The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Long‐term risk of invasive cervical cancer after treatment of squamous cervical intraepithelial neoplasia
Open accessAbstract
Invasive cancer of the cervix after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) is becoming more important, as screening reduces the incidence of invasive disease. The rate of invasive cervical or vaginal cancer following treatment for CIN in UK remains elevated for at least 8 years. The aim of our study was to determine from international data how long this rate remains elevated and whether the rate of invasive disease reflects the rate of posttreatment CIN. The aim was to determine why the rate of invasive disease does not fall. A search of Medline and a secondary search of cited references identified 1,848 articles referring to the success rate of the treatment of CIN. Only 26 cohorts from 25 articles met all the inclusion criteria. The policy in these was to perform at least annual smears. After the first year following treatment for CIN, the rate of invasive disease remained about 56 per 100,000 woman years until at least 20 years after treatment. This rate is ˜2.8 times greater than expected. In contrast, the risk of posttreatment CIN declined steadily with time to about 190 per 100,000 women in the 10th year. Although the posttreatment rate of CIN falls with time, the rate of invasive disease remains static. It seems likely that this is due to diminishing compliance with follow‐up. Women should be encouraged to persevere with annual smears for at least 10 years after their treatment as this may offer them the best chance of detecting recurrence at a treatable stage. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
McCredie, M. R., Sharples, K. J., Paul, C., Baranyai, J., Medley, G., Jones, R. W., & Skegg, D. C. (2008) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(08)70103-7 · Cited by 1,123
Saslow, D., Solomon, D., Lawson, H. W., Killackey, M., Kulasingam, S. L., Cain, J. M., Garcia, F. A. R., Moriarty, A. T., Waxman, A. G., Wilbur, D. C., et al. (2012) · Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease · doi:10.1097/lgt.0b013e31824ca9d5 · Cited by 915
Evidence Regarding Human Papillomavirus Testing in Secondary Prevention of Cervical Cancer
Arbyn, M., Ronco, G., Anttila, A., Meijer, C. J. L. M., Poljak, M., Ogilvie, G., Koliopoulos, G., Naucler, P., Sankaranarayanan, R., & Peto, J. (2012) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.06.095 · Cited by 897
Arbyn, M., Kyrgiou, M., Simoens, C., Raifu, A. O., Koliopoulos, G., Martin-Hirsch, P., Prendiville, W., & Paraskevaidis, E. (2008) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.a1284 · Cited by 694
Arbyn, M., Redman, C. W. E., Verdoodt, F., Kyrgiou, M., Tzafetas, M., Ghaem-Maghami, S., Petry, K.-U., Leeson, S., Bergeron, C., Nieminen, P., et al. (2017) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(17)30700-3 · Cited by 342
Metadata
- Authors
- Soutter, W. P., Sasieni, P., & Panoskaltsis, T.
- Venue
- International Journal of Cancer
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-11-11
- Volume
- 118
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 2048-2055
- ISSN
- 0020-7136 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0215
- OpenAlex
- W2027709039
- Cited by
- 232
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Long‐term risk of invasive cervical cancer after treatment of squamous cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/ijc.21604
- The paper
- Soutter, W. P., Sasieni, P., & Panoskaltsis, T. (2006). Long‐term risk of invasive cervical cancer after treatment of squamous cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. International Journal of Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.21604
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.