ArticleCommunications medicine2026
Clinical performance of ASCL1/LHX8 DNA methylation on first-void urine to screen for cervical cancer.
Article in Communications medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Observational
- Advances in the application of gene methylation detection in cervical cancer screening.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDNA methylation analysis provides a promising triage strategy for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and cancer detection following Human Papillomavirus (HPV) testing on self-collected samples, including urine.
methodsThis study aimed to develop an entirely molecular cervical screening approach based on HPV and DNA methylation analysis in at-home collected first-void urine from healthy females (n = 69) and a referral population (n = 385; CIN-cancer). CIN3+ detection was analyzed by multivariate logistic regression.
resultsHere we show that urinary ASCL1/LHX8 methylation levels increase significantly in relation to disease severity, with AUC-values for CIN3+ of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.74-0.88) and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.74-0.92) in the training (n = 285) and validation cohort (n = 160), respectively. This corresponds to a validated CIN3+ sensitivity of 73.0% (95% CI: 57.0-84.6%) at 81.9% specificity (95% CI: 73.5-88.1%; <CIN2). Urinary HPV testing is more sensitive (83.8%; 95% CI: 68.9-92.3%) although less specific (59.6%; 95% CI: 50.0-68.5%). For triage of HPV positives, ASCL1/LHX8 methylation and HPV16/18 genotyping have a similar CIN3+ sensitivity (75.0%; 95% CI: 62.8-84.2% vs 73.3%; 95% CI: 61.0-82.9%), with lower genotyping specificity. Combining ASCL1/LHX8 methylation with HPV16/18 genotyping yield a 85.0% sensitivity (95% CI: 73.9-91.9%) at 50.5% specificity (95% CI: 40.8-60.1%).
conclusionsThe ASCL1/LHX8 methylation test detects nearly all cancers and a majority of CIN3 in first-void urine, supporting the potential of full molecular screening in urine by primary HPV testing and methylation triage.
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.