Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38556619›Full record

Trial reportBJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology2025

Topical imiquimod treatment of residual or recurrent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia lesions (TOPIC-2): A randomised controlled trial.

Anna J M van de Sande, Romy van Baars, Margot M Koeneman, Cornelis G Gerestein, Arnold-Jan Kruse, Edith M G van Esch, Peggy J de Vos van Steenwijk, Caroline L P Muntinga, Sten P Willemsen, Helena C van Doorn and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Signaling pathways and targeted interventions for precancers.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
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

12 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Anna J M van de SandeDepartment of Gynaecological Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7773-2758
Romy van BaarsDepartment of Gynaecological Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Margot M KoenemanDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4650-9032
Cornelis G GeresteinDivision of Imaging and Oncology, Department of Gynaecological Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0490-2258
Arnold-Jan KruseDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Edith M G van EschDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Catharina Cancer Institute, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7387-5922
Peggy J de Vos van SteenwijkDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9822-9529
Caroline L P MuntingaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2886-3436
Sten P WillemsenDepartment of Epidemiology, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1675-2931
Helena C van DoornDepartment of Gynaecological Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1062-4485
Folkert J van KemenadeDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4225-4354
Helene J van BeekhuizenDepartment of Gynaecological Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8899-7412
Erasmus MC Cancer Institute · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NLErasmus MC · NLErasmus University Rotterdam · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NLUtrecht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the efficacy of imiquimod in women with residual or recurrent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (rrCIN), compared with large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ).

designRandomised controlled non-inferiority trial.

settingOne academic and one regional hospital in the Netherlands. POPULATION: Thirty-five women with rrCIN were included in the study between May 2016 and May 2021.

methodsWomen were randomised to receive treatment with 5% imiquimod cream (12.5 mg) intravaginally (three times a week for a duration of 16 weeks) or a LLETZ procedure (standard treatment).

main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was reduction to normal cytology at 6 months after starting treatment. Secondary outcomes were clearance of high-risk human papilloma virus (hr-HPV) in both groups and reduction to ≤CIN1 in the imiquimod group. Side effects were monitored.

resultsTreatment success was 33% (6/18) in the imiquimod group versus 100% (16/16) in the LLETZ group (P < 0.001), whereas HPV clearance was 22% (4/18) in the imiquimod group versus 88% (14/16) in the LLETZ group (P < 0.001). After the randomisation of 35 women, the futility of treatment with imiquimod was proven and the trial was prematurely finished. In the follow-up period, three patients remained without additional treatment, whereas all other patients underwent LLETZ, conisation or hysterectomy. In the LLETZ group none of the patients received additional treatment during 2 years of follow-up.

conclusionsThis is the first randomised controlled trial to show that topical imiquimod has a significantly lower success rate in terms of reduction to normal cytology and hr-HPV clearance, compared with LLETZ, in women with rrCIN. Additionally, imiquimod has numerous side effects and after using imiquimod most women with rrCIN still required additional surgical treatment.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsImiquimodNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalUterine Cervical DysplasiaUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAdministration, IntravaginalAdultFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm, ResidualNetherlandsPapillomavirus InfectionsTreatment OutcomeAntineoplastic AgentsImiquimodcervical dysplasiacervical intraepithelial neoplasiaefficacyhigh‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesionhuman papillomavirusimiquimodlarge loop excision of the transformation zoneprevention of cervical cancerquality of lifetransformation zone

Identifiers

PMID38556619
PMCPMC12137755
OpenAlexW4393363412

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.