• 1
    Parkin DM, Bray FI, Davassa SS. Cancer burden in the year 2000. Eur J Cancer. 2001; 37: S466.
  • 2
    International Agency for Research on Cancer – IARC Screening Group. Accuracy of screening test. Available at URL: Accessed November 11, 2005.
  • 3
    Sankaranarayanan R, Rajamanickam R, Theresa R, et al. Initial results from a randomized trial of cervical visual screening in rural south India. Int J Cancer. 2004; 109: 461467.
  • 4
    Sankaranarayanan R, Gaffkin L, Jacob M, Sellors J, Robles S. A critical assessment of screening methods for cervical neoplasia. Int J Gynecol Obset. 2005; 89: S4S12.
  • 5
    Tezcan A, Garner DM, Lam P, Korbelik J, Palcic B. Analysis of thionin, gallocyanin, and hematoxylin for automated quantitative image cytometry of cervical samples. 8th Annual Meeting, Clinical Applications of Cytometry 1993: 1518.
  • 6
    Sudbo J, Reith A. The evolution of predictive oncology and molecular-based therapy for oral cancer prevention [Review]. Int J Cancer. 2005; 115: 339345.
  • 7
    Sudbo J, Lippman SM, Lee JJ, et al. The influence of resection and aneuploidy on mortality in oral leukoplakia. N Engl J Med. 2004; 350: 14051413.
  • 8
    Sudbo J, Bryne M, Johannessen, Kildal W, Danielson HE, Reith A. Comparison of histological grading and large-scale genomic status (DNA ploidy) as prognostic tools in oral dysplasia. J Pathol. 2001; 194: 303310.
  • 9
    Fitzgibbons PL, Page DL, Weaver D, et al. Prognostic factors in breast cancer. College of American Pathologists Consensus Statement 1999. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2000; 124: 966978.
  • 10
    Follen M, Crain S, MacAulay C, et al. Optical technologies for cervical neoplasia: update of an NCI program project grant. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol. 2005; 3: 4153.
  • 11
    Follen M, Schottenfeld D. Surrogate endpoint biomarkers and their modulation in cervical chemoprevention trials. Cancer. 2001; 91: 17581776.
  • 12
    Malpica A, Matisic JP, Niekirk DV, et al. Kappa statistics to measure interrater and intrarater agreement for 1790 cervical biopsy specimens among twelve pathologists: qualitative histopathologic analysis and methodologic issues. Gynecol Oncol. 2005; 99: S3852.
  • 13
    Garner D, Harrison A, MacAulay CF. Cyto-Savant™ and its use in automated screening of cervical smears. In: WiedGL, editor. Compendium on the computerized cytology and histology laboratory. Chicago, IL: Tutorial of Cytology, 1994. p 346352.
  • 14
    Anderson G, MacAulay CF, Matisic J, Garner D, Palcic B. The use of an automated image cytometer for screening and quantitative assessment of cervical lesions for screening. Columbia Cervical Smear Screening Programme. Cytopathology. 1997; 8: 298312.
  • 15
    Palcic B, Garner DM, MacAulay CF, J Matisic J, Anderson GH. Oncometrics Imaging Corporation and Xillix Technologies Corporation. Use of the Cyto-Savant in quantitative cytology. Acta Cytol. 1996; 40: 6772.
  • 16
    Doudkine A, MacAulay C, Poulin NB, Palcic B. Nuclear texture measurements in image cytometry. Pathologica. 1995; 87: 286299.
  • 17
    Haroske G, Giroud F, Reith A, Bocking A. 1997 ESACP consensus report on diagnostic DNA image cytometry. Part I. Basic considerations and recommendations for preparation, measurement and interpretation. Anal Cell Pathol. 1998; 17: 189200.
  • 18
    Giroud F, Haroske G, Reith A, Bocking A. 1997 ESACP consensus report on diagnostic DNA image cytometry. Part II. Specific recommendations for quality assurance. Anal Cell Pathol. 1998; 17: 201201.
  • 19
    Guillaud M, Cox D, Malpica A, et al. Quantitative histopathological analysis of cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia sections: methodological issues. Cell Oncol. 2004; 26: 3143.
  • 20
    Guillaud M, Cox D, Adler-Storthz K, et al. Exploratory analysis of quantitative histopathology of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: objectivity, reproducibility, malignancy-associated changes, and human papillomavirus. Cytometry. A2004; 60: 8189.
  • 21
    Bollman R, Mehes G, Speich N, Schmitt C, Bollman M. Aberrant, highly hyperdiploid cells in human papillomavirus-positive cytologic samples are associated with progressive lesions of the uterine cervix. Cancer Cytopathol. 2005; 105: 96100.
  • 22
    Bollman R, Mehes G, Torka R, Speich N, Schmitt C, Bollman M. Human papillomavirus typing and DNA ploidy determination of squamous intraepithelial lesions in liquid-based cytologic samples. Cancer Cytopathol. 2003; 99: 5762.
  • 23
    Lorenzato M, Clavel D, Masure M, et al. DNA image cytometry and human papillomavirus (HPV) detection help to select smears at high risk of high-grade cervical lesions. J Pathol. 2001; 194: 171176.
  • 24
    Bocking A, Nguyen VQ. Diagnostic and prognostic use of DNA image cytometry in cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions and invasive carcinoma. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathology). 2004; 102: 4154.
  • 25
    Chiu D, Guillaud M, Cox D, Follen M, MacAulay C. Quality assurance system using statistical process control: an implementation for image cytometry. Cell Oncol. 2004; 26: 101117.
  • 26
    Shaw AR. Human papillomavirus vaccines in development: if they're successful in clinical trials, how will they be implemented? Gynecol Oncol. 2005; 99: S246248.
  • 27
    ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study (ALTS). Group results of a randomized trial on the management of cytology interpretations of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 188: 13831392.
  • 28
    Wright TC, Cox JT, Massad LS, Twiggs LB, Wilkinson EJ. ASCCP-Sponsored Consensus Conference. 2001 consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA. 2002; 287: 21202129.
  • 29
    Arbyn M, Paraskevaidis E, Martin-Hirsh P, Prendiville W, Dillner JA. Clinical utility of HPV-DNA detection: triage of minor cervical lesions, follow-up of women treated for high-grade CIN: an update of pooled evidence. Gynecol Oncol. 2005; 99: S711.
  • 30
    Wright TC, Schiffman M. Adding a test for human papillomavirus DNA to cervical cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2003; 348: 489490.
  • 31
    Papanicolaou GN, Traut HF. The diagnostic value of vaginal smears in carcinoma of the uterus. 1941. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1997; 121: 211224.
  • 32
    Benedet JL, Anderson GH. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in British Columbia: a comprehensive program for detection, diagnosis, and treatment. Gynecol Oncol. 1981; 12: S280291.
  • 33
    Davey E, Barratt A, Irwig L, et al. Effect of study design and quality on unsatisfactory rates, cytology classification, and accuracy in liquid-based versus conventional cytology: a systematic review. Lancet. 2006; 367: 122132.
  • 34
    Obwegeser J, Schneider V. Thin-layer cervical cytology: a new meta-analysis. Lancet. 2006; 367: 8889.
  • 35
    Anderson GH, Boyes DA, Benedet JL, et al. Organisation and results of the cervical cytology screening programme in British Columbia, 1955–85. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1988; 296: 975978.
  • 36
    Fahey MT, Irwig L, Macaskill P. Meta-analysis of Pap test accuracy. Am J Epidemiol. 1995; 141: 680689.
  • 37
    Sun XR, Wang J, Garner D, Palcic B. Detection of cervical cancer and high grade neoplastic lesions by a combination of liquid-based sample preparation and DNA measurement using automated image cytometry. Cell Oncol. 2005; 27: 3341.