Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ BMJarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
BMJ
Article
Data sources: UnpayWall
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics
Article . 1991 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
BMJ
Article . 1990 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: Crossref
BMJ
Article . 1990
BMJ
Article
versions View all 3 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Cervical cancers diagnosed after negative results on cervical cytology: perspective in the 1980s.

Authors: Graham G. Giles; H Mitchell; G Medley;

Cervical cancers diagnosed after negative results on cervical cytology: perspective in the 1980s.

Abstract

To assess the magnitude of the problem of interval cancers of the cervix (those that are diagnosed within a short time after negative screening test results) in the 1980s, to compare the nature of interval cancers in younger women with that in older women, and, by reviewing negative cervical smears, to determine the proportion of interval cancers that might represent the development of malignancy anew compared with the proportion that might be associated with difficulties in sampling or errors in reporting.An audit of the interval cases of cervical cancer that had been diagnosed within 36 months of a smear having been reported as negative by the Victorian Cytology Gynaecological Service among women registered with cervical cancer during 1982-6.The Victorian Cytology Gynaecological Service, a free public sector cytology laboratory in Victoria, Australia.138 Women, all of whom had had cervical cancer diagnosed during the 36 months after having had a negative cervical smear. Subjects were divided into two age groups: younger women, aged less than 35; older women, aged 35-69.Negative slides were reviewed for evidence of optimal sampling and for the presence of cellular abnormalities that had been missed at the time of the original reporting.The number of interval cases of cancer of the cervix registered during 1982-6. The proportion of interval cases occurring in younger women and the proportion occurring in older women. Division of women into three risk categories based on clinical history and screening history that broadly corresponded to the probability that a diagnosis of cervical cancer might be expected during the 36 months after the issuing of a negative smear report.138 Of 1044 (13.2%) women who had been registered with cervical cancer during 1982-6 had had one or more negative smears during the 36 months preceding the diagnosis of cancer. Interval cancers comprised a larger proportion of registrations of cervical cancer in women aged less than 35 years than in women aged 35-69 (21.1% v 11.0%, p less than 0.01). Women with interval cancer who had had at least three negative smears during the 10 years before the diagnosis of cancer were commoner in the younger age group than in the older age group (7.0% v 2.5%, p less than 0.01). When, however, the number of observed cases of squamous cell carcinoma was related to the number of expected cases in the absence of screening, no significant difference was found between the two age groups (6.8% v 4.8%, p greater than 0.10). The rate of diagnosis of interval cancer per 100,000 negative tests was lower among younger women than among older women (10/100,000 v 16/100,000). Review of the negative slides showed that 11.9% were again considered to be negative with an optimal sample having been obtained as evidenced by the presence of endocervical cells or metaplastic cells, or both.Interval cancers might comprise a larger proportion of all registered cases of cervical cancer among younger women owing to the larger proportion of such cancers being prevented in this age group. Among women with interval cancer review of the negative slides showed that most were accounted for by suboptimal sampling or by errors of reporting.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Adult, Vaginal Smears, Time Factors, Age Factors, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Middle Aged, Risk Factors, Carcinoma, Squamous Cell, Humans, Mass Screening, Female, Diagnostic Errors, Aged

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    96
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 1%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
96
Top 10%
Top 1%
Top 10%
bronze
Related to Research communities
Cancer Research