Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30259973›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of cancer2019

DNA methylation markers as a triage test for identification of cervical lesions in a high risk human papillomavirus positive screening cohort.

Robert W van Leeuwen, Anja Oštrbenk, Mario Poljak, Ate G J van der Zee, Ed Schuuring, G Bea A Wisman

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Methylation ofWorld journal of oncology · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Triage performance of PAX1Clinical epigenetics · 2024
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Robert W van LeeuwenDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, Cancer Research Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Anja OštrbenkInstitute of Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Mario PoljakInstitute of Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Ate G J van der ZeeDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, Cancer Research Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Ed SchuuringDepartment of Pathology, Cancer Research Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
G Bea A WismanDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, Cancer Research Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4830-3401
University Medical Center Groningen · NLUniversity of Ljubljana · SI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective triage strategies are required to prevent unnecessary referrals for colposcopy in population-based screening programs using primary high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing. We have identified several DNA methylation markers with high sensitivity and specificity for detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or worse (CIN2+) in women referred for colposcopy. Our study assessed diagnostic potential of these methylation markers in a hrHPV-positive screening cohort. All six markers (JAM3, EPB41L3, C13orf18, ANKRD18CP, ZSCAN1 and SOX1) showed similar association across histology in the hrHPV-positive cohort when compared to the Dutch cohort (each p > 0.15). Sensitivity for CIN2+ was higher using methylation panel C13orf18/EPB41L3/JAM3 compared to the other 2 panels (80% vs. 60% (ANKRD18CP/C13orf18/JAM3) and 63% (SOX1/ZSCAN1), p = 0.01). For CIN3+ all three methylation panels showed comparable sensitivity ranging from 68% (13/19) to 95% (18/19). Specificity of SOX1/ZSCAN1 panel (84%, 167/200) was considerably higher compared to ANKRD18CP/C13orf18/JAM3 (68%, 136/200, p = 2 × 10

Indexed as

DNA MethylationAdultBiomarkers, TumorCohort StudiesColposcopyFemaleHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPapillomaviridaePapillomavirus InfectionsSensitivity and SpecificityTriageUterine Cervical DysplasiaUterine Cervical NeoplasmsBiomarkers, Tumorcervical cancer screeningDNA methylation markershigh-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)(pre)malignant cervical cancertriage test

Identifiers

PMID30259973
PMCPMC6587981
OpenAlexW2894174193

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.