BACKGROUND: The objective of the current study was to evaluate the applicability of liquid-based cytology in the Netherlands population screening program for cervical cancer. METHODS: A special committee performed an evaluation of all the available literature. Two methods were investigated: the AutoCytePrep system (currently known as ShurePath-system; TriPath Imaging, Burlington, NC) and the ThinPrep system (Cytyc, Boxborough, MA) for the detection of squamous epithelial abnormalities. All literature up to May 2000 was evaluated. RESULTS: For the AutoCytePrep system, there were indications that the detection rate for atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) or higher had lower sensitivity compared with conventional screening. No definitive statement could be made concerning the value of the AutoCytePrep system for the detection rate of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL) or higher and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) or higher because of conflicting results. For the ThinPrep system, there were indications that the detection rate of ASCUS or higher had a higher detection rate compared with conventional screening, with slightly lower specificity. It is likely that the detection rate of LSIL or higher with the ThinPrep system had greater sensitivity compared with conventional screening with almost unchanged specificity. In addition, it is likely that the detection rate of HSIL or higher with the ThinPrep system had a higher detection rate and greater absolute sensitivity compared with conventional screening with almost unchanged relative and absolute specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Further research that complies with the standards stated in the current study will be necessary to evaluate the applicability of the AutoCytePrep method. Further evaluation of the costs and benefits of the ThinPrep method should be undertaken to decide definitively whether to implement this method in the Netherlands population screening program. Copyright 2003 American Cancer Society.
BACKGROUND: The objective of the current study was to evaluate the applicability of liquid-based cytology in the Netherlands population screening program for cervical cancer. METHODS: A special committee performed an evaluation of all the available literature. Two methods were investigated: the AutoCytePrep system (currently known as ShurePath-system; TriPath Imaging, Burlington, NC) and the ThinPrep system (Cytyc, Boxborough, MA) for the detection of squamous epithelial abnormalities. All literature up to May 2000 was evaluated. RESULTS: For the AutoCytePrep system, there were indications that the detection rate for atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) or higher had lower sensitivity compared with conventional screening. No definitive statement could be made concerning the value of the AutoCytePrep system for the detection rate of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL) or higher and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) or higher because of conflicting results. For the ThinPrep system, there were indications that the detection rate of ASCUS or higher had a higher detection rate compared with conventional screening, with slightly lower specificity. It is likely that the detection rate of LSIL or higher with the ThinPrep system had greater sensitivity compared with conventional screening with almost unchanged specificity. In addition, it is likely that the detection rate of HSIL or higher with the ThinPrep system had a higher detection rate and greater absolute sensitivity compared with conventional screening with almost unchanged relative and absolute specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Further research that complies with the standards stated in the current study will be necessary to evaluate the applicability of the AutoCytePrep method. Further evaluation of the costs and benefits of the ThinPrep method should be undertaken to decide definitively whether to implement this method in the Netherlands population screening program. Copyright 2003 American Cancer Society.
Authors: Roberta Zappacosta; Francesca B Aiello; Tommaso D'Antuono; Antonio D Procopio; Scott K Durum; Pio Conti; Sandra Rosini Journal: Ann Clin Lab Sci Date: 2011 Impact factor: 1.256
Authors: Guglielmo Ronco; Jack Cuzick; Paola Pierotti; Maria Paola Cariaggi; Paolo Dalla Palma; Carlo Naldoni; Bruno Ghiringhello; Paolo Giorgi-Rossi; Daria Minucci; Franca Parisio; Ada Pojer; Maria Luisa Schiboni; Catia Sintoni; Manuel Zorzi; Nereo Segnan; Massimo Confortini Journal: BMJ Date: 2007-05-21