CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 146Cervical Cancer and HPV ResearchWomen's cancer prevention and managementEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Chapter 13: Primary Screening of Cervical Cancer With Human Papillomavirus Tests

Open access
Franco, E. L.·2003·JNCI Monographs
DOI 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jncimonographs.a003488
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Despite its history of success in cancer screening, Pap cytology has important limitations, particularly its high false-negative rate, which carries important public health implications. Since the mid-1990s, there has been substantial interest in the use of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing in cervical cancer screening under the premise that the testing of cervical cells for the causative agent of cervical cancer could have acceptable screening performance, while being more reproducible in clinical practice than Pap cytology. There have been several studies assessing the utility of HPV testing compared with the Pap test as a screening tool. These studies varied widely in lesion-outcome definition and in methodology. No studies were based on cervical cancer incidence or mortality. No randomized controlled trials have yet been published; all of the studies were based on concomitant testing for HPV and cytology or additional tests. HPV testing has greater sensitivity (average, 27%) but somewhat lower specificity (average, 8%) than Pap cytology for detecting high-grade lesions. Screening of women aged 30 years or older tends to improve test specificity, but it also does so for cytology. The combination of cytology and HPV attained high-negative predictive values, which suggests that their joint use could allow screening intervals to be safely increased, thus lowering costs. Although evidence is yet to come from long-term studies and from randomized controlled trials with high-grade lesions and invasive cancer as outcomes, HPV testing is clearly one of the most promising new technologies and has the potential to improve cervical cancer-screening effectiveness in many settings.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jncimonographs.a003488

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 28 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Ratnam, 2000, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention, 9, 945
  2. Womack, 2000, International journal of cancer. Journal international du cancer, 85, 206, 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0215(20000115)85:2%3C206::AID-IJC10%3E3.0.CO;2-Q · DOI
  3. Sellors, 2000, Canadian Medical Association Journal, 163, 513

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Franco, E. L.
Affiliations
McGill University (CA)
Corresponding author
Franco, E. L.
ORCID
Franco, E. L.
Venue
JNCI Monographs
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2003-06-01
Volume
2003
Issue
31
Pages
89-96
ISSN
  • 1052-6773 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-6614
DOI
10.1093/oxfordjournals.jncimonographs.a003488
OpenAlex
W2135253681
Cited by
146
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 10
FWCI
11.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
public-domain
Locations
  • JNCI Monographs (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • 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, Pap smear cytology, primary screening, false negative rate, high-grade cervical lesions, sensitivity and specificity, negative predictive value, screening interval extension, cost reduction
MeSH terms
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, DNA, Viral, Ethics, Medical, Female, Humans, Mass Screening, Primary Prevention, Public Health, Sensitivity and Specificity, Tumor Virus Infections, Vaginal Smears, Observer Variation, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Ethics, Clinical, Papillomaviridae, Papillomavirus Infections, Ethics, Research

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