SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2011
Medical interventions for high grade vulval intraepithelial neoplasia.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Medical interventions for high-grade vulval intraepithelial neoplasia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Human Papillomavirus Infection Across the Immunological Spectrum: Clinical Expression, Colposcopic Challenges, and Therapeutic Implications.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Clinician's Update on the Benign, Premalignant, and Malignant Skin Tumours of the Vulva: The Dermatologist's View.International scholarly research notices · 2017Review
- Diagnosis, Therapy and Follow-up Care of Vulvar Cancer and its Precursors. Guideline of the DGGG and DKG (S2k-Level, AWMF Registry Number 015/059, November 2015.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2016Article
- VIN usual type-from the past to the future.Ecancermedicalscience · 2015Review
- Vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN 2/3): comparing clinical outcomes and evaluating risk factors for recurrence.Gynecologic oncology · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.