Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20830707›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of cancer2011

Accuracy of optical spectroscopy for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: Testing a device as an adjunct to colposcopy.

Scott B Cantor, Jose-Miguel Yamal, Martial Guillaud, Dennis D Cox, E Neely Atkinson, John L Benedet, Dianne Miller, Thomas Ehlen, Jasenka Matisic, Dirk van Niekerk and 16 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of cancer, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Optical techniques for cervical neoplasia detection.Beilstein journal of nanotechnology · 2017
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

26 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Scott B CantorDepartment of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. sbcantor@mdanderson.org
Jose-Miguel Yamal
Martial Guillaud
Dennis D Cox
E Neely Atkinson
John L Benedet
Dianne Miller
Thomas Ehlen
Jasenka Matisic
Dirk van Niekerk
Monique Bertrand
Andrea Milbourne
Helen Rhodes
Anais Malpica
Gregg Staerkel
Shahla Nader-Eftekhari
Karen Adler-Storthz
Michael E Scheurer
Karen Basen-Engquist
Eileen Shinn
Loyd A West
Anne-Therese Vlastos
Xia Tao
J Robert Beck
Calum Macaulay
Michele Follen
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USUniversity of British Columbia · CAThe University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston · USBaylor College of Medicine · USFox Chase Cancer Center · USIn-Q-Tel · USRice University · US

Funding

Technical FeasibilityP01CA082710 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI GUILLAUD, MARTIAL · 1999 to 2014
$28.7M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA082710NCI NIH HHS P01-CA-82710-09
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Testing emerging technologies involves the evaluation of biologic plausibility, technical efficacy, clinical effectiveness, patient satisfaction, and cost-effectiveness. The objective of this study was to select an effective classification algorithm for optical spectroscopy as an adjunct to colposcopy and obtain preliminary estimates of its accuracy for the detection of CIN 2 or worse. We recruited 1,000 patients from screening and prevention clinics and 850 patients from colposcopy clinics at two comprehensive cancer centers and a community hospital. Optical spectroscopy was performed, and 4,864 biopsies were obtained from the sites measured, including abnormal and normal colposcopic areas. The gold standard was the histologic report of biopsies, read 2 to 3 times by histopathologists blinded to the cytologic, histopathologic, and spectroscopic results. We calculated sensitivities, specificities, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and areas under the ROC curves. We identified a cutpoint for an algorithm based on optical spectroscopy that yielded an estimated sensitivity of 1.00 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.92-1.00] and an estimated specificity of 0.71 [95% CI = 0.62-0.79] in a combined screening and diagnostic population. The positive and negative predictive values were 0.58 and 1.00, respectively. The area under the ROC curve was 0.85 (95% CI = 0.81-0.89). The per-patient and per-site performance were similar in the diagnostic and poorer in the screening settings. Like colposcopy, the device performs best in a diagnostic population. Alternative statistical approaches demonstrate that the analysis is robust and that spectroscopy works as well as or slightly better than colposcopy for the detection of CIN 2 to cancer.

Indexed as

ColposcopyAlgorithmsAlphapapillomavirusFemaleHumansROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificitySpectrum AnalysisUterine Cervical Dysplasia

Identifiers

PMID20830707
PMCPMC3015005
OpenAlexW1987562072

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.