ArticleScientific reports2024
Photodynamic therapy compared with loop electrosurgical excision procedure in patients with cervical high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion.
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 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.
- 5-Aminolevulinic Acid Photodynamic Therapy for Non-Lesional Persistent High-Risk HPV Infection: A Comparative Cohort Study With Interferon.International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Systematic photodynamic therapy for concurrent cervical-vaginal high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion: a series of eight cases.Lasers in medical science · 2026Article
- Electrospun Fibrous Architectures for Localized Delivery of Photosensitizers in Cancer Therapy.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Photodynamic Therapy Efficacy of the Human Papillomavirus-Related Cervical Lesions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- HPV negative conversion following Hiporfin PDT for HPV associated HSIL in the female lower reproductive tract.Scientific reports · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The study aimed to compare the effectiveness between Hiporfin-photodynamic therapy (PDT) and loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) in treating cervical high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL). We conducted a retrospective analysis of 104 women diagnosed with cervical HSIL at our hospital from April 2019 to July 2023. With 1:1 matched case-control, 52 cases received Hiporfin-PDT and 52 cases underwent LEEP. All PDT-treated cases received Hiporfin (2 mg/kg) I.V. and a diode laser at a wavelength of 630-nm. T-test, Chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, and Yates's correction for continuity were conducted for statistical. A P value < 0.05 was considered significant. The complete response (CR) post-PDT at 3rd-6th months,10th-12th months and 24th months was in 98.1% (51/52),100.0% (45/45) and 100.0% (22/22) patients respectively, compared to 98.1% (51/52), 100.0% (46/46) and 100.0% (24/24) patients respectively after LEEP. HPV clearance rates after PDT at 3rd-6th months,10th-12th months and 24th months was 76.9% (40/52), 88.9% (40/45) and 95.5% (21/22) respectively, compared to 69.2% (36/52), 93.5% (43/46) and 95.8% (23/24) respectively after LEEP, with no significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.508, P = 0.687 and P = 1.000, respectively). Postoperative complications in the PDT group were tolerable. The cure rates and HPV eradication of Hiporfin-PDT were comparable with that of LEEP in the management of cervical HSIL. Hiporfin-PDT may serve an alternative method for organ-saving in cervical HSIL.
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.