ArticleOncotarget2017
Evaluation of cytology versus human papillomavirus-based cervical cancer screening algorithms in Bhutan.
Article in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cervical cancer burden in India: A descriptive epidemiological study and policy insights.Global epidemiology · 2025Article
- Population-level cancer screening and cancer care in Bhutan, 2020-2023: a review.The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia · 2024Review
- Human papillomavirus testing on self-collected samples to detect high-grade cervical lesions in rural Bhutan: The REACH-Bhutan study.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Evaluation of human-papillomavirus testing and visual inspection for cervical cancer screening in Rwanda.BMC women's health · 2018Article
- Comparison between self sampling and provider collected samples for Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) testing in a Nigerian facility.The Pan African medical journal · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
To evaluate the performance of existing versus alternative cervical cancer screening protocols in Bhutan, cervical exfoliated cells were collected for cytology and high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing among 1,048 women aged 30-69 years. Conventional smears were prepared and read locally. HR-HPV was tested by GP5+/6+ polymerase chain reaction, followed by genotyping and human DNA methylation analysis among HR-HPV-positives, in Europe. Test positivity was 7.5% for ASCUS or worse (ASCUS+) cytology and 14.0% for HR-HPV. All women with ASCUS+ and/or HR-HPV positivity (n=192) were recalled for colposcopy, among whom a total of 29 cases of histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) were identified. An additional 7 CIN2+ cases were imputed among women without colposcopy. Corrected sensitivities for CIN2+ and CIN3+ were 61% and 74% for ASCUS+, 86% and 96% for HR-HPV, and 47% and 70% for ASCUS+ triage of HR-HPV. Specificity varied from 88% for HR-HPV up to 98% for ASCUS+ triage of HR-HPV, similarly for CIN2+ and CIN3+. Among HR-HPV-positive women with biopsies, methylation analysis offered similar discrimination of CIN2/3 and cervical cancer as ASCUS+, and better than HPV16/18 genotyping alone, but sample sizes were limited. In conclusion, the performance of cytology in Bhutan is in the mid-range of that reported in other screening settings. HR-HPV testing has the potential to improve detection of CIN2+, albeit with a higher referral rate for colposcopy. Cytological triage of HR-HPV-positives (performed in the absence of knowledge of HR-HPV status) reduced referral but missed more than one third of CIN2+.
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.