Trial reportInternational journal of cancer2026
Controlled trial of cervical cancer screening frequency among human-papillomavirus-vaccinated women.
Trial report in International journal of cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 5 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.
Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Two Vaccination Strategies Using GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals' HPV Vaccine GSK580299 (Cervarix) Administered in Healthy Adolescents
Effectiveness of Cervical Screening in HPV Vaccinated Women - a Randomized Trial
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Controlled trial of cervical cancer screening frequency among human-papillomavirus-vaccinated women.International journal of cancer · 2026Trial
- Challenges and possible solutions towards reaching global cervical cancer elimination.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Review
- Predicting optimal impact interventions in the post-HPV vaccination world.International journal of cancer · 2026Review
- Protective Human Papillomavirus Type 16/18 Vaccine-Induced Neutralizing Antibody Levels Remain Elusive.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Major changes in cervical cancer screening in the US.Preventive medicine · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cervical screening frequency has not been studied in vaccinees. As the major risk factor, oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) is declining due to vaccination. We report a trial to assess the effectiveness of cervical screening frequency among women HPV-vaccinated as early adolescents (NCT02149030). In 2013, 5626 1992-1995-born women, who had received three doses of the HPV16/18 vaccine at ages 12-15 between 2007 and 2010 in a community-randomized vaccination trial (NCT00534638), were allocated at age 22 into high-intensity cytology-based cervical screening by even birth date (Arm A1) or into low-intensity cytology-based cervical screening by odd birth date (Arm A2). One thousand three hundred thirty-three women who received HPV16/18 vaccination at age 18 attended a safety of low intensity-screening arm (Arm A3). Low-intensity screening, where low-grade cytological abnormalities were not revealed for 6 years, was compared to the standard high-intensity screening used in Finland at the time. The prevalence of cytological and HPV findings was calculated at ages 22/25/28. The hazard ratio of histopathologically confirmed immediate cervical cancer precursors (HSIL/CIN2+) among participants was compared between low- and high-intensity screening arms. The overall occurrence of CIN2+ was comparable in Arms A1, 0.70% and A2, 0.66%, with the corresponding hazard ratio at age 28 being 0.97 (95% confidence intervals, 0.50-1.88). By age 28, the occurrence of vaccine-HPV types 16/18 was reduced up to 88% in the 12-to-15 compared to 18-year-old HPV-vaccinated women. In conclusion, the risk of CIN2+ was similar for HPV-vaccinated women who attended low-intensity cervical screening compared to high-intensity screening most likely due to the decline of oncogenic HPVs.
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.