ArticleCurrent medical science2024
Genome-integrated Human Papilloma Viruses Testing: A Complement to Colposcopy-guided Biopsy for Cervical Cancer Screening.
Article in Current medical science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveOur research aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of colposcopy-guided biopsy (CGB) in detecting high-grade cervical lesions and explore how human papilloma virus (HPV) integration status and other factors affect its performance.
methodsA retrospective cohort analysis involving 550 patients was conducted to evaluate whether the HPV integration plays a role in identifying high-grade cervical lesions and cervical cancer. Logistic regression models and area under the curve (AUC) calculations were employed.
resultsOur findings revealed that 53.5% of CGB/surgery pairs demonstrated congruent diagnoses, whereas 17.1% showed underestimation and 29.5% overestimation. Furthermore, multivariate logistic regression analysis identified several key predictors for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)2+ and CIN3+ according to surgical pathology. Notably, a CGB confirming CIN2+ [odds ratio (OR)=6.0, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.9-9.1, P<0.001], high-grade cytology (OR=2.6, 95% CI: 1.4-1.9, P=0.003), and HPV integration positivity (OR=2.2, 95% CI: 1.3-3.5, P<0.001) emerged as significant factors for CIN2+. Similarly, for CIN3+ identification, CGB confirming CIN2+ (OR=5.3, 95% CI: 3.4-8.3, P<0.001), high-grade cytology (OR=2.6, 95% CI: 1.5-4.7, P=0.001), and HPV integration positivity (OR=2.0, 95% CI: 1.3-3.1, P=0.003) were independent predictors.
conclusionOur study highlights the innovative role of HPV integration testing as a pivotal adjunct to CGB and cytology, offering a comprehensive approach that may enhance the diagnostic precision for high-grade cervical lesions, ultimately achieving more precise management strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39673000What 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.