Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32774490›Full record

ArticleOncology letters2020

Rate of detecting CIN3+ among patients with ASC-US using digital colposcopy and dynamic spectral imaging.

Karen Eloise Harris, Philip Todd Lavin, Mark Donnell Akin, Emmanouil Papagiannakis, Sara Denardis

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncology letters, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Karen Eloise HarrisDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Medicine, University of Central Florida, Gainesville, FL 32605, USA.
Philip Todd LavinBoston Biostatistics Research Foundation, Framingham, MA 01702-6105, USA.
Mark Donnell AkinAustin Area Obstetrics, Gynecology and Fertility, Austin, TX 78758, USA.
Emmanouil PapagiannakisDYSIS Medical, Edinburgh EH12 9DQ, UK.
Sara DenardisDepartment of Obstetrics/Gynecology, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL 32827, USA.
University of Central Florida · USNational Foundation for Cancer Research · USTexas Fertility Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study compared two methods for the detection of severe cervical dysplasia in women with atypical squamous cells of underdetermined significance (ASC-US) cytology; digital colposcopy with adjunctive dynamic spectral imaging (DSI) and conventional colposcopy. IMPROVE-COLPO was a two-arm cross-sectional study of US community-based colposcopy. The active (prospective) arm of this study recruited patients examined by digital colposcopy and adjunctive DSI. Preceding consecutive patients that had been examined with conventional methods were used as historical controls in the retrospective arm of the study after being matched in number to those in the prospective arm by a colposcopist. In the present study, the primary measure was the number of women detected with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) following punch biopsy. The study included 1,353 retrospective and 1,226 prospective patients eligible for this analysis who were examined by 146 colposcopists in 42 community-based clinics. The patient baseline characteristics were comparable between the two arms. The average number of biopsies taken per patient was higher among the prospective arm patients (including standard and DSI-assisted biopsies) compared with the retrospective arm control patients (1.21 vs. 0.97 respectively). Biopsy detected 31 patients with CIN3+ [2.29%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.56-3.24] in the retrospective arm, and 48 patients with CIN3+ (3.92%; 95% CI, 2.90-5.16) in the prospective arm. The difference in the number of patients detected with CIN3+ in the two arms of the study was 1.62% (95% CI, 0.30-3.04; P=0.022), which corresponds to a 70.9% relative increase in the prospective compared with the retrospective arm. Biopsy appeared less efficient in detecting patients with CIN3+ in the retrospective arm compared with the prospective arm. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the retrospective arm and the prospective arm in terms of: i) Biopsies taken (over the entire population) per patient detected with CIN3+ (42.2 in the retrospective arm vs. 30.8 in the prospective arm; P=0.164) and ii) positive predictive value of using biopsies to identify patients with CIN3+ (2.83 vs. 3.92; P=0.118). Adoption of digital colposcopy with DSI increased the number of biopsies collected from ASC-US patients compared with retrospective controls of standard colposcopy and detected a significantly higher number of patients who were CIN3+. The number of additional biopsies taken in the prospective arm compared with the retrospective arm was too small to explain the increased detection of patients with CIN3+ observed in the prospective arm, suggesting that biopsies in the prospective arm were better at identifying CIN3+.

Indexed as

biopsycervical cancercervical intraepithelial neoplasiacervix utericolposcopydynamic spectral imaging

Identifiers

PMID32774490
PMCPMC7406885
OpenAlexW3043785670

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.