Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2003 Apr 5;326(7392):733.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.326.7392.733.

Cross sectional study of conventional cervical smear, monolayer cytology, and human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervical cancer screening

Joël Coste  1 , Béatrix Cochand-Priollet, Patricia de Cremoux, Catherine Le Galès, Isabelle Cartier, Vincent Molinié, Sylvain Labbé, Marie-Cécile Vacher-Lavenu, Philippe Vielh; French Society of Clinical Cytology Study Group
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Cross sectional study of conventional cervical smear, monolayer cytology, and human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervical cancer screening

Joël Coste et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the sensitivity, specificity, and interobserver reliability of conventional cervical smear tests, monolayer cytology, and human papillomavirus testing for screening for cervical cancer.

Design: Cross sectional study in which the three techniques were performed simultaneously with a reference standard (colposcopy and histology).

Setting: Public university and private practices in France, with complete independence from the suppliers.

Participants: 828 women referred for colposcopy because of previously detected cytological abnormalities and 1757 women attending for routine smears.

Main outcome measures: Clinical readings and optimised interpretation (two blind readings followed, if necessary, by consensus). Sensitivity, specificity, and weighted kappa computed for various thresholds of abnormalities.

Results: Conventional cervical smear tests were more often satisfactory (91% v 87%) according to the Bethesda system, more reliable (weighted kappa 0.70 v 0.57), and had consistently better sensitivity and specificity than monolayer cytology. These findings applied to clinical readings and optimised interpretations, low and high grade lesions, and populations with low and high incidence of abnormalities. Human papillomavirus testing associated with monolayer cytology, whether systematic or for atypical cells of undetermined significance, performed no better than conventional smear tests.

Conclusions: Monolayer cytology is less reliable and more likely to give false positive and false negative results than conventional cervical smear tests for screening for cervical cancer.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Nanda K, McCrory DC, Myers ER, Bastian LA, Hasselblad V, Hickey JD, et al. Accuracy of the Papanicolaou test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytologic abnormalities: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2000;132:810–819. - PubMed
    1. Hartmann KE, Nanda K, Hall S, Myers E. Technologic advances for evaluation of cervical cytology: is newer better? Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2001;56:765–774. - PubMed
    1. Merea E, Le Galès C, Cochand-Priollet B, Cartier I, de Cremoux P, Vacher-Lavenu MC, et al. Cost of screening for cancerous and precancerous lesions of the cervix. Diagn Cytopathol. 2002;27:251–257. - PubMed
    1. Cochand-Priollet B, Le Galès C, de Cremoux P, Molinié V, Sastre-Garau X, Vacher-Lavenu MC, et al. Cost-effectiveness of monolayers and human papillomavirus testing compared to that of conventional Papanicolaou smears for cervical cancer screening: protocol of the study of the French Society of Clinical Cytology. Diagn Cytopathol. 2001;24:412–420. - PubMed
    1. Reid MC, Lachs MS, Feinstein AR. Use of methodological standards in diagnostic test research. Getting better but still not good. JAMA. 1995;274:645–651. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms