The DOI matches its Crossref record; 85 of the 85 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
p16INK4a immunostaining in cytological and histological specimens from the uterine cervix: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Open accessAbstract
Background P16INK4a is a biomarker for transforming HPV infections that could act as an adjunct to current cytological and histological assessment of cervical smears and biopsies, allowing the identification of those women with ambiguous results that require referral to colposcopy and potentially treatment. Material and Methods We conducted a systematic review of all studies that evaluated the use of p16INK4a in cytological or histological specimens from the uterine cervix. We also estimated the mean proportion of samples that were positive for p16INK4a in cytology and histology, stratified by the grade of the lesion. Results Sixty-one studies were included. The proportion of cervical smears overexpressing p16INK4a increased with the severity of cytological abnormality. Among normal smears, only 12% (95% CI: 7–17%) were positive for the biomarker compared to 45% of ASCUS and LSIL (95% CI: 35–54% and 37– 57% respectively) and 89% of HSIL smears (95% CI: 84–95%). Similarly, in histology only 2% of normal biopsies (95% CI: 0.4– 30%) and 38% of CIN1 (95% CI: 23– 53%) showed diffuse staining for p16INK4a compared to 68% of CIN2 (95% CI: 44– 92%) and 82% of CIN3 (95% CI: 72– 92%). Conclusion Although there is good evidence that p16INK4a immunostaining correlates with the severity of cytological/histological abnormalities, the reproducibility is limited due to insufficiently standardized interpretation of the immunostaining. Therefore, a consensus needs to be reached regarding the evaluation of p16INK4a staining and the biomarker needs to be evaluated in various clinical settings addressing specific clinical questions.
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
Cites
Meta-analysis in clinical trials
DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 · Cited by 39,552
The combination of estimates from different experiments
Cochran, W. G. (1954) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/3001666 · Cited by 5,380
Systematic review and meta-analysis
(2019) · Providing Information for Health · doi:10.1201/9781315377315-19 · Cited by 2,659
Natural History of Cervicovaginal Papillomavirus Infection in Young Women
Ho, G. Y. F., Bierman, R., Beardsley, L., Chang, C. J., & Burk, R. D. (1998) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199802123380703 · Cited by 2,329
NATURAL HISTORY OF CERVICOVAGINAL PAPILLOMAVIRUS INFECTION IN YOUNG WOMEN
Loria, G. R., Ierman, R. O. B., Eardsley, L. E. B., & Hang, H. J. C. (1998) · Cited by 1,890
NATURAL HISTORY OF CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA
RICHART, R. M. (1967) · Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1097/00003081-196712000-00002 · Cited by 1,376
Natural History of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia: A Critical Review
Östör, A. G. (1993) · International Journal of Gynecological Pathology · doi:10.1097/00004347-199304000-00018 · Cited by 1,260
Stoler, M. H. (2001) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.285.11.1500 · Cited by 1,087
Klaes, R., Friedrich, T., Spitkovsky, D., Ridder, R., Rudy, W., Petry, U., Dallenbach-Hellweg, G., Schmidt, D., & von Knebel Doeberitz, M. (2001) · International Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1002/ijc.1174 · Cited by 1,035
Human Papillomavirus and Papanicolaou Tests to Screen for Cervical Cancer
Naucler, P., Ryd, W., Törnberg, S., Strand, A., Wadell, G., Elfgren, K., Rådberg, T., Strander, B., Johansson, B., Forslund, O., et al. (2007) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa073204 · Cited by 797
Cited by
Human Papillomavirus Testing in the Prevention of Cervical Cancer
Schiffman, M., Wentzensen, N., Wacholder, S., Kinney, W., Gage, J. C., & Castle, P. E. (2011) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djq562 · Cited by 759
Self-citationTainio, K., Athanasiou, A., Tikkinen, K. A. O., Aaltonen, R., Cárdenas, J., Hernándes, Glazer-Livson, S., Jakobsson, M., Joronen, K., Kiviharju, M., et al. (2018) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.k499 · Cited by 391
Self-citationCatarino, R. (2015) · World Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.5306/wjco.v6.i6.281 · Cited by 284
Prevalence of human papillomavirus types in cervical lesions from women in rural Western India
Deodhar, K., Gheit, T., Vaccarella, S., Romao, C. C., Tenet, V., Nene, B. M., Jayant, K., Kelkar, R., Malvi, S. G., Sylla, B. S., et al. (2012) · Journal of Medical Virology · doi:10.1002/jmv.23310 · Cited by 34
Metadata
- Authors
- Tsoumpou, I., Arbyn, M., Kyrgiou, M., Wentzensen, N., Koliopoulos, G., Martin-Hirsch, P., Malamou-Mitsi, V., & Paraskevaidis, E.
- Venue
- Cancer Treatment Reviews
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-05
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 210-220
- ISSN
- 0305-7372 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2115240529
- Cited by
- 323
- References
- 85
- FWCI
- 4.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: p16INK4a immunostaining in cytological and histological specimens from the uterine cervix: A systematic review and meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ctrv.2008.10.005
- The paper
- Tsoumpou, I., Arbyn, M., Kyrgiou, M., Wentzensen, N., Koliopoulos, G., Martin-Hirsch, P., Malamou-Mitsi, V., & Paraskevaidis, E. (2009). p16INK4a immunostaining in cytological and histological specimens from the uterine cervix: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Treatment Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctrv.2008.10.005
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.