Atypical Squamous Cells, Cannot Exclude High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion: A Follow-up Study of Conventional and Liquid-Based Preparations in a High-Risk Population

American Journal of Clinical Pathology

Volumn 120, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 392-397

  Louro, Ana Paula ^b   Roberson, Janie ^b   Eltoum, Isam ^b   Chhieng, David C ^a  

^a University of Alabama at Birmingham   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

Atypical squamous cells; Cervical dysplasia; Cervicovaginal smears; High grade squamous intraepithelial lesions; Liquid based preparation

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATYPICAL SQUAMOUS CELL; CARCINOMA IN SITU; COLPOSCOPY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HIGH GRADE SQUAMOUS INTRAEPITHELIAL LESION; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; METAPLASIA; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SMEAR; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; UTERINE CERVIX BIOPSY; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; ADOLESCENT; AGE; AGED; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; VAGINA SMEAR;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 85047689055     PISSN: 00029173     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1309/NPU3WRQCTAB81XLW     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. The 1988 Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytological diagnoses. National Cancer Institute Workshop. JAMA. 1989;262:931-934.
2. Kurman R, Solomon D. The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical/Vaginal Cytologic Diagnoses: Definitions, Criteria and Explanatory Notes for Terminology and Specimen Adequacy. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 1994.
3. The Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytologic diagnoses: revised after the second National Cancer Institute Workshop, April 29-30, 1991. Acta Cytol. 1993;37:115-124.
4. Wilbur DC, Dressl DM. Metaplastic variants of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: diagnosis and patient management issues. Pathol Case Rev. 1997;2:53-57.
5. Ho GY, Bierman R, Beardsley L, et al. Natural history of cervicovaginal papillomavirus infection in young women. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:423-428.
6. Gupta D, Kannan V, Komaromy-Hiller G, et al. ASCUS, mature metaplastic type: cytologic diagnosis and follow-up. Acta Cytol. 2001;45:192-196.
7. Quddus MR, Sung CJ, Steinhoff MM, et al. Atypical squamous metaplastic cells: reproducibility, outcome, and diagnostic features on ThinPrep Pap test. Cancer. 2001;93:16-22.
8. Sherman ME, Tabbara SO, Scott DR, et al. "ASCUS, rule out HSIL": cytologic features, histologic correlates, and human papillomavirus detection. Mod Pathol. 1999;12:335-342.
9. Sherman ME, Solomon D, Schiffman M, for the ALTS Group. Qualification of ASCUS: a comparison of equivocal LSIL and equivocal HSIL cervical cytology in the ASCUS LSIL Triage Study. Am J Clin Pathol. 2001;116:386-394.
10. Sheils LA, Wilbur DC. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: stratification of the risk of association with, or progression to, squamous intraepithelial lesions based on morphologic subcategorization. Acta Cytol. 1997;41:1065-1072.
11. Schoolland M, Sterrett GF, Knowles SA, et al. The " inconclusive-possible high grade epithelial abnormality" category in Papanicolaou smear reporting. Cancer. 1998;84:208-217.
12. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, et al. The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA. 2002;287:2114-2119.
13. Genest DR, Dean B, Lee KR, et al. Qualifying the cytologic diagnosis of "atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance" affects the predictive value of a squamous intraepithelial lesion on subsequent biopsy. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1998;122:338-341.
14. Buschman BO, Michael C. The significance of reporting atypical squamous metaplasia: a retrospective review of 913 cases [abstract]. Acta Cytol. 1995;39:970.
15. Solomon D, Schiffman M, Tarone R. Comparison of three management strategies for patients with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: baseline results from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93:293-299.
16. Wright TC Jr, Lorincz A, Ferris DG, et al. Reflex human papillomavirus deoxyribonucleic acid testing in women with abnormal Papanicolaou smears. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998;178:962-966.
17. Manos MM, Kinney WK, Hurley LB, et al. Identifying women with cervical neoplasia: using human papillomavirus DNA testing for equivocal Papanicolaou results. JAMA. 1999;281:1605-1610.
18. Fait G, Kupferminc MJ, Daniel Y, et al. Contribution of human papillomavirus testing by hybrid capture in the triage of women with repeated abnormal Pap smears before colposcopy referral. Gynecol Oncol. 2000;79:177-180.
19. Cox JT, Lorincz AT, Schiffman MH, et al. Human papillomavirus testing by hybrid capture appears to be useful in triaging women with a cytologic diagnosis of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;172:946-954.
20. Rader AE, Rose PG, Rodriguez M, et al. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance in women over 55: comparison with the general population and implications for management. Acta Cytol. 1999;43:357-362.
21. Symmans F, Mechanic L, MacConnell P, et al. Correlation of cervical cytology and human papillomavirus DNA detection in postmenopausal women. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1992;11:204-209.
22. Abati A, Jaffurs W, Wilder AM. Squamous atypia in the atrophic cervical vaginal smear: a new look at an old problem. Cancer. 1998;84:218-225.
23. Wright TC Jr, Cox JT, Massad LS, et al. 2001 Consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA. 2002;287:2120-2129.