European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical histopathology

References

• Arbyn M, Herbert A, Schenck U, . European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening: Recommendations for collecting samples for conventional and liquid-based cytology. Cytopathology 2007;18:133–9.
   Google Scholar
• Herbert A, Bergeron C, Wiener H, Schenck U, Klinkhamer PJ, Arbyn M. European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening: Recommendations for cervical cytology terminology. Cytopathology 2007;18:213–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giordano L, Webster P, Szarewski A, . Improving the quality of communication in organised cervical cancer screening. Patient Educ Couns 2008;72:130–6.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Arbyn M, Dillner J. Review of current knowledge on HPV vaccination: An appendix to the European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening. J Clin Virol 2007;38:189–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordan J, Arbyn M, Martin-Hirsch P, . European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening: Recommendations for clinical management of abnormal cervical cytology, part 1. Cytopathology 2008;19:342–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordan J, Martin-Hirsch P, Arbyn M, . European guidelines for management of abnormal cervical cytology, Part 2. Cytopathology 2009;20:5–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arbyn M, Anttila A, Jordan J, . European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening. Second Edition – Summary document. Ann Oncol 2010;21:448–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costa MJ, Grimes C, Tackett E, Naib ZM. Cervicovaginal cytology in an indigent population. Comparison of results for 1964, 1981 and 1989. Acta Cytol 1991;35:51–6.
   Google Scholar
• Singer A, Monaghan JM. Lower genital tract precancer: Colposcopy, pathology and treatment. 2nd. Oxford: Blackwell Science Ltd.; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening. 2nd. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Jordan J, Martin-Hirsch P, Arbyn M, . Chapter 6: Management of abnormal cervical cytology. Arbyn M, Anttila A, Jordan J, Ronco G, Schenck U, Segnan N, ., European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening. 2nd. Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities; 2008. 191–232.
   Google Scholar
• Obermair A, Wanner C, Bilgi S, . The influence of vascular space involvement on the prognosis of patients with stage IB cervical carcinoma: Correlation of results from hematoxylin and eosin staining with results from immunostaining for factor VIII-related antigen. Cancer 1998;82:689–96.
   Google Scholar
• Birner P, Obermair A, Schindl M, Kowalski H, Breitenecker G, Oberhuber G. Selective immunohistochemical staining of blood and lymphatic vessels reveals independent prognostic influence of blood and lymphatic vessel invasion in early-stage cervical cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2001;7:93–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IARC. Cervix cancer screening. IARC handbooks of cancer prevention. Vol. 10. Lyon: IARC Press; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• WHO. Pathology and genetics of tumours of the breast and female genital organs. Lyon: IARC Press; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell MF, Tortolero-Luna G, Wright TC, . Cervical human apillomavirus infection and intraepithelial neoplasia: A review. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1996;17–25.
   Google Scholar
• Ostor AG, Mulvany N. The pathology of cervical neoplasia. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 1996;8:69–73.
   Google Scholar
• Melnikow J, Nuovo J, Willan AR, Chan BK, Howell LP. Natural history of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions: A meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1998;92:727–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbert A, Arbyn M, Bergeron C. Why CIN3 and CIN2 should be distinguished on histological reports. Cytopathology 2008;19:63–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ismail SM, Colclough AB, Dinnen JS, . Observer variation in histopathological diagnosis and grading of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. BMJ 1989;298:707–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stoler MH, Schiffman MA. Interobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologic and histologic interpretations. JAMA 2001;285:1500–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crum CP, Egawa K, Fu YS, . Atypical immature metaplasia (AIM). A subset of human papilloma virus infection of the cervix. Cancer 1983;51:2214–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klaes R, Benner A, Friedrich T, . p16INK4A immunohistochemistry improves interobserver agreement in the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Surg Pathol 2002;26:1389–99.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NHSCSP. Histopathology reporting in cervical screening. Working party of the Royal College of Pahtologists and the NHS Cervical Screening Programme. Shefield: NHS Cancer Screening Programmes; 1999. Report No.: 10.
   Google Scholar
• Goldstein NS, Ahmad E, Hussain M, Hankin RC, Perez-Reyes N. Endocervical glandular atypia: Does a preneoplastic lesion of adenocarcinoma in situ exist? Am J Clin Pathol 1998;110:200–9.
   Google Scholar
• Horn LC, Riethdorf L, Loning T. Leitfaden für die Präparation uteriner Operationspräprate. Pathologe 1999;20: 9–14.
   Google Scholar
• Robboy SJ, Kraus FT, Kurman RJ. Gross discription: Processing and reporting of gynecologic and obstretric specimens. Kurman RJ, Blaustein's pathology of the female genital tract. 4th. Springer-Verlag; 1994. 1225–40.
   Google Scholar
• Robboy SJ, Russell P, Anderson MC, Bentley RC. Cutup – the gross description, processsing and reporting of specimens. Pathol Female Reproduct Tract 2002;861–77.
   Google Scholar
• Heatley MK. How many histological levels should be examined from tissue blocks originating in cone biopsy and large loop excision of the transformation zone specimens of cervix? J Clin Pathol 2001;54:650–1.
   Google Scholar
• Breitenecker G, Wiener H, Stani J. Cervical cancer screening in Austria. Eur J Cancer 2000;36:2189–90.
   Google Scholar
• Kobak WH, Roman LD, Felix JC, Muderspach LI, Schlaerth JB, Morrow CP. The role of endocervical curettage at cervical conization for high-grade dysplasia. Obstet Gynecol 1995;85:197–201.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffman MS, Sterghos S Jr, Gordy LW, Gunasekar D. Evaluation of the cervical canal with the endocervical brush. Obstet Gynecol 1993;82:573–577.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mogensen ST, Bak M, Dueholm M, . Cytobrush and endocervical curettage in the diagnosis of dysplasia and malignancy of the uterine cervix. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1997;76:69–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boardman LA, Meinz H, Steinhoff MM, Heber WW, Blume J. A randomized trial of the sleeved cytobrush and the endocervical curette. Obstet Gynecol 2003;101:426–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pretorius RG, Zhang WH, Belinson JL, . Colposcopically directed biopsy, random cervical biopsy, and endocervical curettage in the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia II or worse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;191:430–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bulten J, van der Laak JA, Gemmink JH, Pahlplatz MM, de Wilde PC, Hanselaar AG. MIB1, a promising marker for the classification of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Pathol 1996;178:268–73.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bulten J, de Wilde PC, Schijf C, . Decreased expression of Ki-67 in atrophic cervical epithelium of post-menopausal women. J Pathol 2000;190:545–53.
   Google Scholar
• Smela M, Chosia M, Domagala W. Proliferation cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) expression in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). An immunohistochemical study. Pol J Pathol 1996;47:171–4.
   Google Scholar
• Klaes R, Friedrich T, Spitkovsky D, . Overexpression of p16(INK4A) as a specific marker for dysplastic and neoplastic epithelial cells of the cervix uteri. Int J Cancer 2001;92: 276–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anttila A, Ronco G, Lynge E, . Chapter 2: Epidemiological guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening. Arbyn M, Anttila A, Jordan J, Ronco G, Schenck U, Segnan N, . European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening. 2nd Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities; 2008. 11–52.
   Google Scholar
• Ronco G, Anttila A. Chapter 7: Summary table of key performance indicators. Arbyn M, Anttila A, Jordan J, Ronco G, Schenck U, Segnan N, . European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening, 2nd. Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities; 2008. 231–42.
   Google Scholar
• Vutuc C, Haidinger G, Waldhoer T, Ahmad F, Breitenecker G. Prevalence of self-reported cervical cancer screening and impact on cervical cancer mortality in Austria. Wien Klin Wochenschr 1999;111:354–9.
   Google Scholar
• Wiener HG, Klinkhamer P, Schenck U, . European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening: Recommendations for cytology laboratories. Cytopathology 2007;18:67–78.
   Google Scholar
• FIGO. FIGO annual report on the results of treatment in gynaecological cancer. 24th. J Epidemiol Biostat 2000;Special issue:x.
   Google Scholar