SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCES

  • 1
    Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, et al. The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA. 2002;287:21142119.
  • 2
    Monteiro DL, Trajano AJ, Russomano FB, Silva KS. Prognosis of intraepithelial cervical lesion during adolescence in up to 2 years of follow-up. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2010;23:230236.
  • 3
    Elit L, Levine MN, Julian JA, et al. Expectant management versus immediate treatment for low-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a randomized trial in Canada and Brazil. Cancer Cytopathol. 2011;117:14381445.
  • 4
    Moscicki AB, Cox JT. Practice improvement in cervical screening and management (PICSM): symposium on management of cervical abnormalities in adolescents and young women. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2010;14:7380.
  • 5
    Kjaer SK, Frederiksen K, Munk C, Iftner T. Long-term absolute risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse after human papillomavirus infection: role of persistence. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102:14781488.
  • 6
    Herbert A. The impact of cytological cervical screening and its changing role in the future. Cytopathology. 2010;21:355358.
  • 7
    Dehn D, Torkko KC, Shroyer KR. Human papillomavirus testing and molecular markers of cervical dysplasia and carcinoma. Cancer Cytopathol. 2007;111:114.
  • 8
    Brown CA, Bogers J, Sahebali S, Depuydt CE, De Prins F, Malinowski DP. Role of protein biomarkers in the detection of high-grade disease in cervical cancer screening programs [serial online]. J Oncol 2012:289315, 2012.
  • 9
    Hwang SJ, Shroyer KR. Biomarkers of cervical dysplasia and carcinoma [serial online]. J Oncol 2012:507286, 2012.
  • 10
    Abreu AL, Souza RP, Gimenes F, Consolaro ME. A review of methods for detect human Papillomavirus infection [serial online]. Virol J. 2012;9:262.
  • 11
    Llewellyn H. Observer variation, dysplasia grading, and HPV typing: a review. Am J Clin Pathol. 2000;114(suppl):S21S35.
  • 12
    Crum CP. Symposium part 1: should the Bethesda System terminology be used in diagnostic surgical pathology? Point Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2003;22:512.
  • 13
    Mollers M, Goot Hein J, Vriend Henrike J, et al. Prevalence, incidence and persistence of HPV infections in a large cohort of sexually active young women in the Netherlands. Vaccine. 2013;31:394401.
  • 14
    Arbyn M, Kyrgiou M, Simoens C, et al. Perinatal mortality and other severe adverse pregnancy outcomes associated with treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: meta-analysis [serial online]. BMJ. 2008;337:a1284.
  • 15
    Instituto Nacional de Cancer. Diretrizes brasileiras para o rastreamento do cancer do colo do utero. Available at: http://www1.inca.gov.br/inca/Arquivos/Diretrizes_rastreamento_cancer_colo_utero.pdf. Accessed December 18, 2012.
  • 16
    Castle PE, Schiffman M, Wheeler CM, Solomon D. Evidence for frequent regression of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia-grade 2. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113:1825.
  • 17
    Peto J, Gilham C, Fletcher O, Matthews FE. The cervical cancer epidemic that screening has prevented in the UK. Lancet. 2004;364:249256.
  • 18
    Kohli M, Ferko N, Martin A, et al. Estimating the long-term impact of a prophylactic human papillomavirus 16/18 vaccine on the burden of cervical cancer in the UK. Br J Cancer. 2007;96:143150.
  • 19
    Freitas RA, Carvasan GA, Morais SS, Zeferino LC. Excessive Pap smears due to opportunistic cervical cancer screening. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2008;29:479482.
  • 20
    Vale DB, Morais SS, Pimenta AL, Zeferino LC. Assessment of the cervical cancer screening in the Family Health Strategy in Amparo, Sao Paulo State, Brazil. Cad Saude Publica. 2010;26:383390.
  • 21
    Sasieni P, Castanon A, Cuzick J. Effectiveness of cervical screening with age: population based case-control study of prospectively recorded data [serial online]. BMJ. 2009;339:b2968.
  • 22
    McCredie MR, Sharples KJ, Paul C, et al. Natural history of cervical neoplasia and risk of invasive cancer in women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2008;9:425434.
  • 23
    Ostor AG. Natural history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a critical review. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1993;12:186192.
  • 24
    Vooijs GP. Benign proliferative reactions, intraepithelial neoplasia and invasive cancer of the uterine cervix. In: Bibbo M, ed. Comprehensive Cytopathology. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Company; 1991:153230.
  • 25
    Coleman DV, Evans DMD. Biopsy Pathology and Cytology of the Cervix. 2nd ed. London, United Kingdom: Arnold; 1999.
  • 26
    Dufloth RM, Messias-Silva SM, Andrade LA, di Loreto C, Munhoz DM, Zeferino LC. Nuclear alterations of cells and atypical metaplastic cells in cervical smears are predictive criteria of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2005;26:186190.
  • 27
    Blanks RG, Kelly RS. Comparison of cytology and histology results in English cervical screening laboratories before and after liquid-based cytology conversion: do the data provide evidence for a single category of high-grade dyskaryosis? Cytopathology. 2010;21:368373.
  • 28
    Ronco G, Giorgi-Rossi P, Carozzi F, et al. Efficacy of human papillomavirus testing for the detection of invasive cervical cancers and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:249257.
  • 29
    Zhao C, Chen X, Onisko A, Kanbour A, Austin RM. Follow-up outcomes for a large cohort of US women with negative imaged liquid-based cytology findings and positive high risk human papillomavirus test results. Gynecol Oncol. 2011;122:291296.