134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11391604)
1. Less medical intervention after sharp demarcation of Grade 1-2 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia smears by neural network screening.
Kok MR; Boon ME; Schreiner-Kok PG; Hermans J; Grobbee DE; Kok LP
Cancer; 2001 Jun; 93(3):173-8. PubMed ID: 11391604
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Risk of recurrent high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia after successful treatment: a long-term multi-cohort study.
Kocken M; Helmerhorst TJ; Berkhof J; Louwers JA; Nobbenhuis MA; Bais AG; Hogewoning CJ; Zaal A; Verheijen RH; Snijders PJ; Meijer CJ
Lancet Oncol; 2011 May; 12(5):441-50. PubMed ID: 21530398
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion in women aged <30 years has a prevalence pattern resembling low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion.
Vale DB; Westin MC; Zeferino LC
Cancer Cytopathol; 2013 Oct; 121(10):576-81. PubMed ID: 23765869
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Human papillomavirus testing for the detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cancer: final results of the POBASCAM randomised controlled trial.
Rijkaart DC; Berkhof J; Rozendaal L; van Kemenade FJ; Bulkmans NW; Heideman DA; Kenter GG; Cuzick J; Snijders PJ; Meijer CJ
Lancet Oncol; 2012 Jan; 13(1):78-88. PubMed ID: 22177579
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Age-specific evaluation of primary human papillomavirus screening vs conventional cytology in a randomized setting.
Leinonen M; Nieminen P; Kotaniemi-Talonen L; Malila N; Tarkkanen J; Laurila P; Anttila A
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2009 Dec; 101(23):1612-23. PubMed ID: 19903804
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. PCR based high risk HPV testing is superior to neural network based screening for predicting incident CIN III in women with normal cytology and borderline changes.
Rozendaal L; Westerga J; van der Linden JC; Walboomers JM; Voorhorst FJ; Risse EK; Boon ME; Meijer CJ
J Clin Pathol; 2000 Aug; 53(8):606-11. PubMed ID: 11002764
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Neural network-based screening (NNS) in cervical cytology: no need for the light microscope?
Kok MR; van Der Schouw YT; Boon ME; Grobbee DE; Kok LP; Schreiner-Kok PG; van der Graaf Y; Doornewaard H; van den Tweel JG
Diagn Cytopathol; 2001 Jun; 24(6):426-34. PubMed ID: 11391826
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Expression of MN/CA9 protein in Papanicolaou smears containing atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance is a diagnostic biomarker of cervical dysplasia and neoplasia.
Liao SY; Stanbridge EJ
Cancer; 2000 Mar; 88(5):1108-21. PubMed ID: 10699902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Is it possible to define a better ASCUS class in cervicovaginal screening? A review of 187 cases.
Guerrini L; Sama D; Visani M; Cotignoli T; Sintoni C; Maioli P; Lanzanova G; Schincaglia P
Acta Cytol; 2001; 45(4):532-6. PubMed ID: 11480714
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Benefit and burden in the Dutch cytology-based vs high-risk human papillomavirus-based cervical cancer screening program.
Loopik DL; Koenjer LM; Siebers AG; Melchers WJG; Bekkers RLM
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2021 Feb; 224(2):200.e1-200.e9. PubMed ID: 32800820
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Screening properties of human papillomavirus testing for predicting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion smears: a prospective study.
Dane C; Batmaz G; Dane B; Cetin A
Ann Diagn Pathol; 2009 Apr; 13(2):73-7. PubMed ID: 19302953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Abnormal outcomes following cervical cancer screening: event duration and health utility loss.
Insinga RP; Glass AG; Myers ER; Rush BB
Med Decis Making; 2007; 27(4):414-22. PubMed ID: 17585005
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The diagnostic value of computer-assisted primary cervical smear screening: a longitudinal cohort study.
Doornewaard H; van der Schouw YT; van der Graaf Y; Bos AB; Habbema JD; van den Tweel JG
Mod Pathol; 1999 Nov; 12(11):995-1000. PubMed ID: 10574595
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance on cervical smears: follow-up study of an Asian screening population.
Cheung AN; Szeto EF; Ng KM; Fong KW; Yeung AC; Tsun OK; Khoo US; Chan KY; Ng AW
Cancer; 2004 Apr; 102(2):74-80. PubMed ID: 15098250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Cytology versus HPV testing for cervical cancer screening in the general population.
Koliopoulos G; Nyaga VN; Santesso N; Bryant A; Martin-Hirsch PP; Mustafa RA; Schünemann H; Paraskevaidis E; Arbyn M
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2017 Aug; 8(8):CD008587. PubMed ID: 28796882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Screening histories of incidence cases of cervical cancer and high grade SIL. A comparison.
Baldauf JJ; Dreyfus M; Ritter J; Meyer P; Philippe E
Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(5):1431-8. PubMed ID: 9305380
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Accuracy of thin-layer cytology in patients undergoing cervical cone biopsy.
Bergeron C; Bishop J; Lemarie A; Cas F; Ayivi J; Huynh B; Barrasso R
Acta Cytol; 2001; 45(4):519-24. PubMed ID: 11480712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Cytology and human papillomavirus screening test results associated with 2827 histopathologic diagnoses of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2/3.
Zhao C; Amin M; Weng B; Chen X; Kanbour-Shakir A; Austin RM
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2013 Jul; 137(7):942-7. PubMed ID: 23050808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Use of computer-assisted rescreening as an ancillary tool to subclassify AGUS cervical smears.
Chhieng DC; Elgert PA; Xiong Y; Cangiarella JF; Cohen JM
Diagn Cytopathol; 2000 Sep; 23(3):165-70. PubMed ID: 10945903
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Diagnoses and outcomes in cervical cancer screening: a population-based study.
Insinga RP; Glass AG; Rush BB
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2004 Jul; 191(1):105-13. PubMed ID: 15295350
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
