Human papilloma virus genotyping for the cross-sectional and longitudinal probability of developing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more.

doi:10.1002/ijc.31326

Loading publication...

Noodle always counts identifier-free feature events for service operation. With your permission, Google Analytics can also estimate audience and engagement. Search text, publication identifiers, cookies, IP addresses and browser fingerprints are never included in Noodle's first-party event counters.

Privacy details

Back to search

Article

Human papilloma virus genotyping for the cross-sectional and longitudinal probability of developing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more.

International journal of cancer - 15 Jul 2018

Del Mistro Annarosa, Adcock Rachael, Carozzi Francesca, Gillio-Tos Anna, De Marco Laura, Girlando Salvatore, Rizzolo Raffaella, Frayle Helena, Trevisan Morena, Sani Cristina, Burroni Elena, Giorgi Rossi Paolo, Cuzick Jack, Ronco Guglielmo

Abstract excerpt

Human papilloma virus (HPV) testing is more sensitive but less specific than cytology. We evaluated stand-alone genotyping as a possible triage method. During a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing HPV testing to conventional cytology, HPV-positive women were referred to colposcopy a...

Topics

Adult
Colposcopy
Cross-Sectional Studies
Cytodiagnosis
DNA, Viral
Early Detection of Cancer
Female
Genotype
Humans
Longitudinal Studies
Middle Aged

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Neoplasm Grading

Papillomaviridae

Papillomavirus Infections

Sensitivity and Specificity

Uterine Cervical Neoplasms

Uterine Cervical Dysplasia

Source

Open in PubMed Open full text

Identifiers

PMID: 29453769
DOI: 10.1002/ijc.31326
PMCID: PMC6099271

Provenance

PubMed metadata and Literature Corpus relationships. Corpus snapshot updated 30 Aug 2026. Prepared record publication-29453769-2026-08-30.1. Manifest publication-graph-cohort-2026-08-30.1.

Source receipt: PubMed via Helena Literature Corpus, retrieved 30 Aug 2026.

Community interpretation

Discuss the evidence

Ask a question, add context or challenge an interpretation. Community activity is separate from scientific evidence strength.

discussions

replies

Citations encouraged

Claims remain attributable.

No discussion yet

Be the first to add a careful, cited interpretation.