ArticleOncology research and treatment2025
Follow-Up Time of Anal Cancer Screening among Women Living with HIV at High Risk of Developing Anal Cancer.
Article in Oncology research and treatment, 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.
- Application of the Cascade of Care Framework to Guide Evidence-Informed Implementation of Anal Cancer Screening Guidelines.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterReview
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
<p>Introduction: Screening for anal cancer can help in its secondary prevention. We examined follow-up time for anal cancer screening among high-risk women living with HIV (WLHIV) and whether it varies with the number of risk factors for developing anal cancer.
methodsA retrospective cohort study involving high-risk WLHIV under 65 enrolled in Medicaid for at least 2 years across 16 US states plus D.C. from 2009 to 2012. High risk was defined by a history of abnormal cervical test results or genital warts. Initial anal cancer screening was the first screening after a high-risk diagnosis, with results classified as normal or abnormal. Follow-up was until the next screening. Follow-up time was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier estimator and the Cox Proportional Hazards model.
resultsOur cohort included 4,340 high-risk WLHIV, mean (±SD) age 41.8 (±10.2) years. About 18% (763/4,340) had both risk factors, while 9% (374/4,340) had abnormal results on their initial anal cancer screening. The median time, or the time at which 50% of the cohort received follow-up screening, was 17.53 (95% CI = 16.13, 18.30) months overall. Follow-up screening was more common in women with both risk factors for developing anal cancer compared to those with one risk factor (median time: 10.13 [95% CI = 8.90, 11.47] vs. 19.56 [95% CI = 18.36, 21.40] months; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 1.53 [95% CI = 1.38, 1.68]). The follow-up was also more common in women with abnormal results on the initial screening compared to those with a normal result (median time: 7.00 [95% CI = 5.40, 9.23] vs. 18.91 [95% CI = 17.92, 20.12] months; aHR = 2.00 [95% CI = 1.76, 2.28]).
conclusionFollow-up time for anal cancer screening in high-risk WLHIV was about 1.5 years but varied according to the risk of developing anal cancer. Future research should examine the guideline-concordance of follow-up screening time given the recently issued guidelines for anal cancer screening. </p>.
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.