINICAL TRIAL; CYTODIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; ENDOMETRIUM CARCINOMA; ENDOMETRIUM CELL; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HISTOLOGY; HOSPITAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; THINPREP PAP TEST;

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ENDOMETRIAL NEOPLASMS; ENDOMETRIUM; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 84876473548     PISSN: 87551039     EISSN: 10970339     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/dc.22841     Document Type: Review

References (27)

1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Thun MJ,. Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J Clin 2009; 59: 225-249.
2. Ronnett B, Zaino R, Ellenson L, Kurman R,. Endometrial carcinoma. In:, Kurman RJ, editor. Blaustein's pathology of female genital tract. 5th ed. New York: Springer; 2002. p 501-560.
3. Lee KR, Ashfaq R, Birdsong GG, Corkill ME, McIntosh KM, Inhorn SL,. Comparison of conventional Papanicolaou smears and a fluid-based, thin-layer system for cervical cancer screening. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 90: 278-284.
4. Zhou J, Tomashefski J, Jr, Khiyami A,. Diagnostic value of the thin-layer, liquid-based Pap test in endometrial cancer: A retrospective study with emphasis on cytomorphologic features. Acta Cytol 2007; 51: 735-741.
5. Zhou J, Tomashefski JF, Jr, Khiyami A,. ThinPrep Pap tests in patients with endometrial cancer: A histo-cytological correlation. Diagn Cytopathol 2007; 35: 448-453.
6. Frable WJ,. Screening for endometrial cancer? Cancer 2008; 114: 219-221.
7. Guidos BJ, Selvaggi SM,. Detection of endometrial adenocarcinoma with the ThinPrep Pap test. Diagn Cytopathol 2000; 23: 260-265.
8. Schorge JO, Hossein Saboorian M, Hynan L, Ashfaq R,. ThinPrep detection of cervical and endometrial adenocarcinoma: A retrospective cohort study. Cancer 2002; 96: 338-343.
9. Fadare O, Ghofrani M, Chacho MS, Parkash V,. The significance of benign endometrial cells in cervicovaginal smears. Adv Anat Pathol 2005; 12: 274-287.
10. Jones BA, Novis DA,. Cervical biopsy-cytology correlation. A College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 22 439 correlations in 348 laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1996; 120: 523-531.
11. Mathers ME, Johnson SJ, Wadehra V,. How predictive is a cervical smear suggesting glandular neoplasia? Cytopathology 2002; 13: 83-91.
12. Davey DD, Woodhouse S, Styer P, Stastny J, Mody D,. Atypical epithelial cells and specimen adequacy: Current laboratory practices of participants in the college of American pathologists interlaboratory comparison program in cervicovaginal cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000; 124: 203-211.
13. Raab SS, Snider TE, Potts SA, et al. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance. Diagnostic accuracy and interobserver variability using select cytologic criteria. Am J Clin Pathol 1997; 107: 299-307.
14. Solomon D, Nayar R,. The bethesda system for reporting cervical cytology: definitions, criteria, and explanatory notes. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2004.
15. Eltabbakh GH, Lipman JN, Mount SL, Morgan A,. Significance of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance on ThinPrep Papanicolaou smears. Gynecol Oncol 2000; 78: 245-250.
16. Scheiden R, Wagener C, Knolle U, Dippel W, Capesius C,. Atypical glandular cells in conventional cervical smears: Incidence and follow-up. BMC Cancer 2004; 4: 37.
17. Chhieng DC, Elgert P, Cohen JM, Cangiarella JF,. Clinical implications of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance, favor endometrial origin. Cancer 2001; 93: 351-356.
18. Levine L, Lucci JA, III, Dinh TV,. Atypical glandular cells: New Bethesda terminology and management guidelines. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2003; 58: 399-406.
19. Wilbur DC, Cibas ES, Merritt S, James LP, Berger BM, Bonfiglio TA,. ThinPrep Processor. Clinical trials demonstrate an increased detection rate of abnormal cervical cytologic specimens. Am J Clin Pathol 1994; 101: 209-214.
20. 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.
21. Reagan JW, Ng ABP,. The cells of uterine adenocarcinoma. Monographs in clinical cytology. Basel: Karger; 1973.
22. Yancey M, Magelssen D, Demaurez A, Lee RB,. Classification of endometrial cells on cervical cytology. Obstet Gynecol 1990; 76: 1000-1005.
23. Chin AB, Bristow RE, Korst LM, Walts A, Lagasse LD,. The significance of atypical glandular cells on routine cervical cytologic testing in a community-based population. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182: 1278-1282.
24. Wright TC, Jr, Massad LS, Dunton CJ, Spitzer M, Wilkinson EJ, Solomon D,. 2006 consensus guidelines for the management of women with abnormal cervical cancer screening tests. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 197: 346-355.
25. Insinga RP, Glass AG, Rush BB,. Pap screening in a U.S. health plan. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004; 13: 355-360.
26. Koss LG,. The Papanicolaou test for cervical cancer detection. A triumph and a tragedy. JAMA 1989; 261: 737-743.
27. Dijkhuizen FP, Mol BW, Brolmann HA, Heintz AP,. The accuracy of endometrial sampling in the diagnosis of patients with endometrial carcinoma and hyperplasia: A meta-analysis. Cancer 2000; 89: 1765-1772.