Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35924097›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of women's health2022

The Application of Liquid-Based Cytological Detection for P16, Cytologic Evaluation and High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Testing in Cervical Cancer Screening: A Clinical Evaluation.

Fang Zhao, Deyong Ma, Tingting Wang, Yan Zhang, Ying Dong, Jian Zhao

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of women's health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 41% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Fang ZhaoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Beijing, 100035, People's Republic of China.
Deyong MaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University First Hospital of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Beijing, 100034, People's Republic of China.
Tingting WangPeking University Department of Medicine, Beijing, 100191, People's Republic of China.
Yan ZhangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University First Hospital of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Beijing, 100034, People's Republic of China.
Ying DongDepartment of Pathology, Peking University First Hospital of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Beijing, 100034, People's Republic of China.
Jian ZhaoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University First Hospital of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Beijing, 100034, People's Republic of China.
Peking University · CNPeking University First Hospital · CNBeijing Jishuitan Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to clinically evaluate the application of liquid-based cytology P16, cytologic evaluation, and high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing in cervical cancer screening. Methods: This study screened 900 women, who attended the outpatient clinic, according to the exclusion criteria of study participants. The study participants' screening results of liquid-based cytology P16, cytologic evaluation, and HR-HPV testing were analyzed. According to the pathological results of the biopsy, the efficacy of different screening strategies for the identification of high-grade lesions was evaluated. Results: The positive rate of p16 expression increased with the severity of cervical lesions. P16 had the highest sensitivity and negative predictive value in identifying high-grade lesions (98.45% and 99.67%, respectively). Liquid-based Papanicolaou test (LBP), on the other hand, had the lowest sensitivity (85.27%) but the highest specificity (85.88%). HR-HPV's positive predictive value and accuracy rate were the lowest (32.77% and 70.03%, respectively). The difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Dual combinations of certain tests were set up for this study; P16+LBP, HPV+LBP, and P16+HPV had sensitivities of 98.45%, 96.90%, and 99.22%, and specificities of 80.29%, 63.42%, and 64.33%, respectively. The P16 screening rates of histological and liquid-based cytology approaches were 75.74%. Conclusion: Compared with traditional LBP+HPV, the application of a test that solely screen for P16 or the combined screening method that involves the screening of P16 is more effective in identifying high-grade lesions.

Indexed as

biomarkersHR-HPVliquid-based cytologyp16screening of high-grade cervical lesions

Identifiers

PMID35924097
PMCPMC9342694
OpenAlexW4288069766

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.