ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2025
Impact of knowledge of human papillomavirus positivity on cervical cytology performance in Latin America.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- How to evaluate and select cervical screening and triage tests in vaccinated populations.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2026Article
- Accuracy of colposcopy to triage HPV-positive women in cervical cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Short-term repeat HPV testing for triaging HPV-positive women in cervical cancer screening.British journal of cancer · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCervical cytology is recommended by the World Health Organization as a triage option in human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening programs. We assessed the performance of cytology to detect CIN3+ without and with knowledge of HPV positivity.
methodsWomen were screened with cytology and HPV across ESTAMPA study centers in Latin America. Screen-positives were referred to colposcopy with biopsy and treatment as needed. Cytology was initially interpreted without knowing HPV results. A subset of cytologies from HPV-positive women were reinterpreted at the same laboratories, with knowledge of HPV status, blinded to previous cytology and histological diagnosis. Performance indicators for cytology to detect CIN3+ without and with knowledge of HPV positivity were estimated.
findingsA total of 4087 women were included, of which 490 had histologically confirmed CIN3+ (455 CIN3 and 35 cancers). Cytology sensitivity without knowledge of HPV positivity for CIN3+ was 47.2% (95% CI = 42.5 to 51.9), whereas with knowledge of HPV positivity, the sensitivity was higher (58.9%, 95% CI = 54.2 to 63.5; P < .0001). The specificity without knowledge of HPV was 89.4% (95% CI = 88.2 to 90.5), whereas with knowledge of HPV positivity was 78.9% (95% CI = 77.4 to 80.4; P < .0001). Performance estimates varied by study center for cytology without knowing the HPV positivity (range = 32.8%-61.5% for sensitivity; range = 80.7%-98.6% for specificity). Similarly, performance varied with knowledge of HPV positivity (36.1%-93.4% for sensitivity; 39.6%-98.6% for specificity).
conclusionThe increase in sensitivity of cytology with HPV knowledge was limited and highly variable, reinforcing the need for alternative triage methods to support cervical cancer elimination goals.
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.