ArticleInternational journal of cancer2025
Performance of visual inspection, partial genotyping, and their combination for the triage of women living with HIV who are screen positive for human papillomavirus: Results from the AIMA-CC ANRS 12375 multicentric screening study.
Article in International journal of cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Resource-Adapted Triage Strategies for Women Testing HPV Positive With Self-Collected Vaginal Samples in Cameroon.International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Article
- Long-term risk and predictors of high-risk human papillomavirus persistence after thermal ablation amongst women living with HIV in West Africa.HIV medicine · 2025Article
- Human Papillomavirus and Other Relevant Issues in Cervical Cancer Pathogenesis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Performance of visual inspection, partial genotyping, and their combination for the triage of women living with HIV who are screen positive for human papillomavirus: Results from the AIMA-CC ANRS 12375 multicentric screening study.International journal of cancer · 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
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The WHO recommends the use of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for primary cervical cancer (CC) screening because of its high sensitivity. However, triage is desirable to correctly identify HPV+ women who have high-grade lesions (CIN2+) and require treatment. The ANRS-12375 study was conducted in Côte d'Ivoire, Burkina Faso and Cambodia to assess the performance, feasibility and benefits of different triage options for detecting CIN2+ lesions: partial (HPV16 and HPV16/18/45) and extended genotyping, visual inspection (VIA) alone and VIA combined with partial genotyping. VIA was performed by gynecologists. The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic likelihood ratio (DLR) of each triage option for detecting CIN2+ lesions with histology as a reference standard were calculated. Of the 2253 women living with HIV (WLHIV) included, 932 (41%) were HPV+. A CIN2+ lesion was identified in 105 (13%) of the 777 participants with histopathology results. The sensitivity of VIA as a triage test for CIN2+ patients was 89%, while that for extended genotyping was 89%, that for HPV16/18/45 partial genotyping was 51%, and that for HPV16 partial genotyping was 36%. The specificities for these tests were 45%, 29%, 72%., and 85%, respectively. Combining VIA and/or partial genotyping positivity slightly increased the sensitivity (94%) at the cost of lower specificity (28%). There was significant intersite heterogeneity (p = .04). Among the three triage tests with a sensitivity ≥85%, the VIA had the highest specificity and positive likelihood ratio (p < .001). VIA and extended genotyping, whether independent or combined, are good triage options with high sensitivity for identifying WLHIV needing treatment for CIN2+.
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.