Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42363777›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of cancer2026

HPV Testing Versus Cytology for Cervical Cancer Screening Among Women 50 Years and Older: Evidence From the HPV FOCAL Randomized Controlled Trial.

Md Saiful Alam, Laurie W Smith, Lovedeep Gondara, Darrel Cook, Ruth Elwood Martin, Stuart Peacock, Lily Proctor, Gavin Stuart, David Patrick, Eduardo L Franco and 3 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

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. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Md Saiful AlamUniversity of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5119-2394
Laurie W SmithWomen's Health Research Institute, BC Women's Hospital and Health Service, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Lovedeep GondaraUniversity of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Darrel CookBritish Columbia Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1958-120X
Ruth Elwood MartinUniversity of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Stuart PeacockPopulation Health Sciences, BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8243-8721
Lily ProctorUniversity of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Gavin StuartUniversity of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
David PatrickUniversity of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Eduardo L FrancoDivision of Cancer Epidemiology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4409-8084
Mel KrajdenUniversity of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Anna GottschlichDepartment of Oncology, Karmanos Cancer Institute, Wayne State School of Medicine, Detroit, Michigan, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3095-2323
Gina S OgilvieUniversity of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5783-4493

Funding

Addressing emerging health system priorities in cervical cancer prevention: determining optimal strategies for human papillomavirus test-based screening and triageR01CA221918 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA · PI OGILVIE, GINA · 2018 to 2022
$1.7M
CIHR MCT82072Michael Smith Health Research BC RT-2021-1595NCI NIH HHS R01 CA221918NIH HHS R01 CA221918
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evidence on the comparative effectiveness of HPV testing versus cytology specifically in women aged ≥ 50 years who are approaching screening cessation remains limited. This analysis included 6471 women aged ≥ 50 at baseline screening in the HPV FOCAL randomized clinical trial. Women were randomly allocated to receive cytology (Control Group, n = 3248, 50.19%) or HPV testing (Intervention Group, n = 3223, 49.81%) at baseline, with co-testing at 48-month exit. We calculated incidence rates and risk ratios for CIN2+ detection over follow-up and compared missed lesions at exit by screening method. At the 48-month exit, CIN2+ detection was lower among HPV baseline-negative women than among those in the cytology group (1.61/1000 [95% CI, 0.52-3.76] vs. 3.15/1000 [95% CI, 1.51-5.78]; risk ratio, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.11-0.91]), reflecting higher baseline detection with HPV testing and fewer prevalent lesions at exit. Even with cytology re-screening at 2 years, 50% of CIN2+ cases were missed compared to 30% with HPV testing. After adjusting for age, education, smoking status, and lifetime sexual partners, the hazard ratio for CIN2+ comparing HPV to cytology was 0.44 (95% CI, 0.22-0.88). Among women aged ≥ 50 years, HPV primary screening was more effective than cytology at detecting CIN2+ lesions and was associated with a continued lower subsequent risk following a negative HPV test, supporting its use in cervical cancer screening programs in this age cohort.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerHuman Papillomavirus VirusesPapillomavirus InfectionsUterine Cervical DysplasiaUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAgedFemaleHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPapillomaviridaeVaginal Smearscervical cancer screeningcervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)human papillomavirus (HPV)randomized controlled trialwomen aged 50 and older

Identifiers

PMID42363777
PMCPMC13495925

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.