ArticleBMC cancer2021
TOP2A/MCM2, p16
Article in BMC cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recent advancement in inflammatory biomarkers for cervical cancer diagnosis and therapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- HPV genotype-specific p16/Ki67 expression with machine learning-assisted assessment in cervical neoplasia.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Immunocytochemical staining for p16, Ki-67, and MCM2 in the detection of cervical lesions and cancer: a prospective observational study.Translational cancer research · 2025Article
- Article
- Viral oncogenesis in cancer: from mechanisms to therapeutics.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2025Review
- Expression and biological significance of topoisomerase II α (TOP2A) in oral squamous cell carcinoma.Discover oncology · 2024Article
- Effect of miRNA-200b on the proliferation of liver cancer cells via targeting SMYD2/p53 signaling pathway.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2022Article
- Article
- Identification andJournal of thoracic disease · 2022Article
- Review
- Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo improve the efficiency of early diagnosis systems for cervical cancer, the use of cellular and viral markers for identifying precancerous lesions with a greater probability to progress to cancer has been proposed. Several cellular proteins and markers of oxidative DNA damage have been suggested as possible biomarkers of cervical carcinogenesis; however, they have not been evaluated together. In this study, we analyzed the expression of the cellular markers p16
methodsWe analyzed 1485 liquid-based cytology samples, including 239 non-squamous intraepithelial lesions (NSIL), 901 low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL), 54 high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL), and 291 cervical cancers (CC). The biomarkers were analyzed by immunocytochemistry and Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) genotyping with the INNO-LiPA genotyping Extra kit.
resultsWe found that all tested cellular biomarkers were overexpressed in samples with high risk-HPV infection, and the expression levels increased with the severity of the lesion. TOP2A/MCM2 was the best biomarker for discriminating between LSIL and HSIL, followed by p16
conclusionsWe propose that the detection of TOP2A/MCM2, p16
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.