Cervical Smear Histories of 585 Women with Biopsy-Proven Carcinoma <i>in Situ</i>

Abstract

Of smears classified as negative and taken in the three years before biopsy-proven CIS, 41% were reclassified, with half reclassified as showing HSIL.

Antibody Anti-p16INK4a in Cervical Cytology

“…[6][7][8] A review of the "normal" cytology examinations of the last 3 years in those diagnosed with cervical cancer should be reclassified for high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) 40% of the time. 6 Although there is no ideal marker for cervical lesions, its characteristics should be to provide high sensitivity, not depend on subjective criteria for the diagnosis, be reasonable and affordable and especially be presented on easily collectable samples. 9 The influence of human papillomavirus (HPV) on the genesis of the precursors or neoplastic lesions of the cervix is now well established in many studies over recent decades.…”

Accuracy of Thin-Layer Cytology in Patients Undergoing Cervical Cone Biopsy

“…False negative results do occur and have been related to both inadequate sampling and screening errors. 1,8,19 In recent years, the problems of sample preparation have been recognized by industry, and a new approach was devised in which cells are collected in liquid preservative and processed to prepare thin layers for improved cellular presentation.…”

Molecular Biomarker–Based Screening for Early Detection of Cervical Cancer

“…However, this increases delays and adds expense to a procedure that is already time consuming, costly and resource intensive. Targeted rescreening for high-risk patients can reduce both the cost and frequency of false negative results, 6,9 but it fails to address the problem of screening errors in the bulk of patients who are not at high risk. Additionally, such an approach requires continual interaction with the patient, a dependency that is unreliable, especially in less-developed countries and in public health mass screening programs.…”

“…Errors in cervical sampling and interpretation are common: it has been estimated that they contribute to a false negative rate reported to range from 5% to 50%, [6][7][8][9] and they account for 25% of all invasive cancers in the United States. 4 Approximately twothirds of these false negative results are due to sampling error, in which abnormal cells are not collected or are not transferred to the Pap slide, and the remainder are due to detection error, in which abnormalities are missed or misinterpreted.…”