Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 461

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

p16INK4a Immunohistochemistry Improves Interobserver Agreement in the Diagnosis of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia

Klaes, Rüdiger, Benner, Axel, Friedrich, Tibor, Ridder, Rüdiger, Herrington, Simon, Jenkins, David, Kurman, Robert J., Schmidt, Dietmar, Stoler, Mark, von Knebel Doeberitz, Magnus·2002·The American Journal of Surgical Pathology

Abstract

It has been repeatedly shown that there is a substantial lack of interobserver reproducibility in the histologic diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), which might be improved by a more specific diagnostic biomarker. Cervical cancer and CIN, but not other cervical epithelia, express high levels of the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor p16, suggesting that staining for this marker could help to more precisely identify CIN in tissue sections and therefore reduce variation in interpretation of cervical lesions. To test this hypothesis, 194 cervical cone biopsy samples were selected from a routine histopathology laboratory. Two consecutive sections from each biopsy were stained with hematoxylin and eosin and with a p16 -specific monoclonal antibody, respectively. Five experienced cervical pathologists examined the slides. The agreement in the diagnosis between pairs or groups of observers was calculated by kappa statistics. Significant discrepancies were observed in the diagnostic interpretation of hematoxylin and eosin-stained slides, particularly for low-grade lesions (kappa value 0.60 [95% confidence interval 0.58-0.63]). There was significantly better agreement in the interpretation of p16 expression (kappa value 0.91 [95% confidence interval 0.84-0.99]). Expression of p16 was restricted to CIN 2/CIN 3, CIN 1 associated with high-risk human papillomavirus, or cervical cancer. p16 immunostaining allowed precise identification of even small CIN or cervical cancer lesions in biopsy sections and helped to reduce interobserver variation in the histopathologic interpretation of cervical biopsy specimens. Thus, p16 immunohistochemistry can reduce false-negative and false-positive biopsy interpretation and thereby significantly improve cervical (pre)-cancer diagnosis.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00000478-200211000-00001

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 32 references

Cited by

See all 461

Metadata

Authors
Klaes, R., Benner, A., Friedrich, T., Ridder, R., Herrington, S., Jenkins, D., Kurman, R. J., Schmidt, D., Stoler, M., & von Knebel Doeberitz, M.
Venue
The American Journal of Surgical Pathology
Published
2002-11
Volume
26
Issue
11
Pages
1389-1399
ISSN
0147-5185 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2000799360
Cited by
461
References
32
FWCI
14.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: p16INK4a Immunohistochemistry Improves Interobserver Agreement in the Diagnosis of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00000478-200211000-00001
The paper
Klaes, R., Benner, A., Friedrich, T., Ridder, R., Herrington, S., Jenkins, D., Kurman, R. J., Schmidt, D., Stoler, M., & von Knebel Doeberitz, M. (2002). p16INK4a Immunohistochemistry Improves Interobserver Agreement in the Diagnosis of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia. The American Journal of Surgical Pathology. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000478-200211000-00001

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.