ArticleDiscover oncology2025
The development and validation of a column chart for predicting the regression risk of CIN2.
Article in Discover oncology, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA predictive nomogram model was established for the prognosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 (CIN2).
methodsThis study was based on the research data of CIN2 obtained from the Shanxi CIN cohort study from 2019 to 2022. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of 512 female patients with CIN2. Subsequently, the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression, along with univariate and multivariate regression analyses, were conducted to identify five risk factors associated with CIN2 prognosis. These factors include age at first sexual activity, ThinPrep cytologic test (TCT) results, Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection type, lesion area detected by colposcopy, and acetowhitening thickness. A predictive model was constructed employing R software. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and resampling methods were employed to evaluate the predictive model in terms of accuracy and calibration. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was performed to assess its clinical application value.
resultsWomen with CIN2 (n = 512) aged 19-65 were included in the study; after 6 months of follow-up, 185 showed lesion regression, and 336 showed lesion persistence or progression. The factors for the predictive model included age of sexual activity (P = 0.005), multiple sexual partners (P = 0.076), TCT results (P < 0.0001), HPV infection (P = 0.0025), lesion area (P < 0.0001), and the thickness of acetic acid stain (P < 0.0001). Subsequent ROC curve analysis showed the respective sensitivity and specificity of the predictive model to be 0.827 and 0.708. Finally, DCA, used to assess the predictive value of the 5-factor CIN2 regression predictive model, was higher than the combined predictive model of HPV and TCT.
conclusionThe study could successfully establish a model for predicting the pathological regression status of CIN2 patients.
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.