Login to MyKarger

New to MyKarger? Click here to sign up.



Login with Facebook

Forgot your password?

Authors, Editors, Reviewers

For Manuscript Submission, Check or Review Login please go to Submission Websites List.

Submission Websites List

Institutional Login
(Shibboleth or OpenAthens)

For the academic login, please select your country in the dropdown list. You will be redirected to verify your credentials.

Commentary

Free Access

Dr. Bibbo's Presidential Address on Automation in Cytology: Were Her Predictions Right, Wrong, or Somewhere in the Middle?

Wilbur D.C.

Author affiliations

Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

Corresponding Author

Correspondence to: Dr. David C. Wilbur

Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School

55 Fruit Street, Warren 120

Boston, MA 02114 (USA)

E-Mail dwilbur@partners.org

Related Articles for ""

Acta Cytologica 2017;61:345-358

Do you have an account?

Login Information





Contact Information











I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.



Abstract

In 1983, Dr. Marluce Bibbo gave the Presidential Address at the Annual Meeting of the American Society of Cytology in Denver, CO, USA. The lecture was entitled “Analytic and Quantitative Cytology,” a field in which Dr. Bibbo was intimately involved. In the presentation, she included a summary of 30 years of work already accomplished, the present state of the art, and musings about issues encountered, potential resolutions, progress that needed to be made, and her perception of how the field needed to evolve in order to become ultimately successful as a clinical service. This commentary looks back 34 years, with observations about Dr. Bibbo's predictions and how the field of cytology automation did actually evolve in the decades following her address. New challenges are identified and possible paths forward are discussed.

© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel


References

  1. Bibbo M: Presidential Address. Acta Cytol 1984;28:519-526.
    External Resources
  2. Bibbo M, Wilbur DC (eds): Comprehensive Cytopathology, ed 4. London, Elsevier Press, 2015.
  3. Schneider V, Schmitt FC: Marluce Bibbo retires as Editor-In-Chief of Acta Cytologica. Acta Cytol 2013;57:314-315.
  4. Wheeless LL Jr, Reeder JE, O'Connell MJ: Slit-scan flow analysis of cytologic specimens from the female genital tract. Methods Cell Biol 1990;33:501-507.
    External Resources
  5. Bartels PH, Wied GL: Performance testing for automated prescreening devices in cervical cytology. J Histochem Cytochem 1974;22:660-662.
  6. Shack R, Baker R, Buchroeder R, Hillman D, Shoemaker R, Bartels PH: Ultrafast laser scanner microscope. J Histochem Cytochem 1979;27:153-159.
  7. Wied GL, Bartels PH, Bibbo M, Sychra JJ: Cytomorphometric markers for uterine cancer in intermediate cells. Anal Quant Cytol 1980;2:257-263.
    External Resources
  8. O'Leary TJ, Tellado M, Buckner SB, Ali IS, Stevens A, Ollayos CW: PAPNET-assisted rescreening of cervical smears: cost and accuracy compared with a 100% manual rescreening strategy. JAMA 1998;279:235-237.
  9. Patten SF Jr, Lee JS, Wilbur DC, Bonfiglio TA, Colgan TJ, Richart RM, Cramer H, Moinuddin S: The AutoPap 300 QC System multicenter clinical trials for use in quality control rescreening of cervical smears. I. A prospective intended-use study. Cancer 1997;81:337-342.
  10. Fetterman B, Pawlick G, Koo H, Hartinger J, Gilbert C, Connell S: Determining the utility and effectiveness of the NeoPath AutoPap 300 QC System used routinely. Acta Cytol 1999;43:13-22.
  11. Bibbo M, Hawthorne C, Zimmerman B: Does use of the AutoPap assisted primary screener improve cytologic diagnosis? Acta Cytol 1999;43:23-26.
  12. Wilbur DC, Prey MU, Miller WM, Pawlick GF, Colgan TJ: The AutoPap system for primary screening in cervical cytology: comparing the results of a prospective, intended-use study with routine manual practice. Acta Cytol 1998;42:214-220.
  13. Wilbur DC, Black-Schaffer WS, Luff RD, Abraham KP, Kemper C, Molina JT, Tench WD: The Becton Dickinson FocalPoint GS imaging system clinical trials demonstrate significantly improved sensitivity for the detection of important cervical lesions. Am J Clin Pathol 2009;132:767-775.
  14. Wilbur DC: Automated cervical cancer screening: apprehension or logic; which will it be? Diagn Cytopathol 1999;21:235-237.
  15. Lee KR, Ashfaq R, Birdsong GG, Corkill ME, McIntosh KM, Inhorn SL: Comparison of conventional Papanicolaou smears and a fluid-based, thin-layer system for cervical cancer screening. Obstet Gynecol 1997;90:278-284.
  16. Biscotti CV, Dawson AE, Dziura B, Galup L, Darragh T, Rahemtulla A, Wills-Frank L: Assisted primary screening using the automated ThinPrep imaging system. Am J Clin Pathol 2005;123:281-287.
  17. Burger G, Jutting U, Rodenacker K: Changes in benign cell populations in cases of cervical cancer and its precursors. Anal Quant Cytol 1981;3:261-271.
    External Resources
  18. Brotherton JM, Fridman M, May CL, Chappell G, Saville AM, Gertig DM: Early effect of the HPV vaccination programme on cervical abnormalities in Victoria, Australia: an ecological study. Lancet 2011;377:2085-2092.
  19. Evans KK, Tambouret RH, Evered A, Wilbur DC, Wolfe JM: Prevalence of abnormalities influences cytologists' error rates in screening for cervical cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2011;135:1557-1560.
  20. Huh WK, Ault KA, Chelmow D, Davey DD, Goulart RA, Garcia FA, Kinney WK, Massad LS, Mayeaux EJ, Saslow D, Schiffman M, Wentzensen N, Lawson HW, Einstein MH: Use of primary high-risk human papillomavirus testing for cervical cancer screening: interim clinical guidance. Gynecol Oncol 2015;136:178-182.
  21. Bergeron C, Ikenberg H, Sideri M, Denton K, Bogers J, Schmidt D, Alameda F, Keller T, Rehm S, Ridder R: Prospective evaluation of p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology for managing women with abnormal Papanicolaou cytology: PALMS study results. Cancer Cytopathol 2015;123:373-381.
  22. Beck AH, Sangoi AR, Leung S, Marinelli RJ, Nielsen TO, van de Vijver MJ, West RB, van de Rijn M, Koller D: Systematic analysis of breast cancer morphology uncovers stromal features associated with survival. Sci Transl Med 2011;3:108ra113.
  23. Louis DN, Gerber GK, Baron JM, Bry L, Dighe AS, Getz G, Higgins JM, Kuo FC, Lane WJ, Michaelson JS, Le LP, Mermel CH, Gilbertson JR, Golden JA: Computational pathology: an emerging definition. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2014;138:1133-1138.
  24. Sweeney BJ, Eno C: Lead the way, follow the yellow brick road. J Am Soc Cytopathol 2015;4:I-III.
  25. Robboy SJ, Gupta S, Crawford JM, Cohen MB, Karcher DS, Leonard DG, Magnani B, Novis DA, Prystowsky MB, Powell SZ, Gross DJ, Black-Schaffer WS: The pathologist workforce in the United States. II. An interactive modeling tool for analyzing future qualitative and quantitative staffing demands for services. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2015;139:1413-1430.
  26. Robboy SJ, Weintraub S, Horvath AE, Jensen BW, Alexander CB, Fody EP, Crawford JM, Clark JR, Cantor-Weinberg J, Joshi MG, Cohen MB, Prystowsky MB, Bean SM, Gupta S, Powell SZ, Speights VO Jr, Gross DJ, Black-Schaffer WS: Pathologist workforce in the United States: I. Development of a predictive model to examine factors influencing supply. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2013;137:1723-1732.

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Commentary

Received: May 03, 2017
Accepted: May 04, 2017
Published online: July 11, 2017
Issue release date: July – October

Number of Print Pages: 14
Number of Figures: 0
Number of Tables: 0

ISSN: 0001-5547 (Print)
eISSN: 1938-2650 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/ACY

References

  1. Bibbo M: Presidential Address. Acta Cytol 1984;28:519-526.
    External Resources
  2. Bibbo M, Wilbur DC (eds): Comprehensive Cytopathology, ed 4. London, Elsevier Press, 2015.
  3. Schneider V, Schmitt FC: Marluce Bibbo retires as Editor-In-Chief of Acta Cytologica. Acta Cytol 2013;57:314-315.
  4. Wheeless LL Jr, Reeder JE, O'Connell MJ: Slit-scan flow analysis of cytologic specimens from the female genital tract. Methods Cell Biol 1990;33:501-507.
    External Resources
  5. Bartels PH, Wied GL: Performance testing for automated prescreening devices in cervical cytology. J Histochem Cytochem 1974;22:660-662.
  6. Shack R, Baker R, Buchroeder R, Hillman D, Shoemaker R, Bartels PH: Ultrafast laser scanner microscope. J Histochem Cytochem 1979;27:153-159.
  7. Wied GL, Bartels PH, Bibbo M, Sychra JJ: Cytomorphometric markers for uterine cancer in intermediate cells. Anal Quant Cytol 1980;2:257-263.
    External Resources
  8. O'Leary TJ, Tellado M, Buckner SB, Ali IS, Stevens A, Ollayos CW: PAPNET-assisted rescreening of cervical smears: cost and accuracy compared with a 100% manual rescreening strategy. JAMA 1998;279:235-237.
  9. Patten SF Jr, Lee JS, Wilbur DC, Bonfiglio TA, Colgan TJ, Richart RM, Cramer H, Moinuddin S: The AutoPap 300 QC System multicenter clinical trials for use in quality control rescreening of cervical smears. I. A prospective intended-use study. Cancer 1997;81:337-342.
  10. Fetterman B, Pawlick G, Koo H, Hartinger J, Gilbert C, Connell S: Determining the utility and effectiveness of the NeoPath AutoPap 300 QC System used routinely. Acta Cytol 1999;43:13-22.
  11. Bibbo M, Hawthorne C, Zimmerman B: Does use of the AutoPap assisted primary screener improve cytologic diagnosis? Acta Cytol 1999;43:23-26.
  12. Wilbur DC, Prey MU, Miller WM, Pawlick GF, Colgan TJ: The AutoPap system for primary screening in cervical cytology: comparing the results of a prospective, intended-use study with routine manual practice. Acta Cytol 1998;42:214-220.
  13. Wilbur DC, Black-Schaffer WS, Luff RD, Abraham KP, Kemper C, Molina JT, Tench WD: The Becton Dickinson FocalPoint GS imaging system clinical trials demonstrate significantly improved sensitivity for the detection of important cervical lesions. Am J Clin Pathol 2009;132:767-775.
  14. Wilbur DC: Automated cervical cancer screening: apprehension or logic; which will it be? Diagn Cytopathol 1999;21:235-237.
  15. Lee KR, Ashfaq R, Birdsong GG, Corkill ME, McIntosh KM, Inhorn SL: Comparison of conventional Papanicolaou smears and a fluid-based, thin-layer system for cervical cancer screening. Obstet Gynecol 1997;90:278-284.
  16. Biscotti CV, Dawson AE, Dziura B, Galup L, Darragh T, Rahemtulla A, Wills-Frank L: Assisted primary screening using the automated ThinPrep imaging system. Am J Clin Pathol 2005;123:281-287.
  17. Burger G, Jutting U, Rodenacker K: Changes in benign cell populations in cases of cervical cancer and its precursors. Anal Quant Cytol 1981;3:261-271.
    External Resources
  18. Brotherton JM, Fridman M, May CL, Chappell G, Saville AM, Gertig DM: Early effect of the HPV vaccination programme on cervical abnormalities in Victoria, Australia: an ecological study. Lancet 2011;377:2085-2092.
  19. Evans KK, Tambouret RH, Evered A, Wilbur DC, Wolfe JM: Prevalence of abnormalities influences cytologists' error rates in screening for cervical cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2011;135:1557-1560.
  20. Huh WK, Ault KA, Chelmow D, Davey DD, Goulart RA, Garcia FA, Kinney WK, Massad LS, Mayeaux EJ, Saslow D, Schiffman M, Wentzensen N, Lawson HW, Einstein MH: Use of primary high-risk human papillomavirus testing for cervical cancer screening: interim clinical guidance. Gynecol Oncol 2015;136:178-182.
  21. Bergeron C, Ikenberg H, Sideri M, Denton K, Bogers J, Schmidt D, Alameda F, Keller T, Rehm S, Ridder R: Prospective evaluation of p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology for managing women with abnormal Papanicolaou cytology: PALMS study results. Cancer Cytopathol 2015;123:373-381.
  22. Beck AH, Sangoi AR, Leung S, Marinelli RJ, Nielsen TO, van de Vijver MJ, West RB, van de Rijn M, Koller D: Systematic analysis of breast cancer morphology uncovers stromal features associated with survival. Sci Transl Med 2011;3:108ra113.
  23. Louis DN, Gerber GK, Baron JM, Bry L, Dighe AS, Getz G, Higgins JM, Kuo FC, Lane WJ, Michaelson JS, Le LP, Mermel CH, Gilbertson JR, Golden JA: Computational pathology: an emerging definition. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2014;138:1133-1138.
  24. Sweeney BJ, Eno C: Lead the way, follow the yellow brick road. J Am Soc Cytopathol 2015;4:I-III.
  25. Robboy SJ, Gupta S, Crawford JM, Cohen MB, Karcher DS, Leonard DG, Magnani B, Novis DA, Prystowsky MB, Powell SZ, Gross DJ, Black-Schaffer WS: The pathologist workforce in the United States. II. An interactive modeling tool for analyzing future qualitative and quantitative staffing demands for services. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2015;139:1413-1430.
  26. Robboy SJ, Weintraub S, Horvath AE, Jensen BW, Alexander CB, Fody EP, Crawford JM, Clark JR, Cantor-Weinberg J, Joshi MG, Cohen MB, Prystowsky MB, Bean SM, Gupta S, Powell SZ, Speights VO Jr, Gross DJ, Black-Schaffer WS: Pathologist workforce in the United States: I. Development of a predictive model to examine factors influencing supply. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2013;137:1723-1732.

Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.