ArticleCureus2026
Diagnostic Utility of Acetic Acid-induced Acetowhite Change in Suspected Penile Intraepithelial Neoplasia.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPenile intraepithelial neoplasia (PeIN) is a premalignant lesion with clinical features that often overlap with benign inflammatory dermatoses. Although biopsy remains the diagnostic gold standard, topical acetic acid application producing an acetowhite reaction is sometimes used to aid clinical assessment. This study evaluated the diagnostic utility of acetic acid-induced acetowhite change in identifying penile dysplasia or PeIN.
methodsA retrospective observational cohort study was conducted at a tertiary penile cancer referral centre. Consecutive patients referred with suspicious erythematous penile lesions between September 2022 and September 2025 who underwent both topical acetic acid application and penile biopsy were included. Acetowhite responses were categorised as negative, mildly positive, or strongly positive based on contemporaneous clinical documentation. Histopathological diagnosis from biopsy specimens served as the reference standard. The association between acetowhite response and histological outcome was assessed using chi-squared analysis.
resultsFifty-two patients were included. Histopathology demonstrated benign findings in 34 patients, PeIN in 10, mild dysplasia in 1, and moderate-severe dysplasia in 7. Acetowhite change was observed across both benign and dysplastic lesions. No significant association was identified between the presence or degree of acetowhite change and histologically confirmed dysplasia or PeIN (p = 0.686).
conclusionAcetic acid-induced acetowhite change did not reliably predict the presence of penile dysplasia or PeIN. These findings suggest that acetic acid testing has limited diagnostic utility in the assessment of suspicious penile lesions and should not influence decisions regarding biopsy, which remains essential for accurate diagnosis regardless of the response to acetic acid application.
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.