ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2025
Management and natural course of CIN 1 and CIN 2 before and after implementation of the revised cervical cancer screening in Germany.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn 2020, Germany implemented a revised cervical cancer screening program, incorporating co-testing with cytology and human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for women aged 35 and older. This study describes patient characteristics, referral patterns, and follow-up outcomes of histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 1 and CIN 2 lesions before and after the introduction of the organized cervical cancer screening program in Germany.
methodsIn a hybrid prospective-retrospective study, we analyzed two consecutive cohorts of patients with histologically confirmed CIN 1 or CIN 2 at the Department of Women's Health, University Hospital Tuebingen, between 2013 and 2022. Patient characteristics, referral indications, and follow-up outcomes were described and compared.
resultsPatients post-2020 were older (median 41 vs. 31 years), more often hrHPV-positive (93.4% vs. 63.3%), and more frequently presented with CIN 1 (62% vs. 51%). Immediate intervention was less common post-2020 (CIN 1: 7% vs. 25%; CIN 2: 37% vs. 67%). Among those followed, remission was higher in the post-2020 cohort (CIN 1: 63.5% vs. 42.2%; CIN 2: 61.6% vs. 41.0%). Progression to CIN 3 remained rare in both cohorts. Multivariable regression indicated that CIN 2 diagnosis and smoking reduced remission, while the post-2020 period was associated with increased remission odds.
conclusionThe differences in remission and persistence between cohorts likely reflect changes in referral pathways, patient age rather than causal program effects. These data provide a descriptive benchmark for clinicians, supporting conservative management of CIN 1 and selected CIN 2 under the new screening program.
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.