BELGIAN CONSENSUS GUIDELINES FOR FOLLOW-UP OF WOMEN WITH CERVICAL CYTOLOGICAL ABNORMALITIES

REFERENCES

• Papanicolaou GN. Cytological evaluation of smears pre-pared by the tampon method for the detection of carci-noma of the uterine cervix. Cancer 1954 7: 1185–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Cancer Institute Workshop. The 1988 Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytological diagno-ses. JAMA 1989; 262: 931–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broder S. From the National Institutes of Health. Rapid communication- The Bethesda System for reporting cer-vical/vaginal cytologic diagnoses- report of the 1991 Bethesda Workshop. JAMA 1992; 267: 1892.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, et al. The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytol-ogy.JAMA 2002; 287:2114–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright TC, Cox JT, Massad LS, Twiggs LB, Wilkinson E J. 2001 consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA 2002; 287:2120–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stoler MH, Schiffman M. Interobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologic and histologic interpretations. JAMA 2001;285: 1500–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sherman ME, Solomon D, Schiffman M. Qualification of ASCUS: A Comparison of Equivocal LSIL and Equivocal HSIL Cervical Cytology in the ASCUS LSIL Triage Study. Am J Clin Pathol 2001; 116: 386–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones BA, Novis DA. Follow-up of abnormal gynaecologic cytology: a College of American Pathologists Q-probes study of 16.132 cases from 306 laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000; 124: 665–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flynn K, Rimm DL. Diagnosis of 'ASCUS' in women over age 50 is less likely to be associated with dysplasia. Diagn Cytopathol 2001; 24: 132–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schiffman MH, Brinton LA. The epidemiology of cervical carcinogenesis. Cancer 1995; 76: 1888–1901.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solomon D, Schiffman M, Tarone R. Comparison of three management strategies for patients with atypical squamous cells of undertermined significance: baseline results from a randomized trial. J Narl Cancer Inst 2001; 93: 293–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergeron C, Jeannel D, Podeva J, Cassonnet P, Orth G. Human papillomavirus testing in women with mild cyto-logic atypia. Obstet Gynecol 2000; 95:821–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Cervical cytology: evaluation and management of abnor-malities. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetri-cians and Gynecologists; 1993: 1–7. ACOG Technical Bulletin 183.
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell MF, Schottenfeld D, Tortolero-Luna G, Cantor SB, Richards-Kortum R. Colposcopy for the diagnosis of squamous intraepithelial lesions: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 91:626–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sherman ME, Schiffman M, Cox JT. Effects of age and hu-man papilloma viral load on colposcopy triage: data from the randomized atypical squamous cells of undertermined significance/low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion triage study (ALTS). J Natl Cancer Inst 2002; 94: 102–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright TC, Lorincz A, Ferris DG, et al. Reflex human papil-lomavirus deoxyribonucleic acid testing in women with abnormal Papanicolaou smears. Arn Obstet Gynecol 1998; 178: 962–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ALTS-group. Results of a randomised trial on the manage-ment of cytology interpretations of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 188: 1383–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keating JT, Wang H H. Significance of a diagnosis of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance for Papanicolaou smears in perimenopausal and postmeno-pausal women. Cancer 2001; 93: 100–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones BA, Davey DD. Quality management in gynaeco-logic cytology using interlaboratory comparison. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000; 124: 672–81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Takezawa K, Bennett BB, Wilkinson E J, Drew PA, Hardt NS. Squamous intraepithelial lesions of the cervix in a high-risk population. J Lower Gen Tract Dis 1998; 2: 136–40.
   Google Scholar
• Lonky NM, Sadeghi M, Tsadik GW, Petitti D. The clinical significance of the poor correlation of cervical dysplasia and cervical malignancy with referral cytologic results. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 181: 560–6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• zur Hausen H. Papillomaviruses causing cancer: evasion from host-cell control in early events in carcinogenesis. J Nat! Cancer Inst 2000; 92: 690–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robertson JH, Woudent BE, Elliott H. Cytological changes preceding cervical cancer. J Clin Pathol 1994; 47: 278–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ALTS-Group. Human papillomavirus testing for triage of women with cytologic evidence of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions: baseline data from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92: 397–402.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Massad LS, Collins YC, Meyer PM. Biopsy correlates of abnormal cervical cytology classified using the Bethesda System. Gynecol Oncol 2001; 82: 516–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kinney WK, Manos MM, Hurley LB, Ransley JE. Where's the high-grade cervical neoplasia? The importance of mini-mally abnormal Papanicolaou diagnoses. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 91:973–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grenko RT, Abendroth CS, Frauenhoffer EE, Ruggiero FM, Zaino RJ. Variance in the interpretation of cervical biopsy specimens obtained for atypical squamous cells of unde-termined significance. Am J Clin Pathol 2000; 114: 735–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milne DS, Wadehra V, Mennim D, Wagstaff TI. A prospective follow upstudy of women with colposcopically uncon-firmed positive cervical smears. BrJ Ostet Gynaecol 1999; 106:38–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soofer SB, Sidawy MK. Atypical glandular cells of unde-termined significance. Cancer 2000; 90:207–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee KR, Manna EA, St. John T. Atypical endocervical glan-dular cells: accuracy of cytologic diagnosis. Diagn Cyto-pathol 1995; 13:202–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montz F J. Significance of 'normal' endometrial cells in cervical cytology form asymptomatic postmenopausal women receiving hormone replacement therapy. Gynecol Oncol 2001; 81: 33–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar