ArticleScientific reports2024
Cervical cancer microbiome analysis: comparing HPV 16 and 18 with other HPV types.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differential diagnostic value of PAX1 and JAM3 methylation for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia between premenopausal and postmenopausal women: a retrospective clinical study in China.Annals of medicine · 2026Article
- Inferred functional microbiome features are associated with clinical trajectories of low-grade cervical lesions.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
- From dysbiosis to mechanisms: Why cervicovaginal microbiome-HPV studies must catch up with biology.PLoS pathogens · 2025Article
- Triple-mode point-of-care diagnostics for high-risk human papillomavirus in urine.Biosensors & bioelectronics: X · 2025Article
- An immunoassay based on polyHRP signal amplification for HPV16/18 E6 RNA detection with anti-DNA-RNA hybrid antibody.Analytical sciences : the international journal of the Japan Society for Analytical Chemistry · 2025Article
- Concanavalin-A-assisted extraction-free one-pot RPA-CRISPR/Cas12a assay for rapid detection of HPV16.Mikrochimica acta · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Differences in the cervicovaginal microbiome may influence the persistence of HPV and therefore, the progression to cervical cancer. We aimed to analyze and compare the metatranscriptome of cervical cancers positive for HPV 16 and 18 with those positive for other HPV types to understand the microbiome's influence on oncogenicity. RNA sequencing data from a total of 222 invasive cervical cancer cases (HPV16/18 positive (n=42) and HPV "Other types" (n=180)) were subjected to taxonomy classification (Kraken 2) including bacteria, virus and fungi to the level of species. With a median depth of 288,080.5 reads per sample, up to 107 species (38 bacterial, 16 viral and 53 fungal) were identified. Diversity analyses revealed no significant differences in viral or fungal species between HPV16/18 and other HPV types. Bacterial alpha diversity was significantly higher in the "Other HPV types" group for the Observed index (p=0.0074) (but not for Shannon). Cumulative species curves revealed greater species diversity in the "Other HPV types" group compared to "HPV16/18 but no significant differences in species abundance were found between HPV groups. The study did not detect strong significant microbiome differences between HPV 16/18 and other HPV types in cervical cancers. Further research is necessary to explore potential factors influencing the oncogenicity of different HPV types and their interaction with the cervical microbiome.
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.