ArticleCancer medicine2022
Efficacy of careHPV™ human papillomavirus screening versus conventional cytology tests for the detection of precancerous and cancerous cervical lesions among women living with HIV-1 in Lao People's Democratic Republic.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Human papillomavirus testing on self-collected samples to detect high-grade cervical lesions in rural Bhutan: The REACH-Bhutan study.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of cervical cancer screening strategies for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+/CIN3+) among women living with HIV: A systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2022Article
- Review of the Standard and Advanced Screening, Staging Systems and Treatment Modalities for Cervical Cancer.Cancers · 2022Review
- 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
18 authors at 10 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the Lao People's Democratic Republic (Lao PDR), cervical cancer is the third leading cause of women cancer.
aimsThe objective of this cross-sectional study was to compare the efficacy of careHPV™ test versus conventional Pap smear or Siriraj liquid-based cytology in the detection of cervical cancer in women living with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1). MATERIALS &
methodsOverall, 631 women consented to participate. Four cervical specimens were taken for the purpose of conventional Pap smear, Siriraj liquid-based cytology, careHPV™ test, and HPV-16 genotyping. The exact McNemar test was used to compare the efficacy and diagnostic performance of the tests.
resultsOf the 631 women with follow-up, 331 were human papillomavirus (HPV) negative. High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions were found in 37 women, biopsy-proven high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in 50 women, and invasive carcinoma in seven women. The proportion of women with high-grade cervical lesion or carcinoma detected after abnormal careHPV™ test was higher (6.02%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.4-8.1) than that detected by conventional Pap smear (4.59%; 95% CI: 3.2-6.5). careHPV™ and HPV-16 genotyping had, respectively, the highest sensitivity (80.8%; 95% CI: 67.4-89.5) and specificity (92.2%; 95% CI: 89.8-94.2). HPV-16 was the most frequently detected genotype.
conclusionscareHPV™ test represents a screening option in Lao PDR, particularly in women living with HIV-1 because of higher prevalence of chronic HPV in this population.
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.