Acta Cytologica
Acta Cytologica 40 Years Ago
Volume I, Number 1, 1957
international discussions of scientific problems
that were (and still are) of interest to the gynecologic cytologist. The following experts from
the first issue of Acta Cytologica deal with
“dyskaryosis.”
l
ht
ig
©
C
op
yr
T
D
O
N
O
ed
D
U
te
ria
P
L
M
a
I
C
A
TE
In 1957 scientific articles published in Acta Cytologica
were by invitation only. Acta Cytologica was not a
journal for publication of papers proffered by
authors on their own topics 40 years ago.
Instead, symposia in the journal contained
Symposion on Dyskaryosis
The Definition of a Dyskaryotic Cell
GEORGE N. PAPANICOLAOU, New York, New
York, U.S.A.: The term “dyskaryosis” has been
introduced to designate certain cytologic patterns
observed in vaginal and cervical smears from cases
of early carcinoma and some other pathologic lesions of the uterine cervix, in which the exfoliated
cells are characterized by marked nuclear abnormalities consistent with the generally accepted cy-
0001-5547/97/4102-0621/$02.00/0 © The International Academy of Cytology
Acta Cytologica
621
Acta 40 Years Ago
Acta Cytologica
tologic criteria of malignancy, although the cells as
a whole may show no significant deviation from
their standard normal type. . . . Such abnormal
smear patterns are usually seen in cases diagnosed
pathologically most frequently as intra-epithelial carcinoma of the cervix, but may also be observed in cases of cervical lesions diagnosed as nonmalignant, or only potentially malignant, such as
dysplasia. . . . Since we still lack objective morphologic criteria by which the malignant nature of disputable, chiefly early lesions of the uterine cervix,
can be definitely established in any given case, it appears that the use of the term “dyskaryosis” for describing the above specified abnormal cytologic
patterns is most desirable.
O
TE
A
GUILLERMO TERZANO, Buenos Aires, Argentina: It is hard to define a dyskaryotic cell because this term was used by Papanicolaou to designate an “undefinable” type of cell. . . . We contend
that a cell should be classified as dyskaryotic when
it is not a malignant cell . . . but shows a large, irregular and hyperchromatic nucleus suggestive of
malignancy, while the cell looks normal in size and
shape.
JAMES W. REAGAN, Cleveland, Ohio, U.S.A.:
The contributions pertaining to “dyskaryosis”
D
ed
ht
ig
yr
op
C
©
N
O
T
D
LEOPOLD G. KOSS, New York, New York,
U.S.A.: I do not know what is meant by “typical malignant nucleus.” Observation of neoplastic lesions
of the uterine cervix will readily disclose an entire
spectrum of nuclear changes which are not always
present simultaneously in the same cell. However,
as a rule, dyskaryotic cells show larger or multiple
and more hyperchromatic nuclei than normal cells
of comparable origin. . . .
The problem of “nucleocytoplasmic ratio,” a
more correct term, is a delicate one since this ratio
varies substantially in perfectly normal cells according to their degree of differentiation. . . . Although the majority of dyskaryotic cells fall well
within the normal nucleocytoplasmic ratio, in some
of the smaller cells, the ratio will be reversed in
favor of the nucleus. . . .
l
ria
P
L
M
a
I
C
JOSE R. DEL SOL, Madrid, Spain: In discussions
with many outstanding cytologists from North and
South America and from Europe, I gained the impression that the term “dyskaryosis” is applied in
various laboratories to different cytologic features.
In my opinion, a dyskaryotic cell is an epithelial cell
with normally differentiated cytoplasm containing
an abnormal nucleus.
U
RUTH M. GRAHAM, Buffalo, New York, U.S.A.:
The term “dyskaryotic” implies an abnormal nucleus. . . . A dyskaryotic cell is a squamous cell containing a typical malignant nucleus. It differs from
a true cancer cell in having adequate cytoplasm and
a cytoplasm-nuclear ratio within normal limits.
clearly illustrate the need for standardized terminology in the field of applied cytology and the need
for a sound scientific approach if we are to materially advance our knowledge of cells. . . . The basic
scientist who deals with cells might even question
the use of the term “dyskaryosis” because it implies
that the alteration is confined solely to the nucleus.
. . . Applied cytology is a mature science which
should be associated with an acceptable scientific
terminology rather than with a nomenclature
which implies a total ignorance of the basic science
of cytology.
te
622
RUTH M. GRAHAM: It is obvious from these
discussions of the definition of a dyskaryotic cell
that there is little agreement on the characteristics of
such a cell. . . . I sincerely hope that through the
medium of the ACTA CYTOLOGICA, we shall be
able to place cytologic terminology on a strict scientific basis and thereby have a common language.
Edited by Steven I. Hajdu, M.D., F.I.A.C.