ArticleInfectious agents and cancer2024
HPV integration: a precise biomarker for detection of residual/recurrent disease after treatment of CIN2-3.
Article in Infectious agents and cancer, 2024. 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.
- HPV integration as a triage tool for HPV-positive women in cervical cancer screening.Tumour virus research · 2026Article
- Review
- Risk of residual/recurrent cervical diseases in HPV-positive women post-conization depends on HPV integration status.Infectious agents and cancer · 2025Article
- Prediction of Cervical Cancer Progression Leveraging HPV16 Integration-Related Genes.International journal of women's health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to investigate whether persistent human papillomavirus integration at the same loci (PHISL) before and after treatment can predict recurrent/residual disease in women with CIN2-3.
methodsA total of 151 CIN2-3 women treated with conization between August 2020 and September 2021 were included. To investigate the precision of HPV integration, we further analyzed HPV integration-positive patients. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV, respectively), and the Youden index for predicting recurrence/residual disease were calculated.
resultsAmong the 151 enrolled CIN2-3 women, 56 were HPV integration-positive and 95 had HPV integration-negative results. Six (10.7%) experienced recurrence among 56 HPV integration-positive patients, which was more than those in HPV integration-negative patients (one patient, 1.1%). In the 56 HPV integration-positive patients, 12 had positive HPV results after treatment, seven had PHISL, and two had positive cone margin. Among the seven patients who tested with PHISL, six (85.7%) had residual/recurrent disease. PHISL was a prominent predictor of persistent/recurrent disease. The HPV test, the HPV integration test, and PHISL all had a sensitivity of 100% and a NPV of 100% for residual/recurrent disease. PHISL showed better specificity (98.0% vs. 82.0%, p = 0.005) and PPV (85.7% vs. 40.0%, p = 0.001) than the HPV test for predicting recurrence.
conclusionsThe HPV-integration-positive CIN2-3 women had much higher relapse rates than HPV-integration-negative CIN2-3 women. The findings indicate that PHISL derived from preoperative and postoperative HPV integration tests may be a precise biomarker for the identification of residual/recurrent CIN 2/3.
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.