ReviewJournal of oncology2019
Accuracy of mRNA HPV Tests for Triage of Precursor Lesions and Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Journal of oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Identification of Circulating MicroRNAs as a Promising Diagnostic Biomarker for Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia and Early Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.BioMed research international · 2020Pooled it
- Point-of-care hrHPV mRNA detection with reverse transcription recombinase polymerase amplification on a portable fluorimeter from provider-collected cervical samples in Maputo, Mozambique.Infectious agents and cancer · 2026Article
- Comparative performance of standalone E6/E7 mRNA testing versus a combined DNA genotyping and viral load assay for detecting cervical high-grade lesions: a retrospective paired study.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Extraction-free RT-RPA assay for detection of HPV16, HPV18, and HPV45 mRNA expression.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- HPV E6/E7 mRNA Testing in the Follow-Up of HPV-Vaccinated Patients After Treatment for High-Grade Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia.Vaccines · 2025Article
- Molecular detection of hrHPV-induced high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions of the cervix through a targeted RNA next generation sequencing assay.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- DNA high-risk HPV, mRNA HPV and P16 tests for diagnosis of anal cancer and precursor lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2023Article
- E6/E7 mRNA Expression of the Most Prevalent High-Risk HPV Genotypes in Cervical Samples from Serbian Women.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Cervical cancer, geographical inequalities, prevention and barriers in resource depleted countries.Oncology letters · 2022Review
- Review
- Cervical Cancer Screening Postpandemic: Self-Sampling Opportunities to Accelerate the Elimination of Cervical Cancer.International journal of women's health · 2021Review
- Novel biomarkers with promising benefits for diagnosis of cervical neoplasia: a systematic review.Infectious agents and cancer · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis systematic review evaluates the accuracy of the mRNA HPV biomarker in cervical smears to identify cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 or 3 and cervical cancer. DATA SOURCE: Eligible studies were identified by performing a search of electronic databases on Medline via Pubmed, Lilacs, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Grey literature for papers published between January 1990 and June 2018. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: As no randomized studies were identified, this review focuses on observational studies in which the mRNA HPV diagnostic test was compared to a histopathology reference standard. We analyzed studies that included women screened for cervical cancer using mRNA HPV. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS
methodsAfter screening, 61 studies including 29,674 patients met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Dichotomization was performed by defining CIN2 or worse (CIN2+) versus CIN1, HPV infection, and normal (CIN 1-). The analysis was discriminated by the following tests: Aptima, PreTect HPV Profeer, NucliSens EasyQ HPV, OncoTect, and Quantivirus.
resultsAnalyzing by technique, Aptima, with 28 studies, exhibited superior performance, showing for the outcomes CIN2+ and CIN3+ an AUC of 0.88 (0.82-0.95) and 0.91 (0.84-0.99), a pooled sensitivity of 92.8% (95%CI 91.9-93.7) and 95.6% (95%CI 94.5-96.5), and a pooled specificity of 60.5% (95%CI 59.8-61.3) and 61.9% (95%CI 61.1-62.7), respectively.
conclusionThis study supports the current hypothesis that the mRNA HPV assay is an adequate tool for secondary cervical cancer screening.
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.