Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21922253›Full record

ReviewDer Pathologe2011

[Precancerous lesions of the cervix. Biomarkers in cytological diagnosis].

D Schmidt

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Pathologe, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

D SchmidtInstitut für Pathologie, A2,2, 68159, Mannheim, Deutschland. schmidt@gyn-patho.de
University of Mannheim · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the success of the German screening program for cervical cancer a new discussion has started with the aim to improve its quality. The main reason for this new discussion has been the finding of many international studies that the quality of screening programs could be improved by introducing human papillomavirus (HPV) testing. It is well known that the sensitivity of the HPV test is much better than that of a single Papanicolaou (PAP) smear. On the other hand, it is generally accepted that the specificity of the established HPV tests is significantly lower than that of cytology, i.e. the HPV test produces more false positive diagnoses. The introduction of new biomarkers could solve this problem and one of these biomarkers is p16(INK4a) which is a surrogate marker for the oncogenic transformation of cervical cells. Using this biomarker it is now possible to identify cases which should be sent for colposcopy and possibly biopsy directly, among those cases which have been classified cytologically as unclear (ASC-US) or mild and moderately dysplastic cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 1/2). Moreover, it is now feasible to identify the vast majority of underlying high-grade CIN disease in women tested Pap negative/HPV positive, while reducing the number of colposcopies to a level of approximately 25%. In addition, the combination of p16 and L1 probably allows a better estimate of the prognosis of cases with mild or moderate dysplasia.

Indexed as

Human papillomavirus 16Biomarkers, TumorCapsid ProteinsCarcinoma, Squamous CellCyclin-Dependent Kinase Inhibitor p16CytodiagnosisFemaleHumansImmunohistochemistryKi-67 AntigenLeukocyte L1 Antigen ComplexMass ScreeningOncogene Proteins, ViralPapanicolaou TestPapillomavirus InfectionsPrecancerous ConditionsBiomarkers, TumorCapsid ProteinsCyclin-Dependent Kinase Inhibitor p16Ki-67 AntigenL1 protein, Human papillomavirus type 16Leukocyte L1 Antigen ComplexOncogene Proteins, Viral

Identifiers

PMID21922253
OpenAlexW3208522534

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.