Cited by 101Cervical Cancer and HPV ResearchWomen's cancer prevention and managementEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments

HPV for cervical cancer screening (HPV FOCAL): complete round 1 results of a randomized trial comparing HPV-based primary screening to liquid-based cytology for cervical cancer

Open access
Ogilvie, Gina S., Krajden, Mel, van Niekerk, Dirk, Smith, Laurie W., Cook, Darrel, Ceballos, Kathy, Lee, Marette, Gentile, Laura +6 more·2017·International Journal of Cancer

Abstract

Complete Round 1 data (baseline and 12‐month follow‐up) for HPV FOCAL, a randomized trial establishing the efficacy of HPV DNA testing with cytology triage as a primary screen for cervical cancer are presented. Women were randomized to one of three arms: Control arm – Baseline liquid‐based cytology (LBC) with ASCUS results triaged with HPV testing; Intervention and Safety arms – Baseline HPV with LBC triage for HPV positives. Results are presented for 15,744 women allocated to the HPV (intervention and safety combined) and 9,408 to the control arms. For all age cohorts, the CIN3+ detection rate was higher in the HPV (7.5/1,000; 95%CI: 6.2, 8.9) compared to the control arm (4.6/1,000; 95%CI: 3.4, 6.2). The CIN2+ detection rates were also significantly higher in the HPV (16.5/1,000; 95%CI: 14.6, 18.6) vs . the control arm (10.1/1,000; 95%CI: 8.3, 12.4). In women ≥35 years, the overall detection rates for CIN2+ and CIN3+ were higher in the HPV vs . the control arm (CIN2+:10.0/1,000 vs . 5.2/1,000; CIN3+: 4.2/1,000 vs . 2.2/1,000 respectively, with a statistically significant difference for CIN2+). HPV testing detected significantly more CIN2+ in women 25–29 compared to LBC (63.7/1,000; 95%CI: 51.9, 78.0 vs . 32.4/1,000; 95%CI: 22.3, 46.8). HPV testing resulted in significantly higher colposcopy referral rates for all age cohorts (HPV: 58.9/1,000; 95%CI: 55.4, 62.7 vs . control: 30.9/1,000; 95%CI: 27.6, 34.6). At completion of Round 1 HPV‐based cervical cancer screening in a population‐based program resulted in greater CIN2+ detection of across all age cohorts compared to LBC screening.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ijc.30454

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 30 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Bosch FX, Broker T, Forman D, et al. Compre- hensive control of human papillomavirus infec- tions and related diseases. Vaccine 2013;31: H1-H31.
  2. Smith L, Ogilvie G, Krajden M, et al. Methodo- logical quality control measures of a population- based screening trial: HPV FOCAL. Presented at the 30th Annual International Papillomavirus Conference, Lisbon Portugal, September 17-21, 2015.
  3. Dillner J, Rebolj M, Birembaut P, et al. Long term predictive values of cytology and human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screen- ing: joint European cohort study. Br Med J 2008; 337:a1754. doi: 10.1136/bmja1754. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ogilvie, G. S., Krajden, M., van Niekerk, D., Smith, L. W., Cook, D., Ceballos, K., Lee, M., Gentile, L., Gondara, L., Elwood‐Martin, R., Peacock, S., Stuart, G., Franco, E. L., & Coldman, A. J.
Affiliations
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
  • Lower Mainland Laboratories Vancouver BC Canada
  • BC Cancer Agency (CA)
  • McGill University (CA)
Corresponding author
Ogilvie, Gina S.
Venue
International Journal of Cancer
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-10-20
Volume
140
Issue
2
Pages
440-448
ISSN
  • 0020-7136 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0215
OpenAlex
W2526320839
Cited by
101
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 2
FWCI
12.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Cancer (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Endometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
Keywords
cervical cancer screening, HPV testing, primary screening, liquid-based cytology, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, CIN2+ detection, CIN3+ detection, colposcopy referral, women aged 25-29, screening efficacy, cost-effectiveness, cervical cancer prevention
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Colposcopy, DNA, Viral, Female, Humans, Mass Screening, Middle Aged, Referral and Consultation, Sensitivity and Specificity, Triage, Vaginal Smears, Papillomaviridae, Papillomavirus Infections, Early Detection of Cancer

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