Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Le dépistage du cancer du col de l’utérus pp 81–101Cite as

Apport du test HPV dans le dépistage primaire du cancer du col

  • Chapter

  • 291 Accesses

Part of the book series: Dépistage et cancer ((DC))

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Références

  1. Agence nationale pour le développement de l’évaluation médicale (1995) Pratique des frottis cervicaux pour le dépistage du cancer du col. In: Recommandations et références médicales. Tome 2. Paris: Andem 9–24

    Google Scholar 

  2. Patnick J (1997) Screening that failed to work. In: Franco E & Monsonego J (Eds) New developments in cervical cancer screening and prevention. Blackwwell Science, Oxford 200–2

    Google Scholar 

  3. Agence nationale d’accréditation et d’évaluation en santé (Anaes) [2002] Conduite à tenir devant un frottis anormal du col de l’utérus. Recommandations pour la pratique clinique, Actualisation. Paris

    Google Scholar 

  4. Exbrayat C (2003) Col de l’utérus. In: Évolution de l’incidence et de la mortalité par cancer en France de 1978 à 2000. InVS 107–12

    Google Scholar 

  5. Rousseau A, Bohet P, Merlière J et al. (2002) Évaluation du dépistage organisé et du dépistage individuel du cancer du col de l’utérus: utilité des données de l’Assurance maladie. Bull Épidémiol Hebdo 19: 81–3

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ostor AG (1993) Natural history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a critical review. Int J Gynecol Pathol 12(2): 186–92

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Council of the European Union (2003) Council recommendation of 2 decembre 2003 on cancer screening. Official J Eur Union L 327: 34–8

    Google Scholar 

  8. Weidmann C, Schaffer P, Hedelin G et al. (1998) L’incidence du cancer du col de l’utérus régresse régulièrement en France. BEH 5: 17–9

    Google Scholar 

  9. Monsonego J (1997) Spontaneous screening: benefits and limitations. In: Franco E, Monsonego J. New developments in cervical cancer screening and prevention. Oxford: Blackwell Science 220–40

    Google Scholar 

  10. Artmann KE, Hall SA, Nanda K et al. (2002) Screening for cervical cancer. Rockville (MD): AHRQ

    Google Scholar 

  11. Monsonego J. Enquête nationale sur le dépistage du cancer du col auprès des gynécologues. Gynécol Obstét pratique 81: 1–5

    Google Scholar 

  12. Castaigne D, Camatte S (2004) Communication personnelle. Salon de Gynécologie Pratique

    Google Scholar 

  13. Sawaya GF, Kerlikowske K, Lee NC et al. (2000) Frequency of cervical smear abnormalities within 3 years of normal cytology. Obstet Gynecol 96(2): 219–23

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Shy K, Chu J, Mandelson M, Greer B et al. (1989) Papanicolaou smear screening interval and risk of cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol 74(6): 838–43

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Miller MG, Sung HY, Sawaya GF et al. (2003) Screening interval and risk of invasive squamous cell cervical cancer Obstet Gynecol 101(1): 29–37

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sung HY, Kearney KA, Miller M et al. (2000) Papanicolaou smear history and diagnosis of invasive cervical carcinoma among members of a large prepaid health plan. Cancer 88(10): 2283–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Fylan F (1998) Screening for cervical cancer: a review of women’s attitudes, knowledge, and behaviour. Br J Gen Pract 48: 1509–14

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. www.plancancer.fr

    Google Scholar 

  19. Boulanger JC (1996) Explanation of invasive cervical cancer following treatment of CIN Communication personnelle, Congrès IFCPC Sydney, Monduzzi Ed. Bologne 175–9

    Google Scholar 

  20. Raffle AE (1997) Invasive cervical cancer after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Lancet 349(9069): 1910

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. IARC working group on cervical cancer screening, conclusions (1986) In Hakama M, Miller AD, Day N (eds). Screening for cancer of the uterine cervix. Lyon, France 133–44

    Google Scholar 

  22. Fahey MT, Irwig L, Macaskill P (1995) Meta-analysis of pap test accuracy. Am J Epidemiol 141: 680–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Morell ND, Tyler JR, Snyder RN (1982) False negative cytologyrate in patients in whom invasive cervical cancer subsequently developed. Obstet Gynecol 60: 41–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. De May RM (1997) Common problems in Papanicolaou smear interpretation. Arch Pathol Lab Med 121: 229–38

    Google Scholar 

  25. Results of a randomised trial on the management of cytology interpretations of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. ASCUS-L. SIL Triage Study (ALTS) Group (2003) Am J Obstet Gynecol 188(6): 1383–92

    Google Scholar 

  26. Koss LG (1989) The Papanicolaou test for cervical cancer detection. A triumph and tragedy. JAMA 261: 737–43

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Barrasso R (1997) Colposcopy as a screening tool for cervical cancer detection: a review. In: Franco E and Monsonego J Eds. New developments in cervical cancer screening and prevention. Blackwell Science, Oxford 400–5

    Google Scholar 

  28. Stoler MH, Schiffman M (2001) Interobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologic and histologic interpretations: realistic estimates from the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study. JAMA 285: 1500–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Limay A, Connor Amsy J, Huang X et al. (2003) Comparative analysis of conventional Papanicolaou tests ans a fluid-based thin-layer method. Arch Pathol Lab Med 12: 200–4

    Google Scholar 

  30. Yeoh GPS, Chan KW, Lauder I et al. (1999) Evaluation of the ThinPrep Papanicolaou test in clinical practice: 6-month study of 16541 cases with histological correlation in 220 cases. Hong Kong Med J 5: 233–9

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Diaz-Rosario L, Kabawat S (1999) Performance of a fluid-based, thin-layer Papanicolaou smear method in the clinical setting of an independent laboratory and an outpatient screening population in New England. Arch Pathol Lab Med 123: 817–21

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Hutchinson ML, Zahniser DJ, Sherman ME et al. (1999) Utility of liquid-based cytology for cervical carcinoma screening: results of a population-based study conducted in a region of Costa Rica with a high incidence of cervical carcinoma. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 87: 48–55

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Monsonego J, Autillo-Touati A, Bergeron C et al. (2001) Liquid based cytology for primary cervical cancer screening a multicentre study. Br J Cancer 84(3):382–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Bosch FX, Lorincz A, Muñoz N et al. (2002) The causal relation between human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. J Clin Pathol 55: 244–65

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Koutsky L (1997) Epidemiology of genital human papillomavirus infection. Am J Med 102(5A): 3–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Schiffman M, Krüger Kjaer S (2003) Natural history of anogenital human papillomavirus infection and neoplasia. J Natl Cancer Institute Monographs 31:14–9

    Google Scholar 

  37. Franco EL, Villa LL, Sobrinho JP et al. (1999) Epidemiology of acquisition and clearance of cervical human papillomavirus infection in women from a high-risk area for cervical cancer. J Infect Dis 180: 1415–23

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Rozendaal L, Westerga J, van der Linden JC et al. (2000) 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. J Clin Pathol 53(8): 606–11

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Melkert PW, Hopman E, van den Brule AJ et al. (1993) Prevalence of HPV in cytomorphologically normal cervical smears, as determined by the polymerase chain reaction, is age-dependent. Int J Cancer 53(6): 919–23

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Koutsky LA, Holmes KK, Critchlow CW et al. (1992) A cohort study of the risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3 in relation to papillomavirus infection. N Engl J Med 327(18): 1272–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Ho GY, Burk RD, Klein S et al. (1995) Persistent genital human papillomavirus infection as a risk factor for persistent cervical dysplasia. J Natl Cancer Inst 87:1365–71

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Dalstein V, Riethmuller D, Pretet JL et al. (2003) Persistence and load of high-risk HPV are predictors for development of high-grade cervical lesions: a longitudinal French cohort study. Int J Cancer 106(3): 396–403

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Bory JP, Cucherousset J, Lorenzato M et al. (2002) Recurrent human papillomavirus infection detected with the Hybrid Capture II assay selects women with normal cervical smears at risk for developing high grade cervical lesions: a longitudinal study of 3,091 women. Int J Cance 102(5): 519–25

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Schlecht NF, Kulaga S, Robitaille J et al. (2001) Persistent human papillomavirus infection as a predictor of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. JAMA 286: 3106–14

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Wallin KL, Wiklund F, Angstrom T et al. (1999) Type-specific persistence of human papillomavirus DNA before the development of invasive cervical cancer. N Engl J Med 341(22): 1633–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Wang SS, Hildesheim A (2003) Viral and host factors in human papillomavirus persistence and progression. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 31: 35–40

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Monsonego J (1996) Papillomavirus et cancer du col de l’utérus. Médecine/Sciences 12: 733–44

    Google Scholar 

  48. Walboomers JM, Jacobs MV, Manos MM et al. (1999) Human papillomavirus is a necessary cause of invasive cervical cancer worldwide. J Pathol 189(1): 12–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Lörincz A T, Richart RM (2003) Human Papillomavirus DNA testing as an adjunct to cytology in cervical screening programs. Arch. Pathol. Lab Med 127:959–68

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Solomon D, Schiffman M, Tarrone R (2001) Comparison of three management strategies for patients with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. J Natl Cancer Inst 93: 293–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Wright TC Jr, Cox JT, Massad LS et al. (2002) 2001 Consensus Guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA 287:2120–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Cox JT, Schiffman M, Solomon D (2003) Prospective follow-up suggest similar risk of subsequent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3 among women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 or negative colposcopy and directed biopsy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 188(6): 1406–12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Guido R, Schiffman M, Solomon D et al. (2003) Postcolposcopy management strategies for women referred low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or human papillomavirus DANN-positive atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: a two-year prospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 188(6):1401–5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Clavel C, Cucherousset J, Lorenzato M et al. (2004) Negative human papillomavirus testing in normal smears selects a population at low risk for developing high grade cervical lesions. Br J Cancer in press

    Google Scholar 

  55. Clavel C, Masure M, Bory JP et al. (2001) Human papillomavirus testing in primary screening for the detection of high-grade cervical lesions: a study of 7932 women. Br J Cancer 84: 1616–23

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Cuzick J, Szarewski A, Cubie H et al. (2003) Management of women who test positive for high-risk types of human papillomavirus: the HART study. Lancet 362: 1871–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Kulasingam SL, Hughes JP, Kiviat NB et al. (2002) Evaluating of human papillomavirus testing in primary screening for cervical abnormalities. Comparaison of sensitivity, specificity, and frequency of referral. JAMA 288: 1749–57

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Nobbenhuis MA, Walboomers JM, Helmerhorst TJ et al. (1999) Relation of human papillomavirus status to cervical lesions and consequences for cervical-cancer screening: a prospective study. Lancet 354: 20–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Ratnam S, Franco EL, Ferenczy A (2000) Human papillomavirus testing for primary screening of cervical cancer precursors. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 9: 945–51

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Schiffman M, Herrero R, Hildesheim A et al. (2000) HPV DNA testing in cervical cancer screening. Results from women in a high-risk province of Costa Rica. JAMA 283: 87–93

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Petry KU, Menton S, Menton M et al. (2003) Inclusion of HPV testing in routine cervical cancer screening for women above 29 years in Germany: results for 8466 patients. Br J Cancer 88: 1570–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Wright JD, Schiffman M, Solomon D et al. (2004) Interim guidance for the use of human papillomavirus DNA testing as an adjunct to cervical cytology for screening. Obstet Gynecol 103: 304–9

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Évaluation de l’intérêt de la recherche des papillomavirus humains dans le dépistage des lésions précancéreuses du col de l’utérus, Anaes. Évaluation technologique, Paris, mai 2004

    Google Scholar 

  64. Maxwell GL, Carlson JW, Ochoa M et al. (2002) Costs and effectiveness of alternative strategies for cervical cancer screening in military beneficiaries. Obstet Gynecol 100: 740–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Womack SM et al. (2002) Benefits and costs of using HPV testing to screen for cervical cancer. JAMA 287: 2372–81

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Goldie SJ, Kim JJ, Wright TC (2004) Cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervical cancer screening in women aged 30 years or more. Obstet Gynecol 103(4): 619–31

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Marteau TM (1989) Psychological costs of screening. BMJ 299: 527

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Marteau TM (1990) Screening in practice: reducing the psychological cost. BMJ 30: 26–8

    Google Scholar 

  69. Harper D, Philips Z, Jenkins D (2001) HPV testing: Psychosocial and cost-effectiveness studies of screening and HPV disease. Papillomavirus Rep 12: 1–5

    Google Scholar 

  70. Davies P, Kornegay J, Iftner T (2001) Current methods of testing for human papillomavirus. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology 15(5): 677–700

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Saslow D, Runowicz CD, Solomon D et al. (2002) American Cancer Society guideline for the early detection of cervical neoplasia and cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 52: 342–62

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. ACOG practice bulletin: clinical management guidelines for obstetrician-gynecologists (2003) Obstet Gynecol 102: 417–27

    Google Scholar 

  73. Monsonego J et al. (2004) Cervical cancer control, priorities and new directions. Int J cancer 108: 329–33

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Arrêté du 19 mars modifiant l’arrêté du 3 avril 1985 fixant la nomenclature des actes de biologie médicale. Journal Officiel du 30 mars 2004

    Google Scholar 

  75. Koutsky LA, Ault KA, Wheeler CM et al. (2002) Proof of Principle Study Investigators. A controlled trial of a human papillomavirus type 16 vaccine. N Engl J Med 347(21): 1645–51

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Goldie SJ, Kohli M, Grima D et al. (2004) Projected clinical benefits and costeffectiveness of a human papillomavirus 16/18 vaccine. J Natl Cancer Inst 96(8):604–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 174, avenue de Courcelles, 75017, Paris

    J. Monsonego

Authors
  1. J. Monsonego
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer-Verlag France

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Monsonego, J. (2005). Apport du test HPV dans le dépistage primaire du cancer du col. In: Le dépistage du cancer du col de l’utérus. Dépistage et cancer. Springer, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1007/2-287-28699-3_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/2-287-28699-3_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Paris

  • Print ISBN: 978-2-287-22083-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-2-287-28699-5

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation