Literature DB >> 9638376

A case-control study of true-positive versus false-negative cervical smears in women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) III.

J P O'Sullivan1, R P A'Hern, P A Chapman, L Jenkins, R Smith, A al-Nafussi, M T Brett, A Herbert, M E McKean, C A Waddell.   

Abstract

Cervical smears (n = 150) from five departments showing high-grade dyskaryosis were examined by three cytologists. All the smears came from patients with biopsy-proven CIN III. One hundred had been correctly reported (true positives) but 50 had originally been reported as negative and had been found to be positive only on review (false negatives). There were significant differences between the two sets in the characteristics of the dyskaryotic cell population. The false-negative smears tended to have fewer than 200 dyskaryotic cells. The nuclei of the dyskaryotic cells tended to have fine rather than coarse nuclear chromatin. A smear with fewer than 50 dyskaryotic cells is 26 times more likely to be reported as negative than one with more than 200 dyskaryotic cells. The results suggest that there is a type of severely dyskaryotic smear that is inherently likely to be missed on routine screening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9638376     DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2303.1998.00155.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cytopathology        ISSN: 0956-5507            Impact factor:   2.073


  5 in total

Review 1.  Management of Papanicolaou test results that lack endocervical cells.

Authors:  Lizette Elumir-Tanner; Meghan Doraty
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2011-03-07       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Direct human papillomavirus E6 whole-cell enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for objective measurement of E6 oncoproteins in cytology samples.

Authors:  Yi-Shan Yang; Karen Smith-McCune; Teresa M Darragh; Yvonne Lai; Ju-Hwa Lin; Ting-Chang Chang; Hsiao-Yun Guo; Tiea Kesler; Alicia Carter; Philip E Castle; Shuling Cheng
Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol       Date:  2012-07-18

3.  Prevalence of abnormalities influences cytologists' error rates in screening for cervical cancer.

Authors:  Karla K Evans; Rosemary H Tambouret; Andrew Evered; David C Wilbur; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 5.534

4.  The borderline cervical smear: colposcopic and biopsy outcome.

Authors:  A al-Nafussi; G Rebello; R al-Yusif; E McGoogan
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 5.  False Negative Results in Cervical Cancer Screening-Risks, Reasons and Implications for Clinical Practice and Public Health.

Authors:  Anna Macios; Andrzej Nowakowski
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-20
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.