Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21491403›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2011

Medical interventions for high grade vulval intraepithelial neoplasia.

Litha Pepas, Sonali Kaushik, Andrew Bryant, Andy Nordin, Heather O Dickinson

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Medical interventions for high-grade vulval intraepithelial neoplasia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. VIN usual type-from the past to the future.Ecancermedicalscience · 2015
    Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Litha PepasObstetrics and Gynaecology, Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother Hospital, St Peter's Road, Margate, Kent, UK, CT9 4AN.
Sonali Kaushik
Andrew Bryant
Andy Nordin
Heather O Dickinson
Newcastle University · GBBarts Health NHS Trust · GBQueen Elizabeth the Queen Mother Hospital · GBRoyal Sussex County Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVulval intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) is a pre-malignant condition of the vulval skin; its incidence is increasing in women under 50 years. VIN is graded histologically as low grade or high grade. High grade VIN is associated with infection with human papilloma virus (HPV) infection and may progress to invasive disease. There is no consensus on the optimal management of high grade VIN. The high morbidity and high relapse rate associated with surgical interventions call for a formal appraisal of the evidence available for less invasive but effective interventions for high grade VIN.

objectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety of medical interventions for high grade VIN. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 3), MEDLINE and EMBASE (up to September 2010). We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed medical interventions, in adult women diagnosed with high grade VIN. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently abstracted data and assessed risk of bias. Where possible the data were synthesised in a meta-analysis. MAIN

resultsFour trials met our inclusion criteria: three assessed the effectiveness of topical imiquimod versus placebo in women with high grade VIN; one examined low versus high dose indole-3-carbinol in similar women. Meta-analysis of three trials found that the proportion of women who responded to treatment at 5 to 6 months was much higher in the group who received topical imiquimod than in the group who received placebo (relative risk (RR) = 11.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.21 to 44.51). A single trial showed similar results at 12 months in (RR = 9.10, 95% CI 2.38 to 34.77). Only one  trial reported adverse events, which were more common in the imiquimod group. One trial found no significant differences in quality of life (QoL) or body image between the imiquimod and placebo groups. AUTHORS'

conclusionsImiquimod appears to be effective, but its safety needs further examination. Its use is associated with side effects which are tolerable, but more extensive data on adverse effects are required. Long term follow-up should be mandatory in view of the known progression of high grade VIN to invasive disease. Alternative medical interventions, such as cidofovir, should be explored.

Indexed as

Administration, TopicalAdultAminoquinolinesAnticarcinogenic AgentsAntineoplastic AgentsCarcinoma in SituFemaleHumansImiquimodIndolesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicVulvar NeoplasmsAminoquinolinesAnticarcinogenic AgentsAntineoplastic AgentsImiquimodindole-3-carbinolIndoles

Identifiers

PMID21491403
PMCPMC4170998
OpenAlexW4239120047

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.