ArticleCancer causes & control : CCC2024
Performance of urine samples compared to cervical samples for detection of precancer lesions among HPV-positive women attending colposcopy clinic in Mexico City.
Article in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Narrative Review of Urine-Based Human Papillomavirus Screening: Performance, Challenges, and Opportunities to Expand Access in the United States.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2025Review
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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHigh-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) detection in self-collected urine samples (SeCUS) may be a promising alternative for cervical cancer screening because of its greater acceptability, as long as it can offer comparable sensitivity to clinician-collected cervical samples (CCoS) for detecting precancer lesions.
objectiveTo evaluate the performance of the SeCUS compared to that of the CCoS for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN3) detection among hrHPV-positive women receiving colposcopy in Mexico City using different specific extended HPV typing procedures: HPV16/18, HPV16/18/35/39/68 or HPV16/18/35/39/68/31.
methodsFrom March 2017 to August 2018, 4,158 female users of the cervical cancer screening program at Tlalpan Sanitary Jurisdiction in Mexico City were invited to participate in the FRIDA-Tlalpan study. All participants provided ≥ 30 mL of SeCUS, and then a CCoS was obtained with Cervex-Brush®, which was used for hrHPV typing. Participants who tested positive for hrHPV in CCoS were referred for colposcopy for diagnostic confirmation, and all SeCUS of these women were also tested for hrHPV typing.
resultsIn total, 561 hrHPV-positive women were identified by CCoS via colposcopy, and 82.2% of the SeCUS of these women were also hrHPV positive. From both CCoS and SeCUS, 7 cases of CIN3 were detected. Considering HPV16/18 typing, CCoS and SeCUS detected 4 cases of CIN3, but after HPV16/18/35/39/68/31 extension typing, both CCoS and SeCUS detected all 7 of the CIN3 cases among the hrHPV-positive women.
conclusionsUsing extended hrHPV typing based on HPV16/18/35/39/68/31, our results suggest that the performance of SeCUS may be equivalent to that of CCoS for detecting CIN3 lesions. Although our results are inconclusive, they support the hypothesis that SeCUS may be an attractive alternative worthy of further research.
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.