ArticleInfectious agents and cancer2025
Cost-benefit analysis of p16
Article in Infectious agents and cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparison of ThinPrep cytology and high-risk human papillomavirus testing with different triage protocols for cervical cancer screening.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHPV testing has become the recommended primary screening method for cervical cancer in China. However, referring all HPV-positive patients for colposcopy is not practical. This study monetized clinical performance metrics to evaluate the relative performance of 10 secondary triage strategies compared to referring all patients for colposcopy.
methodsUsing real-world HR-HPV sample data and strictly adhering to the HPV-FRAMEWORK, a Markov model was employed to simulate the missed diagnosis losses and health utility losses associated with referring all patients for colposcopy. These losses were monetized using one-time 2023 per capita GDP in China. Incremental net benefits of secondary triage strategies were calculated to identify the optimal strategy. Extensive sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess parameter and sample uncertainty. Additionally, the technical suitability of strategies was explored in the context of healthcare resource allocation in China.
resultsSolely relying on HPV genotyping for secondary triage is not recommended, and necessary secondary triage testing should be implemented. p16 performed better than LBC, particularly in the overall sample and in most age groups. The strategy of HPV16/18+ or (OH-HPV+ and p16+) was the most attractive, with an incremental net benefit of US$492,473.78 compared to referring all patients for colposcopy. Extensive sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these results. Considering healthcare resource allocation in China, p16 demonstrated higher technical suitability.
conclusionBased on real-world sample data and the monetization of clinical performance metrics, this study recommends p16 as the secondary triage technology. The HPV16/18+ or (OH-HPV+ and p16+) strategy is not only the most attractive but also holds high potential for large-scale implementation in China.
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.