ArticleJournal of gynecologic oncology2019
Risk of cervical dysplasia among human papillomavirus-infected women in Korea: a multicenter prospective study.
Article in Journal of gynecologic oncology, 2019. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Application of Machine Learning Algorithms for Risk Stratification and Efficacy Evaluation in Cervical Cancer Screening among the ASCUS/LSIL Population: Evidence from the Korean HPV Cohort Study.Cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Article
- Association of Relative Telomere Length and Risk of High Human Papillomavirus Load in Cervical Epithelial Cells.Balkan journal of medical genetics : BJMG · 2021Article
- Efficient combination of Human Papillomavirus Genotyping for the triage of women with Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance in Chinese rural population: A population-based study.Journal of Cancer · 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
11 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveHuman papillomavirus (HPV) infection is the most important risk factor for cervical cancer, which progresses from precursor lesions with no symptom if left untreated. We compared the risk of cervical dysplasia among HPV-positive Korean women based on HPV types and infection patterns.
methodsWe observed participants of a 5-year multicenter prospective cohort study, comprising HPV-positive women with either atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion of the cervix at their enrollment. Follow-ups, comprising cytology and HPV DNA testing results, were included in the final analysis. Incidence was calculated for each infection pattern (persistent infection, incidental infection, and clearance). To investigate cervical dysplasia risk, we used Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for variables that were significantly different among infection patterns. From April 2010 to September 2017, 71 of 1,027 subjects developed cervical dysplasia more severe than high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion of the cervix.
resultsOf these 71 subjects, persistent infection, incidental infection, and clearance were noted in 30, 39, and 2 individuals, respectively. Based on changes in DNA results during follow-up, cumulative incidence was 27.2%, 10.4%, and 0.5% for persistent infection, incidental infection, and clearance, respectively. Compared to clearance, the adjusted hazard ratios for cervical dysplasia were 51.6 and 24.1 for persistent and incidental infections, respectively (p<0.001).
conclusionIndividuals persistently infected with the same HPV types during the follow-up period had the highest risk of severe cervical dysplasia. Hence, it is necessary to monitor HPV types and infection patterns to prevent severe cervical precancerous lesions.
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.