The objects of the study were to evaluate MIB-1-positive cell clusters (MIB-C) for distinguishing normal, reactive, and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) biopsies and to determine possible pitfalls. Seventy-seven consecutive cervical specimens routinely diagnosed (Dx_orig) as CIN 1 or 2, or no-CIN, were revised independently by two expert gynecopathologists. MIB-1 staining and oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) assessment (by polymerase chain reaction) were performed. Independent diagnoses (plus oncogenic HPV status, in case of disagreement between the experts) were used to obtain a final diagnosis (Dx_final) and compared with MIB-C. Four of the 27 (15%) Dx_final = normal were HPV positive. Agreement between the gynecopathologists was 72 of 77 (94%). There were 30 (39%) discrepancies between Dx_orig and Dx_final (23 = 30% downgrades and 7 = 9% upgrades). All 23 downgrades were HPV negative and all seven upgrades were HPV positive. Overall agreement between Dx_orig and MIB-C was 73%, and with Dx_final 99%. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of MIB-C were very high without false negatives. Tangential cutting of MIB-1-positive parabasal cells and inflammatory cells can erroneously be overdiagnosed as a MIB-C. One single false positive of the 48 non-CIN cases (an immature squamous metaplasia) showed a special, easily recognizable MIB-1 pattern, different from CIN because the MIB-1 staining in the nuclei is not diffuse (as in CIN) but clumped. Moreover, positive nuclei are somewhat less densely packed than in CIN. When tangentially cut parabasal cells and inflammatory cells are carefully excluded, MIB-C is a strong diagnostic adjunct in distinguishing CIN from normal or benign cervical squamoepithelial lesions.