ReviewCancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center
Application of the Cascade of Care Framework to Guide Evidence-Informed Implementation of Anal Cancer Screening Guidelines.
Review in Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Elimination of HPV-associated cancers: universal HPV vaccination and the role of anal screening - a meeting report.BMC proceedings · 2026Article
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
Most squamous cell carcinomas of the anus, or anal cancers, are attributable to persistent infection with the human papillomavirus (HPV), analogous to cervical cancer. Although rare in the general population, rates of anal cancer are high among people with immune-compromising conditions or a history of HPV-related cancers. Recent evidence demonstrates that treatment of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL), a precursor of anal cancer, prevents progression to anal cancer. This has motivated the international release of several guideline statements now recommending anal cancer screening. For a new practice of cancer screening to be integrated into routine care for at-risk populations, implementation strategies will need adaptation for local settings. Our aim is to illustrate the potential value of combining the methods of implementation science with the anal screening cascade framework to support evidence-informed adoption of the guidelines across the different clinical services points where patients might undergo anal cancer screening. We point out means by which research activity could be directed, with particular attention to identifying and addressing care gaps to inform the adoption and scale-up of anal cancer screening. These approaches may help to guide local decisions regarding first steps for anal cancer screening implementation, including determining which populations may need enhanced effort, and to identify where more preparation may be needed.
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.