Pap tests and HPV infection

References

• Munoz N, Bosch FX, de Sanjose S, et al; International Agency for Research on Cancer Multicenter Cervical Cancer Study Group. Epidemiologic classification of human papillomavirus types associated with cervical cancer. N Engl J Med 2003; 348(6): 518–27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palefsky JM. Anal squamous intraepithelial lesions: relation to HIV and human papillomavirus infection. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 1999; 21(Suppl 1): S42–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lacey HB, Wilson GE, Tilston P, et al. A study of anal intraepithelial neoplasia in HIV positive homosexual men. Sex Transm Infect 1999; 75(3): 172–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monk BJ, Burger RA, Lin F, et al. Prognostic significance of human papillomavirus DNA in vulvar carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol 1995; 85(5 Pt 1): 709–15
   Google Scholar
• Iversen T, Tretli S. Intraepithelial and invasive squamous cell neoplasia of the vulva: trends in incidence, recurrence, and survival rate in Norway. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 91(6): 969–72
   Google Scholar
• Ho GY, Bierman R, Beardsley L, et al. Natural history of cervicovaginal papillomavirus infection in young women. N Engl J Med 1998; 338(7): 423–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith EM, Johnson SR, Ritchie JM, et al. Persistent HPV infection in postmenopausal age women. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2004; 87(2): 131–7
   Google Scholar
• Wright TC, Cox JT. Clinical uses of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing. Hagerstown, Md: American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, 2004
   Google Scholar
• Schlecht NF, Kulaga S, Robitaille J, et al. Persistent human papillomavirus infection as a predictor of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. JAMA 2001; 286(24): 3106–14
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG practice bulletin. Cervical cytology screening. Number 45, August 2003. Obstet Gynaecol 2003; 102(2): 417–27
   Google Scholar
• Saslow D, Runowicz CD, Solomon D, et al; American Cancer Society. American Cancer Society guideline for the early detection of cervical neoplasia and cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 2002; 52(6): 342–62
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saint M, Gildengorin G, Sawaya GF. Current cervical neoplasia screening practices of obstetrician/gynecologists in the US. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 192(2): 414–21
   Google Scholar
• Abulafia O, Pezzullo JC, Sherer DM. Performance of ThinPrep liquid- based cervical cytology in comparison with conventionally prepared Papanicolaou smears: a quantitative survey. Gynecol Oncol 2003; 90(1): 137–44
   Google Scholar
• Braly P, Sedlacek T, Kinney W, et al. Reporting the potential benefits of new technologies for cervical cancer screening. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2001; 5(2): 73–81
   Google Scholar
• Diaz-Rosario LA, Kabawat SE. Performance of a fluid-based, thin-layer Papanicolaou smear method in the clinical setting of an independent laboratory and an outpatient screening population in New England. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1999; 123(9): 817–21
   Google Scholar
• Obwegeser JH, Brack S. Does liquid-based technology really improve detection of cervical neoplasia? A prospective, randomized trial comparing the ThinPrep Pap test with the conventional Pap test, including follow-up of HSIL cases. Acta Cytol 2001; 45(5): 709–14
   Google Scholar
• Wright TC Jr, Cox JT, Massad LS, et al; ASCCP-Sponsored Consensus Conference. 2001 Consensus Guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA 2002; 287(16): 2120–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davey DD, Austin RM, Birdsong G, et al; American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology. ASCCP patient management guidelines: Pap test specimen adequacy and quality indicators. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2002; 6(3): 195–9
   Google Scholar
• Mintzer M, Curtis P, Resnick JC, et al. The effect of the quality of Papanicolaou smears on the detection of cytologic abnormalities. Cancer 1999; 87(3): 113–7
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell HS. Longitudinal analysis of histologic high-grade disease after negative cervical cytology according to endocervical status. Cancer 2001; 93(4): 237–40
   Google Scholar
• Selvaggi SM. Reporting of atypical squamous cells, cannot exclude a high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (ASC-H) on cervical samples: Is it significant? Diagn Cytopathol 2003; 29(1): 38–41
   Google Scholar
• Solomon D, Schiffman M, Tarone R; ALTS Study Group. Comparison of three management strategies for patients with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: baseline results from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001; 93(4): 293–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Levine L, Lucci JA III, Dinh TV. Atypical glandular cells: new Bethesda terminology and management guidelines. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2003; 58(6): 399–406
   Google Scholar
• Sharpless KE, Schnatz PF, Mandavilli S, et al. Lack of adherence to practice guidelines for women with atypical glandular cells on cervical cytology. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 105(3): 501–6
   Google Scholar
• Harper DM, Franco EL, Wheeler C, et al; GlaxoSmithKline HPV Vaccine Study Group. Efficacy of a bivalent LI virus-like particle vaccine in prevention of infection with human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 in young women: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2004; 364(9447): 1757–65
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar