ArticleInternational journal of cancer2018
What cervical screening is appropriate for women who have been vaccinated against high risk HPV? A simulation study.
Article in International journal of cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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
35 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 76 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of healthcare disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic on colposcopy services and practice: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Pooled it
- Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for the prevention of cervical cancer and other HPV-related diseases: a network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Human Papillomavirus Across the Reproductive Lifespan: An Integrative Review of Fertility, Pregnancy Outcomes, and Fertility-Sparing Management.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of interventions to increase cervical cancer screening among underserved women in Europe.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024Pooled it
- Canadian Guideline on the Management of a Positive Human Papillomavirus Test and Guidance for Specific Populations.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Guideline
- How to evaluate and select cervical screening and triage tests in vaccinated populations.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2026Article
- Optimal cervical cancer screening strategies for unvaccinated and HPV-vaccinated cohorts in the United States: a comprehensive comparative modeling analysis.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Article
- A guide to cancer screening.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026Review
- A Scoping Review on Calibration Methods for Cancer Simulation Models.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025Article
- Optimizing the Harms and Benefits of Cervical Screening in a Partially Vaccinated Population in Ontario, Canada: A Modeling Study.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025Article
- Patterns of single and multiple HPV infections in female: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Epidemiology of HPV-associated cancers past, present and future: towards prevention and elimination.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2024Review
- Predictable changes in the accuracy of human papillomavirus tests after vaccination: review with implications for performance monitoring in cervical screening.British journal of cancer · 2024Review
- Article
- Managing an extension of screening intervals: Avoiding boom and bust in health care workloads.International journal of cancer · 2023Article
- Knowledge, attitude and practice towards cervical cancer screening among women living with human immunodeficiency virus: Implication for prevention strategy uptake.Nursing open · 2023Article
- Article
- COVID-19 disruption to cervical cancer screening in England.Journal of medical screening · 2022Article
- Extension of cervical screening intervals with primary human papillomavirus testing: observational study of English screening pilot data.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2022Observational
- Are We Facing a New Colposcopic Practice in the HPV Vaccination Era? Opportunities, Challenges, and New Perspectives.Vaccines · 2021Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Women vaccinated against HPV16/18 are approaching the age for cervical screening; however, an updated screening algorithm has not been agreed. We use a microsimulation model calibrated to real published data to determine the appropriate screening intensity for vaccinated women. Natural histories in the absence of vaccination were simulated for 300,000 women using 10,000 sets of transition probabilities. Vaccination with (i) 100% efficacy against HPV16/18, (ii) 15% cross-protection, (iii) 22% cross-protection, (iv) waning vaccine efficacy and (v) 100% efficacy against HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58 was added, as were a range of screening scenarios appropriate to the UK. To benchmark cost-benefits of screening for vaccinated women, we evaluated the proportion of cancers prevented per additional screen (incremental benefit) of current cytology and likely HPV screening scenarios in unvaccinated women. Slightly more cancers are prevented through vaccination with no screening (70.3%, 95% CR: 65.1-75.5) than realistic compliance to the current UK screening programme in the absence of vaccination (64.3%, 95% CR: 61.3-66.8). In unvaccinated women, when switching to HPV primary testing, there is no loss in effectiveness when doubling the screening interval. Benchmarking supports screening scenarios with incremental benefits of ≥2.0%, and rejects scenarios with incremental benefits ≤0.9%. In HPV16/18-vaccinated women, the incremental benefit of offering a third lifetime screen was at most 3.3% (95% CR: 2.2-4.5), with an incremental benefit of 1.3% (-0.3-2.8) for a fourth screen. For HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58-vaccinated women, two lifetime screens are supported. It is important to know women's vaccination status; in these simulations, HPV16/18-vaccinated women require three lifetime screens, HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58-vaccinated women require two lifetime screens, yet unvaccinated women require seven lifetime screens.
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.