Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31110650›Full record

ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2018

HPV negative cervical cancers and primary HPV screening.

Waa Tjalma

Open access · greenAbstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. HPV-Independent Cervical Cancer-A New Challenge of Modern Oncology.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Human papillomavirus negative high grade cervical lesions and cancers: Suggested guidance for HPV testing quality assurance.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Waa TjalmaMultidisciplinary Breast Clinic, Gynecological Oncology Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Antwerp University Hospital, University of Antwerp, Wilrijkstraat 10, 2650 Edegem, Belgium.
Antwerp University Hospital · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

More than 25 years ago it was established that a HPV (Human Papilloma Virus) infection was the causal factor for cervical cancer. Based on this discovery HPV vaccines were developed and primary HPV screening proposed. The impact of 10 years prophylactic HPV vaccination with the bivalent and quadrivalent vaccines has been tremendous. There is a reduction of HPV infections 16/18, 31, 33 and 45 of respectively 89%, 94%, 79% and 83%. High grade lesions have been reduced by 85% and warts by 90%. Within 20 to 30 years a reduction in cervical cancer incidence, by 70-80%, is to be expected. The 9 valent HPV vaccine, which was introduced last year and is reimbursed for girls between 12 - 19 years, is expected to increase the figures by 14 to 18%. Recently, doubt has been created regarding primary HPV screening. Since 2017, the annual screening report in Belgium suggests that 15% of the cervical cancers were HPV negative. Previous published data in Belgium (period 2001 - 2008) showed that the number of HPV negative tumors is less than half of the suggested figure (7%). Frequent reasons for false negative HPV tumors are the used HPV testing methods and the misclassification of endometrial cancers or metastasis as cervical cancers. Other explanations are the loss of HPV expression and the existence of cervical cancers independent of HPV. The incidence of HPV negative tumors doesn't give any information about the performance of primary HPV screening. Data from randomized controlled trials are very clear: if a woman has a normal cytology and no HPV infection or normal cytology and a HPV infection, then her chance of developing a CIN3 + lesion after 5 years is, respectively, 0,2% and 6%. In Belgium, primary HPV screening with dual-stain cytology triage would considerably reduce the incidence (36%) and mortality (40%) of cervical cancer. There is necessity to improve the screening as we are entering an era of vaccinated women who will get screened. Standardized high quality HPV testing is the key stone for improvement. HPV screening preferable with triage markers is superior to cytology, despite the fact that there are HPV negative cancers. The fact that there are HPV negative cancers should not undermine all idea's regarding primary HPV screening.

Indexed as

cervical cancercytologydiagnostic cytologydual stainingHPVmorbiditymortalitynegativepreventionprimaryscreeningvaccination

Identifiers

PMID31110650
PMCPMC6516188
OpenAlexW2989554630

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.