Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24812482›Full record

ArticleBiomarker insights2014

Prognostic value of DNA and mRNA e6/e7 of human papillomavirus in the evolution of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2.

Michelle G Discacciati, Ismael Dcg da Silva, Luisa L Villa, Leandro Reis, Priscila Hayashi, Maria C Costa, Silvia H Rabelo-Santos, Luiz C Zeferino

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Biomarker insights, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Human papillomavirus: wearisome or awesome issue?Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2014
    Article
  7. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michelle G DiscacciatiLaboratory of Clinical Pathology and Cytology, Department of Clinical Chemistry and Toxicology, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Ismael Dcg da SilvaDepartment of Gynecology, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Luisa L VillaLaboratory of Virology, Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, São Paulo, Brazil.
Leandro ReisDepartment of Molecular Biology, Salomão & Zoppi Laboratory, São Paulo, Brazil.
Priscila HayashiDepartment of Molecular Biology, Salomão & Zoppi Laboratory, São Paulo, Brazil.
Maria C CostaLaboratory of Virology, Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, São Paulo, Brazil.
Silvia H Rabelo-SantosSchool of Pharmacy, Federal University of Goiás, Goiânia, Goiás, Brazil.
Luiz C ZeferinoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medical Sciences, State University of Campinas, (UNICAMP), Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
Universidade Federal de Goiás · BRUniversidade Federal de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aimed at evaluating whether human papillomavirus (HPV) groups and E6/E7 mRNA of HPV 16, 18, 31, 33, and 45 are prognostic of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 outcome in women with a cervical smear showing a low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL).

methodsThis cohort study included women with biopsy-confirmed CIN 2 who were followed up for 12 months, with cervical smear and colposcopy performed every three months.

resultsWomen with a negative or low-risk HPV status showed 100% CIN 2 regression. The CIN 2 regression rates at the 12-month follow-up were 69.4% for women with alpha-9 HPV versus 91.7% for other HPV species or HPV-negative status (P < 0.05). For women with HPV 16, the CIN 2 regression rate at the 12-month follow-up was 61.4% versus 89.5% for other HPV types or HPV-negative status (P < 0.05). The CIN 2 regression rate was 68.3% for women who tested positive for HPV E6/E7 mRNA versus 82.0% for the negative results, but this difference was not statistically significant.

conclusionsThe expectant management for women with biopsy-confirmed CIN 2 and previous cytological tests showing LSIL exhibited a very high rate of spontaneous regression. HPV 16 is associated with a higher CIN 2 progression rate than other HPV infections. HPV E6/E7 mRNA is not a prognostic marker of the CIN 2 clinical outcome, although this analysis cannot be considered conclusive. Given the small sample size, this study could be considered a pilot for future larger studies on the role of predictive markers of CIN 2 evolution.

Indexed as

cervical intraepithelial neoplasiadisease progressionE6 proteinhuman papillomavirus-16neoplasm regressionpapillomavirus E7 proteinsspontaneousviral oncogene proteins

Identifiers

PMID24812482
PMCPMC3999821
OpenAlexW1990378318

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.