ArticleBMC global and public health2026
HPV DNA testing and treatment strategies for cervical pre-cancer among women living with HIV in Papua New Guinea: a prospective clinical cohort study.
Article in BMC global and public health, 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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe World Health Organization recommends human papillomavirus (HPV) testing and same-day treatment for cervical screening among women in the general population in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Among women living with HIV, additional triage is recommended due to lower specificity and predictive value of HPV testing alone in this population. We evaluated the performance of HPV DNA testing alone and in combination with alternative triage strategies for the early detection and treatment of cervical pre-cancer among women living with HIV in Papua New Guinea (PNG).
methodsWe did a prospective clinical cohort study among women living with HIV aged 30-59 years attending an HIV treatment and care service. Eligible women self-collected a vaginal specimen for point-of-care HPV DNA testing on the GeneXpert platform. All women testing HPV-positive, and a random sample of HPV-negative women, had enhanced visualisation of the cervix with digital colposcopy (EVA) and provided a clinician-collected cervical specimen for off-site liquid-based cytology. The primary outcome was the clinical performance (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value [PPV, NPV]) of HPV testing alone and in combination with alternative triage strategies (EVA, HPV type restriction, modified assay cut-off values) for detection of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) or worse.
resultsBetween May 3, 2024 and December 12, 2024, we recruited 404 women, of whom 168 (41.6%) tested positive for one or more of 14 oncogenic HPV types. Estimated sensitivity and NPV for HSIL or worse using manufacturer-defined cycle threshold cutoffs was >99%, specificity 63.3% (95%CI: 58.3%-68.3%), and PPV 18.6% (12.6%-24.6%). Restricting screen-positive to one or more of the 8 HPV types of greatest oncogenic potential had comparable sensitivity and NPV (>99%), with specificity 70.2% (65.5%-74.9%) and PPV 22.6% (15.6%-29.6%). HPV 8-type restriction with more stringent assay cut-offs (cycle threshold <33.99) had sensitivity 86.5% (75.3%-97.7%), specificity 80.1% (75.9%-84.3%), PPV 30.7% (21.7%-39.7%), and NPV 98.4% (96.9%-99.9%). EVA provided no additional benefits to HPV testing alone.
conclusionsApplying HPV 8-type restriction with or without modified manufacturer assay cut-off values to the WHO pre-qualified Xpert HPV test improved clinical performance for detection of HSIL or worse among women living with HIV in PNG.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42888458What 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.