Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16271014›Full record

ReviewMolecular diagnosis : a journal devoted to the understanding of human disease through the clinical application of molecular biology2005

Molecular basis for advances in cervical screening.

John Doorbar, Heather Cubie

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular diagnosis : a journal devoted to the understanding of human disease through the clinical application of molecular biology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Stratification of HPV-induced cervical pathology using the virally encoded molecular marker E4 in combination with p16 or MCM.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2015
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Basics of cytology.Avicenna journal of medicine · 2011
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

John DoorbarNational Institute for Medical Research, The Ridgeway, Mill Hill, London, UK. jdoorbar@nimr.mrc.ac.uk
Heather Cubie
Edinburgh Royal Infirmary · GBNational Institute for Medical Research · TZ

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_U117584278
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human papillomaviruses (HPVs) cause cervical lesions, which can, in some instances, progress to high-grade neoplasia and cancer. Around half a million cases of cervical cancer occur each year, with most occurring in developing countries where cervical cancer is a major cause of cancer-related death. The reduction in cervical cancer incidence in developed countries is largely attributed to the introduction of cervical screening. Cervical screening currently depends on the identification by cytology of abnormalities in cells taken from the surface of the cervix. The standard Pap test was developed >50 years ago, and despite modifications, still forms the basis of the test currently in use in most routine screening laboratories. Advances in our understanding of the molecular mechanisms that lead to the development of cervical cancer have been slow to impact on screening, despite the relatively high false-negative rates that can be associated with the conventional Pap smear. Improvements in screening strategies fall into a number of categories. Methods that improve cell presentation and attempt to eliminate artefacts/obscuring debris can be combined with image analysis systems in order to enhance diagnostic accuracy. Such approaches still rely on cytological evaluation and do not incorporate advances in our knowledge of how HPV causes cancer. By contrast, markers of virus infection or cell cycle entry, particularly those that offer some degree of prognostic significance, may be able to highlight abnormal cells more reliably than cytology, and could be combined with cytology to improve the detection rate. Our understanding of the molecular biology of HPV infection and the organization of the HPV life-cycle during cancer progression provides a rational basis for marker selection. The general assumption that persistent active infection by high-risk HPV types is the true precursor of cervical cancer provides the rationale for HPV DNA testing in conjunction with enhanced cytology, while the development of RNA-based approaches should allow active infections to be distinguished from those that are latent. The detection in superficial cells of marker combinations at the level of RNA or protein has the potential to predict disease status more precisely than the detection of markers in isolation. There is also a need for better prognostic markers if the predictive value of screening is to be improved. The potential to control infection by vaccination should reduce the incidence of HPV-associated neoplasia in the population, and this may cause a change in the way that screening is carried out. Nevertheless, the lack of a therapeutic vaccine, and the difficulties associated with eliminating infection by multiple high-risk HPV types, means that some form of screening will still be required as a preventive measure for the control of cervical cancer for the foreseeable future.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesAlphapapillomavirusCervix UteriDNA, ViralFemaleHumansUterine Cervical NeoplasmsDNA, Viral

Identifiers

PMID16271014
OpenAlexW2098334083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.