Conservative management of CIN2: National Audit of British Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology members’ opinion

References

• Benevolo M, Mottolese M, Marandino F, Vocaturo G, Sindico R, Piperno G, et al. 2006. Immunohistochemical expression of p16(INK4a) is predictive of HR-HPV infection in cervical low-grade lesions. Modern Pathology 19:384–391.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benevolo M, Terrenato I, Mottolese M, Marandino F, Muti P, Carosi M, et al. 2010. Comparative evaluation of nm23 and p16 expression as biomarkers of high-risk human papillomavirus infection and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2(þ) lesions of the uterine cervix. Histopathology 57:580–586.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carcopino X, Muszynski C, Mergui JL, Gondry J, Boubli L. 2011. Should CIN 2 and 3 be treated the same way? Gynécologie Obstétrique & Fertilité 39:94–99.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Castanon A, Brocklehurst P, Evans H, Peebles D, Singh N, Walker P, for the PaCT Study Group, et al. 2012. Risk of preterm birth after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia among women attending colposcopy in England: retrospective-prospective cohort study. British Medical Journal 345:e5174.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castanon A, Landy R, Brocklehurst P, Evans H, Peebles D, Singh N, for the PaCT Study Group, et al. 2014. Risk of preterm delivery with increasing depth of excision for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in England: nested case-control study. British Medical Journal 349:g6223.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castle PE, Stoler MH, Solomon D, Schiffman M. 2007. The relationship of community biopsy-diagnosed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 to the quality control pathology-reviewed diagnoses: an ALTS report. American Journal of Clinical Pathology 127:805–815.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castle PE, Schiffman M, Wheeler CM, Solomon D. 2009. Evidence for frequent regression of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia-grade 2. Obstetrics and Gynecology 113:18–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cejtin HE, Malapati R, Chaparala S. 2011. A comparison of loop electrosurgical excision procedures between human immunodeficiency virus-seropositive and -seronegative women. Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease 15:37–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clifford G, Franceschi S, Diaz M, Muñoz N, Villa LL. 2006. HPV type-distribution in women with and without cervical neoplastic diseases. Vaccine 24:S26–S34.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darragh TM, Colgan TJ, Cox JT, Heller DS, Henry MR, Luff RD, et al. 2013. The lower anogenital squamous terminology standardization project for HPV-associated lesions: background and consensus recommendations from the College of American Pathologists and the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology. Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine 137:738.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denny L. 2012. Cytological screening for cervical cancer prevention. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology 26:189–196.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department of Health, NHS Cancer Screening Programmes. 2011. NHS Cervical Screening Programme: Implementing HPV triage for women with mild or borderline cervical screening test results and HPV test of cure. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/implementing-hpv-triage-for-women-with-mild-or-borderline-cervical-screening-test-results-and-hpv-test-of-cure
   Google Scholar
• Discacciati MG, de Souza CA, d’Otavianno MG, Ângelo-Andrade LA, Westin MC, Rabelo-Santos SH, et al. 2011. Outcome of expectant management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 in women followed for 12 months. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology 155:204–208.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galgano MT, Castle PE, Atkins KA, Brix WK, Nassau SR, Stoler MH. 2010. Using biomarkers as objective standards in the diagnosis of cervical biopsies. American Journal of Surgical Pathology 34:1077–1087.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guedes AC, Zeferino LC, Syrjanen KJ, Brenna SMF. 2010. Short-term outcome of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2: considerations for management strategies and reproducibility of diagnosis. Anticancer Research 30:2319–2324.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbert A, Arbyn M, Bergeron C. 2008. Why CIN3 and CIN2 should be distinguished on histological reports. Cytopathology 19:63–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herfs M, Herran CP, Howitt B, Laury A, Nucci MR, Feldman S, et al. 2013. Cervical squamocolumnar junction-specific markers define distinct, clinically relevant subsets of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions. The American Journal of Surgical Pathology 37:1311–1318.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kyrgiou M, Koilopoulos G, Martin-Hirsch P, Arbyn M, Prendiville W, Paraskevaidis E. 2006. Obstetric outcomes after conservative treatment for intraepithelial or early invasive cervical lesions: systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet 367:489–498.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luesley D, Leeson S. 2010. Colposcopy and programme management: guidelines for the NHS cervical screening programme. NHSCSP Publication no. 20. Sheffield: NHS Cancer Screening Programmes.
   Google Scholar
• Macdonald M, Rigg L, Lyon RE, Crossley J, Tidy JA, Palmer JE. 2016. Conservative management of CIN2: Is it time to reconsider our options?
   Google Scholar
• McAllum B, Sykes PH, Sadler L, Macnab H, Simcock BJ, Mekhail AK. 2011. Is the treatment of CIN 2 always necessary in women under 25 years old? American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 205:478. e1–477.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore K, Cofer A, Lanneau G, Walker J, Gold MA. 2007. Adolescent cervical dysplasia: histologic evaluation, treatment, and outcomes. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 197:141.e1–141.e6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moscicki AB, Jonas H, Ellenberg JH, Vermund SH, Holland CA, Darragh T, et al. 2000. Prevalence of and risks for cervical human papillomavirus infection and squamous intraepithelial lesions in adolescent girls: impact of infection with human immunodeficiency virus. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine Journal 154:127–134.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Office of National Statistics. 2014. Childbearing for women born in different years, England and Wales 2013. London, UK: ONS. Available from: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_371129.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ogilvie GS, Cook DA, Taylor DL, Rank C, Kan L, Yu A, et al. 2013. Population-based evaluation of type-specific HPV prevalence among women in British Columbia, Canada. Vaccine 31:1129–1133.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostor AG. 1993. Natural History of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a critical review. International Journal of Gynecological Pathology 12:186.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palefsky JM. 1999. Anal squamous intraepithelial lesions: relation to HIV and human papillomavirus infection. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes 21:S42–S48.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reuschenbach M, Wentzensen N, Dijkstra MG, von Knebel Doeberitz M, Arbyn M. 2014. p16INK4a immunohistochemistry in cervical biopsy specimens: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the interobserver agreement. American Journal of Clinical Pathology 142:767–772.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riethdorf S, Neffen EF, Cviko A, Loning T, Crum CP, Riethdorf L. 2004. p16INK4a expression as biomarker for HPV 16-related vulvar neoplasias. Human Pathology 35:1477–1483.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santos M, Landolfi S, Olivella A, Lloveras B, Klaustermeier J, Suarez H, et al. 2006. p16 overexpression identifies HPV-positive vulvar squamous cell carcinomas. American Journal of Surgical Pathology 30:1347–1356.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sasieni P, Castanon A, Landy R, Kyrgiou M, Kitchener H, Quigley M, et al. 2015. Risk of preterm birth following surgical treatment for cervical disease: executive summary of a recent symposium. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 123:1426–1429.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schiffman M, Herrero R, Desalle R, Hildesheim A, Wacholder S, Cecilia RA, et al. 2005. The carcinogenicity of human papillomavirus types reflects viral evolution. Virology 337:76–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schiffman M, Rodriguez AC. 2008. Heterogeneity in CIN3 diagnosis. The Lancet Oncology 9:404–406.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simcock B, Sykes P. 2014. PRINCess: the prediction of regression in CIN2. A prospective multicentre trial of conservative management of CIN2 in women under the age of 25. Protocol Version 6: 30 May 2014. Available from: http://www.otago.ac.nz/christchurch/otago073807.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Stoler MH, Schiffman M. 2001. Interobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologic and histologic interpretations: realistic estimates from the ASCUS-LSIL triage study. JAMA 285:1500–1505.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun XW, Kuhn L, Ellerbrock TV, Chiasson MA, Bush TJ, Wright TC Jr. 1997. Human papillomavirus infection in women infected with the human immunodeficiency virus. The New England Journal of Medicine 337:1343–1349.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright TC, Massad LS, Dunton CJ, Spitzer M, Wilkinson EJ, Solomon D. 2007. 2006 consensus guidelines for the management of women with abnormal cervical cancer screening tests. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 197:346–355.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar