Diagnostic Histopathology
Volume 15, Issue 7 , Pages 330-334 , July 2009

The future of cervical screening in the UK

References 

  1. Quinn M, Babb P, Jones J, Allen E. Effect of screening on incidence of and mortality from cancer of cervix in England: evaluation based on routinely collected statistics. Br Med J. 1999;318:904–908
  2. Peto J, Gilham C, Fletcher O, Matthews FE. The cervical cancer epidemic that screening has prevented in the UK. Lancet. 2004;364:246–249
  3. IARC . IARC handbooks of cancer prevention. Cervix cancer screening, vol. 10. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer Press; 2005;
  4. Nanda K, McCrory DC, Myers ER, et al. Accuracy of the Papanicolaou test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytological abnormalities: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2000;132:810–819
  5. Department of Health . Cancer reform strategy. London: Department of Health; 2007;
  6. National Institute for Clinical Excellence . Guidance on the use of liquid based cytology for cervical screening. Technology appraisal 69. Available from: www.nice.org.uk/Docref.asp?d=82877October 2003;
  7. NHSCSP . Modernising the NHSCSP. NICE appraisal on liquid based cytology. Published 22 October 2003. Advice to the service Sheffield: NHSCSP; 2003;
  8. NHSCSP Publication 20 In:  Luesley D,  Leeson S editor. Colposcopy and programme management. Sheffield: NHSCSP; 2004;
  9. Sasieni P, Adams J, Cuzick J. Benefits of cervical screening at different ages: evidence from the UK audit of screening histories. Br J Cancer. 2003;89:88–93
  10. Herbert A, Smith JHF. Women under 25 should be offered screening. BMJ. 2007;334:273
  11. In:  Patnick J editors. NHSCSP annual review 2006. Sheffield: NHSCSP; 2007;
  12. Pritchard J. Quality assurance guidelines for the cervical screening programme. NHSCSP Publication 3 Sheffield: NHSCSP; 1996;
  13. Dowie R, Stoykova B, Crawford D, et al. Liquid-based cytology can improve efficiency of cervical smear readers: evidence from timing surveys in two NHS cytology laboratories. Cytopathology. 2006;17:65–72
  14. Williams AR. Liquid-based cytology and conventional smears compared over two 12-month periods. Cytopathology. 2006;17:82–85
  15. Gregory LS, Dudding N, Smith JHF. The impact of introducing liquid based cytology into a routine screening laboratory. Cytopathology. 2006;17(Suppl 1):24
  16. Beerman H, van Dorst EBL, Kuenen-Boumeester V, Hogendoorn PCW. Superior performance of liquid based versus conventional cytology in a population-based cervical cancer screening program. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;112:572–576
  17. In:  Patnick J editors. NHSCSP annual review 2007. Sheffield: NHSCSP; 2008;
  18. Workforce Survey Working Group NHSCSP . A survey of non-medical staff within the cervical screening programme 2002–2005. Sheffield: NHSCSP; 2006;
  19. Bosch FX, Lorincz A, Munoz N, et al. The causal relation between human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. J Clin Pathol. 2002;55:244–265
  20. Bosch FX, Burchell AN, Sciffman M, et al. Epidemiology and natural history of human papillomavirus infections and type-specific implications in cervical neoplasia. Vaccine. 2008;26(Suppl 10):K1–K16
  21. Gravitt PE, Coutlee F, Iftner T, Sellors JW, Quint WGV, Wheeler CM. New technologies in cervical cancer screening. Vaccine. 2008;26(Suppl 10):K42–K52
  22. Cuzick J, Arbyn M, Sankaranarayanan R, et al. Overview of human papillomavirus-based and other novel options for cervical cancer screening in developed and developing countries. Vaccine. 2008;26(Suppl 10):K29–K41
  23. Smart L, Cotton S, Sharp L, et al. Is a single HPV test effective in the triage of women with low-grade smears to repeat smears or colposcopy? Evidence from TOMBOLA. Cytopathology. 2008;19(Suppl 2):12
  24. Moss S, Gray A, Legood R, Vessey M, Patnick J, Kitchener H. Effect of testing for HPV as a triage for cervical cancer: observational before and after study. BMJ. 2006;332:83–85
  25. Cervical Screening Programme, England 2007–08. Available from: http://www.ic.nhs.uk/pubs/cervscreen0708(accessed: February 2009)
  26. Desai M. The role of automation in cervical cytology. Diagn Histopathol. 2009;15:
  27. Kardos TF. The FocalPoint System: FocalPoint slide profiler and FocalPoint GS. Cancer. 2004;102:334–339
  28. Biscotti CV, Dawson AE, Dziura B, et al. Assisted primary screening using the automated ThinPrep Imaging System. Am J Clin Pathol. 2005;123:281–287
  29. Miller F, Nagel LE, Kenny-Moynihan MB. Implementation of the ThinPrep imaging system in a high-volume metropolitan laboratory. Diagn Cytopathol. 2007;35:213–217
  30. Roberts JM, Thurloe JK, Greenberg RC, Clarke JM, Biro C. A three-armed trial of the ThinPrep imaging system. Diagn Cytopathol. 2007;35:96–102
  31. Passamonti B, Bulletti S, Camilli M, et al. Evaluation of the FocalPoint GS System performance in an Italian population-based screening of cervical abnormalities. Acta Cytol. 2007;51:865–871
  32. NHSCSP . Achieving a 14-day turnaround time for results by 2010. Advice to the NHS. Sheffield: NHSCSP; 2008;
  33. Option appraisal: assessment of a seven-day turnaround for the reporting of cervical smear results. Sheffield: ScHARR, University of Sheffield; 2006;
  34. Lord Carter of Coles . Report of the second phase of the independent review of NHS pathology services in England. London: Department of Health; 2008;
  35. NHS immunisation information. Available from: http://www.immunisation.nhs.uk/Vaccines/HPV(accessed March 2009)
  36. 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;96:143–150
  37. Franco EL, Cuzick J, Hildesheim A, de Sanjose S. Issues in planning cervical cancer screening in the era of HPV vaccination. Vaccine. 2006;24(Suppl 3):S171–S177

PII: S1756-2317(09)00094-2

doi: 10.1016/j.mpdhp.2009.04.003

Diagnostic Histopathology
Volume 15, Issue 7 , Pages 330-334 , July 2009

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution