Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29971397›Full record

Trial reportJAMA2018

Effect of Screening With Primary Cervical HPV Testing vs Cytology Testing on High-grade Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia at 48 Months: The HPV FOCAL Randomized Clinical Trial.

Gina Suzanne Ogilvie, Dirk van Niekerk, Mel Krajden, Laurie W Smith, Darrel Cook, Lovedeep Gondara, Kathy Ceballos, David Quinlan, Marette Lee, Ruth Elwood Martin and 5 more

Erratum issued 2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 148 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
148citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
22.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT04093388 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Self-Collection of the Pap Smear as Agency: A Novel Way to Improve Refractory Low Cervical Cancer Screening Rates in Rural Alabama

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Alabama at BirminghamRan2021 to 2027Enrolled250ConditionsCervical CancerArmsSelf-PAP, Traditional Pap smear
NCT05236855 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Spectroscopy and Artificial Intelligence to Disrupt the Status Quo in Cervical Cancer

TypeobservationalSponsorIWK Health CentreRan2022 to 2022Enrolled200ConditionsCervical Cancer, HPVArmsSpectoscropy testing of urine specimen
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

148 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 281 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Human papillomavirus-based vs. cytology for cervical cancer screening: a systematic review with meta-analysis.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. SEOM-GEICO Clinical Guidelines on cervical cancer (2023).Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024
    Guideline
  4. Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Randomized Implementation of a Primary Human Papillomavirus Testing-based Cervical Cancer Screening Protocol for Women 34 to 69 Years in Norway.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2022
    Trial
  10. [Effectiveness of Different Testing Strategies Applied for Cervical Cancer Screening in Shuangliu District, Chengdu City].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2022
    Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Assessing 10-Year Safety of a Single Negative HPV Test for Cervical Cancer Screening: Evidence from FOCAL-DECADE Cohort.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2021
    Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Loop electrosurgical excision procedure and perinatal outcomes post-human papillomavirus cervical screening: A longitudinal cohort study.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

88 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Gina Suzanne OgilvieFaculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Dirk van NiekerkLower Mainland Laboratories, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Mel KrajdenFaculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Laurie W SmithCervical Cancer Screening Program, British Columbia Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Darrel CookBritish Columbia Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Lovedeep GondaraCervical Cancer Screening Program, British Columbia Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Kathy CeballosCervical Cancer Screening Program, British Columbia Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
David QuinlanFaculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Marette LeeCervical Cancer Screening Program, British Columbia Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Ruth Elwood MartinFaculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Laura GentileCervical Cancer Screening Program, British Columbia Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Stuart PeacockCancer Control Research, BC Cancer, British Columbia, Canada.
Gavin C E StuartFaculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Eduardo L FrancoDepartments of Oncology and Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Andrew J ColdmanCervical Cancer Screening Program, British Columbia Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
University of British Columbia · CABC Centre for Disease Control · CACanadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control · CAMcGill University · CA

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: There is limited information about the relative effectiveness of cervical cancer screening with primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing alone compared with cytology in North American populations. Objective: To evaluate histologically confirmed cumulative incident cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) detected up to and including 48 months by primary HPV testing alone (intervention) or liquid-based cytology (control). Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial conducted in an organized Cervical Cancer Screening Program in Canada. Participants were recruited through 224 collaborating clinicians from January 2008 to May 2012, with follow-up through December 2016. Women aged 25 to 65 years with no history of CIN2+ in the past 5 years, no history of invasive cervical cancer, or no history of hysterectomy; who have not received a Papanicolaou test within the past 12 months; and who were not receiving immunosuppressive therapy were eligible. Interventions: A total of 19 009 women were randomized to the intervention (n = 9552) and control (n = 9457) groups. Women in the intervention group received HPV testing; those whose results were negative returned at 48 months. Women in the control group received liquid-based cytology (LBC) testing; those whose results were negative returned at 24 months for LBC. Women in the control group who were negative at 24 months returned at 48 months. At 48-month exit, both groups received HPV and LBC co-testing. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of CIN3+ 48 months following randomization. The cumulative incidence of CIN2+ was a secondary outcome. Results: Among 19 009 women who were randomized (mean age, 45 years [10th-90th percentile, 30-59]), 16 374 (8296 [86.9%] in the intervention group and 8078 [85.4%] in the control group) completed the study. At 48 months, significantly fewer CIN3+ and CIN2+ were detected in the intervention vs control group. The CIN3+ incidence rate was 2.3/1000 (95% CI, 1.5-3.5) in the intervention group and 5.5/1000 (95% CI, 4.2-7.2) in the control group. The CIN3+ risk ratio was 0.42 (95% CI, 0.25-0.69). The CIN2+ incidence rate at 48 months was 5.0/1000 (95% CI, 3.8-6.7) in the intervention group and 10.6/1000 (95% CI, 8.7-12.9) in the control group. The CIN2+ risk ratio was 0.47 (95% CI, 0.34-0.67). Baseline HPV-negative women had a significantly lower cumulative incidence of CIN3+ at 48 months than cytology-negative women (CIN3+ incidence rate, 1.4/1000 [95% CI, 0.8-2.4]; CIN3+ risk ratio, 0.25 [95% CI, 0.13-0.48]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among women undergoing cervical cancer screening, the use of primary HPV testing compared with cytology testing resulted in a significantly lower likelihood of CIN3+ at 48 months. Further research is needed to understand long-term clinical outcomes as well as cost-effectiveness. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN79347302.

Indexed as

Papanicolaou TestVaginal SmearsAdultAgedCervix UteriEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansIncidenceMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingPapillomaviridaePapillomavirus InfectionsUterine Cervical DysplasiaUterine Cervical Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID29971397
PMCPMC6583046
OpenAlexW2810057587

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.