ArticleOncology letters2024
Diagnostic value of HPV E6/E7 mRNA in screening for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse: A systematic review and meta‑analysis.
Article in Oncology letters, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating Biomarkers into Cervical Cancer Screening-Advances in Diagnosis and Risk Prediction: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- Enhancing Cervical Cancer Screening: New Diagnostic Methodologies, Triage, and Risk Stratification in Prevention and Treatment.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
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
Histology is considered the gold standard for diagnosing the pathological progress of cervical cancer development, while cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) is the cutoff for intervention in clinical practice. The diagnostic value of human papillomavirus (HPV) E6/E7 mRNA in screening for CIN2+ has not been systematically summarized. A meta-analysis was conducted as part of the present study conducted to explore the diagnostic value of HPV E6/E7 mRNA in screening for CIN2+, aiming to provide a new marker for earlier clinical diagnosis of cervical cancer. The PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to May 2023. Studies reporting the true positive, false positive, true negative and false negative values in differentiating between CIN2+ and CIN2- were included, while duplicate publications, studies without full text, incomplete information or inability to conduct data extraction, animal experiments, reviews and systematic reviews were excluded. STATA software was used to analyze the data. A total of 2,224 patients were included of whom there were 1,274 patients with CIN2+ and 950 patients with CIN2-. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the studies overall were 0.89 (95% CI, 0.84-0.92) and 0.59 (95% CI, 0.46-0.71), respectively; the positive likelihood ratio (LR) and the negative LR of the studies overall were 2.31 (95% CI, 1.61-3.32) and 0.21 (95% CI, 0.14-0.30), respectively. The pooled diagnostic odds ratio of the studies overall was 11.53 (95% CI, 6.85-19.36). Additionally, the area under the curve was 0.88. The analysis indicated that HPV E6/E7 mRNA has high diagnostic efficacy for CIN2+. HPV E6/E7 mRNA is highly sensitive in the diagnosis of CIN2+, which helps to reduce the rate of missed diagnoses. However, lower specificity may lead to a higher number of misdiagnoses in healthy patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.