ArticleCancers2021
Evaluation of Integrated HPV DNA as Individualized Biomarkers for the Detection of Recurrent CIN2/3 during Post-Treatment Surveillance.
Article in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular characterization of HPV integrations in high-risk HPV-positive women and development of a prognostic signature based on integration-associated genes for cervical cancer.Infectious agents and cancer · 2026Article
- Accuracy of GynTectCancers · 2024Article
- Human papillomavirus associated cervical lesion: pathogenesis and therapeutic interventions.MedComm · 2023Review
- Standardized Procedures for Patients with Dysplasia and Other Diseases of the Cervix, Vulva, and Vagina at a Certified Dysplasia Unit Prior to the Introduction of the Organized Cervical Cancer Screening Program.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2023Article
- Article
- Circulating Virus-Host Chimera DNAs in the Clinical Monitoring of Virus-Related Cancers.Cancers · 2022Review
- Role of Dual-Staining p16/Ki-67 in the Management of Patients under 30 Years with ASC-US/L-SIL.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
33 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePost-treatment follow-up in women with cervical pre-cancers (CIN3) is mandatory due to relapse in up to 10% of patients. Standard follow-up based on hrHPV-DNA/cytology co-testing has high sensitivity but limited specificity. The aim of our prospective, multicenter, observational study was to test the hypothesis that an individualized viral-cellular-junction test (vcj-PCR) combined with cytology has a lower false positive rate for the prediction of recurrence compared to standard co-testing.
methodsPre-surgical cervical swabs served for the identification of HPV16/18 DNA integration sites by next-generation-sequencing (NGS). Samples taken at 6, 12 and 24 months post-surgery were evaluated by cytology, hrHPV-DNA and the patients' individual HPV-integration sites (vcj-PCR on the basis of NGS).
resultsIntegration sites were detected in 48 of 445 patients (10.8%), 39 of them had valid follow-up data. The false positive rate was 18.2% (95% CI 8.6-34.4%) for standard hrHPV/cytology at six months compared to 12.1% (95% CI 4.8-27.3%) for vcj-PCR/cytology, respectively (McNemar
conclusionsAlthough highly specific on its own vcj-PCR could not detect all recurrent CIN2/3. Possible reasons for this unexpected result may be multifocal lesions, intratumoral heterogeneity with respect to HPV integration and/or incident CIN.
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.