BACKGROUND: Women once treated for high grade cervical dysplasia have a high long term risk for developing new dysplasia or cancer. OBJECTIVES: To investigate if human papilloma virus (HPV)-negativity after treatment of cervical dysplasia reduces the need for frequent long term follow up. DESIGN: Case/control study based on archival smears. METHODS: Women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasi (CIN)2-3, treated for dysplasia and with recurrence of CIN2+ more than 2 years after treatment were compared with controls without recurrence, matched for age and date of treatment. High risk-HPV-DNA were analysed with PCR from two archival smears per woman. Mean follow up time was 14.6 years. RESULTS: 24% (45/189) of cases and 11% (43/378) of controls were HPV-positive in any of two smears. Odds ratio (OR)=2.5 (1.6-3.8). CONCLUSION: HPV-status 6-12 months after treatment of high grade dysplasia is of limited value for the design of long term follow up.
BACKGROUND:Women once treated for high grade cervical dysplasia have a high long term risk for developing new dysplasia or cancer. OBJECTIVES: To investigate if human papilloma virus (HPV)-negativity after treatment of cervical dysplasia reduces the need for frequent long term follow up. DESIGN: Case/control study based on archival smears. METHODS:Women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasi (CIN)2-3, treated for dysplasia and with recurrence of CIN2+ more than 2 years after treatment were compared with controls without recurrence, matched for age and date of treatment. High risk-HPV-DNA were analysed with PCR from two archival smears per woman. Mean follow up time was 14.6 years. RESULTS: 24% (45/189) of cases and 11% (43/378) of controls were HPV-positive in any of two smears. Odds ratio (OR)=2.5 (1.6-3.8). CONCLUSION:HPV-status 6-12 months after treatment of high grade dysplasia is of limited value for the design of long term follow up.
Authors: L G Koss; M E Sherman; M B Cohen; A R Anes; T M Darragh; L B Lemos; B J McClellan; D L Rosenthal; S Keyhani-Rofagha; K Schreiber; P T Valente Journal: Hum Pathol Date: 1997-10 Impact factor: 3.466
Authors: Silvia Franceschi; Rolando Herrero; Gary M Clifford; Peter J F Snijders; Annie Arslan; Pham Thi Hoang Anh; F Xavier Bosch; Catterina Ferreccio; Nguyen Trong Hieu; Eduardo Lazcano-Ponce; Elena Matos; Monica Molano; You-Lin Qiao; Raj Rajkumar; Guglielmo Ronco; Silvia de Sanjosé; Hai-Rim Shin; Sukhon Sukvirach; Jaiye O Thomas; Chris J L M Meijer; Nubia Muñoz Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2006-12-01 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Jian Han; David C Swan; Sharon J Smith; Shanjuan H Lum; Susan E Sefers; Elizabeth R Unger; Yi-Wei Tang Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2006-09-27 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Ola Forslund; Annika Antonsson; Karin Edlund; Adrian J C van den Brule; Bengt-Göran Hansson; Chris J L M Meijer; Walter Ryd; Eva Rylander; Anders Strand; Göran Wadell; Joakim Dillner; Bo Johansson Journal: J Med Virol Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 2.327
Authors: L J Bollen; S P Tjong-A-Hung; J van der Velden; B W Mol; F W ten Kate; J ter Schegget; O P Bleker Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 1999-02 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: M J Grainge; R Seth; C Coupland; L Guo; T Rittman; P Vryenhoef; J Johnson; D Jenkins; K R Neal Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2005-05-09 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Hormuzd A Katki; Mark Schiffman; Philip E Castle; Barbara Fetterman; Nancy E Poitras; Thomas Lorey; Li C Cheung; Tina Raine-Bennett; Julia C Gage; Walter K Kinney Journal: J Low Genit Tract Dis Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 1.925
Authors: Benjamin K S Chan; Joy Melnikow; Christina A Slee; Rose Arellanes; George F Sawaya Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2009-01-24 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Hugo De Vuyst; Nelly R Mugo; Silvia Franceschi; Kevin McKenzie; Vanessa Tenet; Julia Njoroge; Farzana S Rana; Samah R Sakr; Peter J F Snijders; Michael H Chung Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-10-24 Impact factor: 3.240