ArticleBMC infectious diseases2015
CIN III lesions and regression: retrospective analysis of 635 cases.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating Biomarkers into Cervical Cancer Screening-Advances in Diagnosis and Risk Prediction: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Spontaneous regression rate of high-grade cervical lesions in women under 35 at Dijon University Hospital: Incidence and predictive factors.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2025Review
- Comparison of Topical 5-Aminolevulinic Acid Photodynamic Therapy With the Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure for Patients With Cervical High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Neoplasia: A Prospective and Propensity-Matched Analysis.Lasers in surgery and medicine · 2025Article
- Molecular Testing as Triage in Cervical Cancer Screening: Economic Evaluation Using Headroom Analysis.Cancers · 2025Article
- The effect of hrHPV prevalence on cervical cancer screening strategies: a cost-effectiveness study of Bangladesh.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Understanding the Dynamics of Human Papillomavirus and Diagnostic Discrepancies in Cervical Pathology: A Single Center Experience.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Spontaneous regression of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3 in women with a biopsy-cone interval of greater than 11 weeks.BMC cancer · 2022Article
- Improving colposcopic accuracy for cervical precancer detection: a retrospective multicenter study in China.BMC cancer · 2022Observational
- Progression of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 lesions among Japanese women harboring different genotype categories of high-risk human papillomaviruses.Journal of rural medicine : JRM · 2021Article
- Local and Systemic STAT3 and p65 NF-KappaB Expression as Progression Markers and Functional Targets for Patients With Cervical Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Article
- Correlation between referral cytology and in-house colposcopy-guided cytology for detecting early cervical neoplasia.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2020Article
- Punch biopsies shorten time to clearance of high-risk human papillomavirus infections of the uterine cervix.BMC cancer · 2018Article
- Mesenchymal Stem Cells from Cervix and Age: New Insights into CIN Regression Rate.Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity · 2018Article
- Significance of "Not Detected but Amplified" Results by Real-Time PCR Method for HPV DNA Detection.BioMed research international · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rate of spontaneous regression in CIN III lesions is controversial. Whereas some studies have reported high regression rates of up to 38% after prolonged biopsy-conus intervals, others have shown rates between 0 and 4% without considering time intervals. Identification of young patients with potentially regressing CIN III could offer the chance to avoid conisation, thus lowering the risk of preterm labour.
methodsTo further clarify the facts, we retrospectively compared 635 biopsies showing CIN III with the diagnosis of the conisation. Either regression (CIN I or less) or non-regression (CIN II and higher) was recorded. Diagnoses were made by light microscopy and p16 immunostaining.
resultsConisation was performed between 2 and 463 days after biopsy (median 8.9 weeks). Six hundred twenty one (98%) were HPV-HR positive. In 345 cases, HPV subtyping was available, showing HPV16 infection in 57%. Routine processing of the conisation tissue showed no corresponding CIN lesion (< CIN II) in 40 cases (6.3%). Additional step sectioning of the tissue revealed small CIN II+ lesions in 80%. Finally, eight cases (1.3%) fulfilled the criteria of regression. No regression was seen in HPV16 positive cases. Twelve invasive carcinomas were detected by routine processing of the conisation tissue.
conclusionThese results are in contrast with some prior reports that might have overestimated spontaneous regression of CIN III. Study size and an accurate discrimination between CIN II and CIN III lesions by histopathology seem to be the most likely factors to explain the diverging results published. Complete step sectioning of the whole tissue is also mandatory in questionable cases. Although theories exist that the initial biopsy might stimulate the immune system, thus triggering regression within weeks, our data do not substantially support such a mechanism. Overall, the chance of a CIN III lesion to regress rapidly within weeks or months after diagnosis seems to be small. We found more previously undetected invasive cancer than we observed regression. Therefore, a change in the current policy to treat CIN III lesions is unwarranted.
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.