Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31174598›Full record

SynthesisSystematic reviews2019

Efficacy of commercially available biological agents for the topical treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a systematic review.

Alex Baleka Mutombo, Cindy Simoens, Rahma Tozin, Johannes Bogers, Jean-Pierre Van Geertruyden, Yves Jacquemyn

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Alex Baleka MutomboDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kinshasa University Hospital, University of Kinshasa, PO Box 236, Kinshasa XI, Democratic Republic of the Congo. alexmutombo@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-6948-5013
Cindy SimoensApplied Molecular Biology Research Group (AMBIOR), Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Laboratory of Cell Biology & Histology, Universiteitsplein 1, 2610, Wilrijk, Belgium.
Rahma TozinDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kinshasa University Hospital, University of Kinshasa, PO Box 236, Kinshasa XI, Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Johannes BogersApplied Molecular Biology Research Group (AMBIOR), Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Laboratory of Cell Biology & Histology, Universiteitsplein 1, 2610, Wilrijk, Belgium.
Jean-Pierre Van GeertruydenGlobal Health Institute, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Doornstraat 331, 2610, Wilrijk, Belgium.
Yves JacquemynDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, UZA Antwerp University Hospital and ASTARC, Antwerp University UA, Wilrijkstraat 10, 2650, Edegem, Belgium.
University of Antwerp · BEAntwerp University Hospital · BEUniversity of Kinshasa · CD

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCervical cancer is a major public health issue in the world, especially in developing countries. It can be prevented through vaccination against HPV (primary prevention) and through screening and treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) (secondary prevention). Surgical methods for treatment of CIN are linked to complications such as bleeding and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Furthermore, these methods are not generally available in resource-poor settings. Therefore, topical agents for local application on the cervix have been used since decades to overpass complications and limitations of the surgical methods.

aimsReview of the literature on the efficacy of commercially available biological agents used for topical treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN).

methodsA systematic search through PubMed and the Cochrane database was performed up to December 2017, using the medical subheadings (MesH) for topical agent, treatment, and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Appropriate inclusion/exclusion criteria have been used for the selection of eligible clinical studies. Clinical studies containing a minimum of 20 women, aged 18-50 with a diagnosis of CIN 1-3, and at least a 4 weeks follow-up after the end of the topical treatment were included.

resultsThe initial electronic database search resulted in a total of 849 articles. After screening titles and abstracts, 62 articles were selected as potential studies. Of these, six articles were included in the review after reading the full text: two were on 5-FluoroUracil, two on trans retinoic acid, one on Imiquimod, and one on Cidofovir. The reported regression/remission rates for CIN differed among studies. In CIN2 patients, the overall remission rate ranged between 43 and 93% for the active agents.

conclusionAmong the topical agents studied, 5-FluoroUracil showed good remission rates above 80%. Varying results seen in this review is due to the differences in quality of the design between studies. Large-scale and less biaised studies are needed to elucidate the true efficacy and safety of topical agents in the treatment of CIN.

Indexed as

Biological FactorsAdministration, TopicalAntimetabolites, AntineoplasticFemaleFluorouracilHumansTreatment OutcomeUterine Cervical DysplasiaAntimetabolites, AntineoplasticBiological FactorsFluorouracilCervical intraepithelial neoplasiaSystematic reviewTopical therapy

Identifiers

PMID31174598
PMCPMC6555029
OpenAlexW2948473912

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.