-
Annals of Oncology : Official Journal... Feb 2020Although local treatments for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) are highly effective, it has been reported that treated women remain at increased risk of cervical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Incidence and mortality from cervical cancer and other malignancies after treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature.
BACKGROUND
Although local treatments for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) are highly effective, it has been reported that treated women remain at increased risk of cervical and other cancers. Our aim is to explore the risk of developing or dying from cervical cancer and other human papillomavirus (HPV)- and non-HPV-related malignancies after CIN treatment and infer its magnitude compared with the general population.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Eligibility criteria: Studies with registry-based follow-up reporting cancer incidence or mortality after CIN treatment.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Summary effects were estimated using random-effects models.
OUTCOMES
Incidence rate of cervical cancer among women treated for CIN (per 100 000 woman-years). Relative risk (RR) of cervical cancer, other HPV-related anogenital tract cancer (vagina, vulva, anus), any cancer, and mortality, for women treated for CIN versus the general population.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven studies were eligible. The incidence rate for cervical cancer after CIN treatment was 39 per 100 000 woman-years (95% confidence interval 22-69). The RR of cervical cancer was elevated compared with the general population (3.30, 2.57-4.24; P < 0.001). The RR was higher for women more than 50 years old and remained elevated for at least 20 years after treatment. The RR of vaginal (10.84, 5.58-21.10; P < 0.001), vulvar (3.34, 2.39-4.67; P < 0.001), and anal cancer (5.11, 2.73-9.55; P < 0.001) was also higher. Mortality from cervical/vaginal cancer was elevated, but our estimate was more uncertain (RR 5.04, 0.69-36.94; P = 0.073).
CONCLUSIONS
Women treated for CIN have a considerably higher risk to be later diagnosed with cervical and other HPV-related cancers compared with the general population. The higher risk of cervical cancer lasts for at least 20 years after treatment and is higher for women more than 50 years of age. Prolonged follow-up beyond the last screening round may be warranted for previously treated women.
Topics: Alphapapillomavirus; Female; Humans; Incidence; Middle Aged; Papillomavirus Infections; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Uterine Cervical Dysplasia
PubMed: 31959338
DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2019.11.004 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2019Uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine remains low in many countries, although the bivalent and quadrivalent HPV vaccines given as a three-dose schedule are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine remains low in many countries, although the bivalent and quadrivalent HPV vaccines given as a three-dose schedule are effective in the prevention of precancerous lesions of the cervix in women. Simpler immunisation schedules, such as those with fewer doses, might reduce barriers to vaccination, as may programmes that include males.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy, immunogenicity, and harms of different dose schedules and different types of HPV vaccines in females and males.
SEARCH METHODS
We conducted electronic searches on 27 September 2018 in Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (in the Cochrane Library), and Ovid Embase. We also searched the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov (both 27 September 2018), vaccine manufacturer websites, and checked reference lists from an index of HPV studies and other relevant systematic reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with no language restriction. We considered studies if they enrolled HIV-negative males or females aged 9 to 26 years, or HIV-positive males or females of any age.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used methods recommended by Cochrane. We use the term 'control' to refer to comparator products containing an adjuvant or active vaccine and 'placebo' to refer to products that contain no adjuvant or active vaccine. Most primary outcomes in this review were clinical outcomes. However, for comparisons comparing dose schedules, the included RCTs were designed to measure antibody responses (i.e. immunogenicity) as the primary outcome, rather than clinical outcomes, since it is unethical to collect cervical samples from girls under 16 years of age. We analysed immunogenicity outcomes (i.e. geometric mean titres) with ratios of means, clinical outcomes (e.g. cancer and intraepithelial neoplasia) with risk ratios or rate ratios and, for serious adverse events and deaths, we calculated odds ratios. We rated the certainty of evidence with GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 20 RCTs with 31,940 participants. The length of follow-up in the included studies ranged from seven months to five years. Two doses versus three doses of HPV vaccine in 9- to 15-year-old females Antibody responses after two-dose and three-dose HPV vaccine schedules were similar after up to five years of follow-up (4 RCTs, moderate- to high-certainty evidence). No RCTs collected clinical outcome data. Evidence about serious adverse events in studies comparing dose schedules was of very low-certainty owing to imprecision and indirectness (three doses 35/1159; two doses 36/1158; 4 RCTs). One death was reported in the three-dose group (1/898) and none in the two-dose group (0/899) (low-certainty evidence). Interval between doses of HPV vaccine in 9- to 14-year-old females and males Antibody responses were stronger with a longer interval (6 or 12 months) between the first two doses of HPV vaccine than a shorter interval (2 or 6 months) at up to three years of follow-up (4 RCTs, moderate- to high-certainty evidence). No RCTs collected data about clinical outcomes. Evidence about serious adverse events in studies comparing intervals was of very low-certainty, owing to imprecision and indirectness. No deaths were reported in any of the studies (0/1898, 3 RCTs, low-certainty evidence). HPV vaccination of 10- to 26-year-old males In one RCT there was moderate-certainty evidence that quadrivalent HPV vaccine, compared with control, reduced the incidence of external genital lesions (control 36 per 3081 person-years; quadrivalent 6 per 3173 person-years; rate ratio 0.16, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.38; 6254 person-years) and anogenital warts (control 28 per 2814 person-years; quadrivalent 3 per 2831 person-years; rate ratio 0.11, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.38; 5645 person-years). The quadrivalent vaccine resulted in more injection-site adverse events, such as pain or redness, than control (537 versus 601 per 1000; risk ratio (RR) 1.12, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.18, 3895 participants, high-certainty evidence). There was very low-certainty evidence from two RCTs about serious adverse events with quadrivalent vaccine (control 12/2588; quadrivalent 8/2574), and about deaths (control 11/2591; quadrivalent 3/2582), owing to imprecision and indirectness. Nonavalent versus quadrivalent vaccine in 9- to 26-year-old females and males Three RCTs were included; one in females aged 9- to 15-years (n = 600), one in females aged 16- to 26-years (n = 14,215), and one in males aged 16- to 26-years (n = 500). The RCT in 16- to 26-year-old females reported clinical outcomes. There was little to no difference in the incidence of the combined outcome of high-grade cervical epithelial neoplasia, adenocarcinoma in situ, or cervical cancer between the HPV vaccines (quadrivalent 325/6882, nonavalent 326/6871; OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.16; 13,753 participants; high-certainty evidence). The other two RCTs did not collect data about clinical outcomes. There were slightly more local adverse events with the nonavalent vaccine (905 per 1000) than the quadrivalent vaccine (846 per 1000) (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.08; 3 RCTs, 15,863 participants; high-certainty evidence). Comparative evidence about serious adverse events in the three RCTs (nonavalent 243/8234, quadrivalent 192/7629; OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.14 to 2.61) was of low certainty, owing to imprecision and indirectness. HPV vaccination for people living with HIV Seven RCTs reported on HPV vaccines in people with HIV, with two small trials that collected data about clinical outcomes. Antibody responses were higher following vaccination with either bivalent or quadrivalent HPV vaccine than with control, and these responses could be demonstrated to have been maintained for up to 24 months in children living with HIV (low-certainty evidence). The evidence about clinical outcomes and harms for HPV vaccines in people with HIV is very uncertain (low- to very low-certainty evidence), owing to imprecision and indirectness.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The immunogenicity of two-dose and three-dose HPV vaccine schedules, measured using antibody responses in young females, is comparable. The quadrivalent vaccine probably reduces external genital lesions and anogenital warts in males compared with control. The nonavalent and quadrivalent vaccines offer similar protection against a combined outcome of cervical, vaginal, and vulval precancer lesions or cancer. In people living with HIV, both the bivalent and quadrivalent HPV vaccines result in high antibody responses. For all comparisons of alternative HPV vaccine schedules, the certainty of the body of evidence about serious adverse events reported during the study periods was low or very low, either because the number of events was low, or the evidence was indirect, or both. Post-marketing surveillance is needed to continue monitoring harms that might be associated with HPV vaccines in the population, and this evidence will be incorporated in future updates of this review. Long-term observational studies are needed to determine the effectiveness of reduced-dose schedules against HPV-related cancer endpoints, and whether adopting these schedules improves vaccine coverage rates.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Child; Dose-Response Relationship, Immunologic; Female; Humans; Male; Papillomavirus Infections; Papillomavirus Vaccines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Young Adult
PubMed: 31755549
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013479 -
Journal of Clinical Virology : the... Jul 2023Human papillomavirus associated anogenital cancers are a significant global burden. The detection of biomarkers (circulating tumour DNA; ctDNA or circulating HPV DNA;... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Human papillomavirus associated anogenital cancers are a significant global burden. The detection of biomarkers (circulating tumour DNA; ctDNA or circulating HPV DNA; cHPV DNA) in blood referred to as "liquid biopsy" may support the early diagnosis and monitoring of affected individuals.
METHODS
A systematic review, including meta-analysis of studies available in the literature on the utilization of ctDNA and cHPV DNA as diagnostic, predictive, and monitoring biomarker tests of HPV associated anogenital cancers was performed following the criteria of PRISMA.
RESULTS
A total of 31 studies were eligible for systematic review; 20 used cHPV DNA in cervical cancers; 7 used ctDNA in cervical cancer; 5 used cHPV DNA in anal cancer; no eligible studies on vulva, vaginal or penile cancer were available. The meta-analysis identified low sensitivity (0.36) and high specificity (0.96) of cHPV DNA as diagnostic for cervical cancer. Comparatively, there was high sensitivity (0.95) and specificity (1.0) of cHPV DNA for the diagnosis of anal cancer. cHPV DNA and/or ctDNA in cervical cancer were prognostic markers associated with poor clinical outcomes. Additionally, in anal cancer the post treatment detection of cHPV DNA was informative in the prediction of treatment response or progression-free survival.
CONCLUSION
ctDNA and cHPV DNA are promising diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for the detection of anogenital disease. Evolution and refinement of molecular tools is likely to improve performance further. Additionally the comparative absence of studies in the vulval, vaginal and penile context warrants further exploration and research.
Topics: Female; Humans; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Papillomavirus Infections; Human Papillomavirus Viruses; Anus Neoplasms; DNA
PubMed: 37163963
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcv.2023.105469 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Sep 2015The aim of this study was to systematically review the findings of publications addressing the epidemiology of anal human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, anal... (Review)
Review
The aim of this study was to systematically review the findings of publications addressing the epidemiology of anal human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, anal intraepithelial neoplasia, and anal cancer in women. We conducted a systematic review among publications published from Jan. 1, 1997, to Sept. 30, 2013, to limit to publications from the combined antiretroviral therapy era. Three searches were performed of the National Library of Medicine PubMed database using the following search terms: women and anal HPV, women anal intraepithelial neoplasia, and women and anal cancer. Publications were included in the review if they addressed any of the following outcomes: (1) prevalence, incidence, or clearance of anal HPV infection, (2) prevalence of anal cytological or histological neoplastic abnormalities, or (3) incidence or risk of anal cancer. Thirty-seven publications addressing anal HPV infection and anal cytology remained after applying selection criteria, and 23 anal cancer publications met the selection criteria. Among HIV-positive women, the prevalence of high-risk (HR)-HPV in the anus was 16-85%. Among HIV-negative women, the prevalence of anal HR-HPV infection ranged from 4% to 86%. The prevalence of anal HR-HPV in HIV-negative women with HPV-related pathology of the vulva, vagina, and cervix compared with women with no known HPV-related pathology, varied from 23% to 86% and from 5% to 22%, respectively. Histological anal high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (anal intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or greater) was found in 3-26% of the women living with HIV, 0-9% among women with lower genital tract pathology, and 0-3% for women who are HIV negative without known lower genital tract pathology. The incidence of anal cancer among HIV-infected women ranged from 3.9 to 30 per 100,000. Among women with a history of cervical cancer or cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3, the incidence rates of anal cancer ranged from 0.8 to 63.8 per 100,000 person-years, and in the general population, the incidence rates ranged from 0.55 to 2.4 per 100,000 person-years. This review provides evidence that anal HPV infection and dysplasia are common in women, especially in those who are HIV positive or have a history of HPV-related lower genital tract pathology. The incidence of anal cancer continues to grow in all women, especially those living with HIV, despite the widespread use of combined antiretroviral therapy.
Topics: Antiretroviral Therapy, Highly Active; Anus Diseases; Anus Neoplasms; Carcinoma in Situ; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Coinfection; Female; HIV Infections; Humans; Incidence; Papillomavirus Infections; Prevalence; Proctitis
PubMed: 25797230
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.03.034 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2014BackgroundPubic or perineal shaving is a procedure performed before birth in order to lessen the risk of infection if there is a spontaneous perinealtear or if an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BackgroundPubic or perineal shaving is a procedure performed before birth in order to lessen the risk of infection if there is a spontaneous perinealtear or if an episiotomy is performed.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of routine perineal shaving before birth onmaternal and neonatal outcomes, according to the best available evidence.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group’s Trials Register (12 June 2014).Selection criteriaAll controlled trials (including quasi-randomised) that compare perineal shaving versus no perineal shaving.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed all potential studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted the data using apredesigned form. Data were checked for accuracy.Main resultsThree randomised controlled trials (1039 women) published between 1922 and 2005 fulfilled the prespecified criteria. In the earliesttrial, 389 women were alternately allocated to receive either skin preparation and perineal shaving or clipping of vulval hair only. In thesecond trial, which included 150 participants, perineal shaving was compared with the cutting of long hairs for procedures only. In thethird and most recent trial, 500 women were randomly allocated to shaving of perineal area or cutting of perineal hair. The primaryoutcome for all three trials was maternal febrile morbidity; no differences were found (risk ratio (RR) 1.14, 95% confidence interval(CI) 0.73 to 1.76). No differences were found in terms of perineal wound infection (RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.70) and perinealwound dehiscence (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.00) in the most recent trial involving 500 women, which was the only trial to assessthese outcomes. In the smallest trial, fewer women who had not been shaved had Gram-negative bacterial colonisation compared withwomen who had been shaved (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.98). There were no instances of neonatal infection in either group in theone trial that reported this outcome. There were no differences in maternal satisfaction between groups in the larger trial reporting this outcome (mean difference (MD) 0.00, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.13). No trial reported on perineal trauma. One trial reported on side-effectsand these included irritation, redness, burning and itching.The overall quality of evidence ranged from very low (for the outcomes postpartum maternal febrile morbidity and neonatal infection)to low (for the outcome maternal satisfaction and wound infection).Authors’ conclusionsThere is insufficient evidence to recommend perineal shaving for women on admission in labour.
Topics: Confidence Intervals; Female; Hair Removal; Humans; Labor, Obstetric; Odds Ratio; Patient Admission; Patient Satisfaction; Perineum; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 25398160
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001236.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2014This is an updated version of an original Cochrane review published in The Cochrane Library, 2011, Issue 1.Vulval intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) is a pre-malignant... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This is an updated version of an original Cochrane review published in The Cochrane Library, 2011, Issue 1.Vulval intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) is a pre-malignant condition of the vulval skin. This uncommon chronic skin condition of the vulva is associated with a high risk of recurrence and the potential to progress to vulval cancer. The condition is complicated by its multicentric and multifocal nature. The incidence of this condition appears to be rising, particularly in the younger age group. There is a lack of consensus on the optimal surgical treatment method. However, the rationale for the surgical treatment of VIN has been to treat the symptoms and exclude any underlying malignancy, with the continued aim of preserving the vulval anatomy and function. Repeated treatments affect local cosmesis and cause psychosexual morbidity, thus impacting he individual's quality of life.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of surgical interventions in women with high-grade VIN.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) Issue 11,2013 and MEDLINE and EMBASE up to December 2013. We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings and reference lists of included studies, and contacted experts in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared surgical interventions in adult women diagnosed with high-grade VIN.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently abstracted data and assessed risk of bias.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified one RCT, including 30 women, that met our inclusion criteria; this trial reported data on carbon dioxide (CO2) laser surgery versus cavitational ultrasonic surgical aspiration (CUSA). There were no statistically significant differences in the risks of disease recurrence after one year of follow-up, pain, scarring, dysuria or burning, adhesions, infection, abnormal discharge or eschar between women who underwent CO2 laser surgery and those who received CUSA. The trial lacked statistical power due to the small number of women in each group and the low number of observed events, but was at low risk of bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The included trial lacked statistical power due to the small number of women in each group and the low number of observed events. The absence of reliable evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of the two surgical techniques for the management of VIN therefore precludes any definitive guidance or recommendations for clinical practice.
Topics: Adult; Carcinoma in Situ; Female; Humans; Lasers, Gas; Precancerous Conditions; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Suction; Ultrasonic Therapy; Vulvar Neoplasms
PubMed: 24596022
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007928.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2011Vulval intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) is a pre-malignant condition of the vulval skin. This uncommon chronic skin condition of the vulva is associated with a high risk... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Vulval intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) is a pre-malignant condition of the vulval skin. This uncommon chronic skin condition of the vulva is associated with a high risk of recurrence and the potential to progress to vulval cancer. The condition is complicated by its' multicentric and multifocal nature. The incidence of this condition appears to be rising particularly in the younger age group.There is a lack of consensus on the optimal surgical treatment method. However, the rationale for surgical treatment of VIN has been to treat symptoms and exclude underlying malignancy with the continued aim of preservation of vulval anatomy and function. Repeated treatments affect local cosmesis and cause psychosexual morbidity thus impacting on the patients' quality of life.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of surgical interventions for high grade VIN.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Issue 3, 2010, Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, MEDLINE and EMBASE up to September 2010. We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared surgical interventions, in adult women diagnosed with high grade vulval intraepithelial neoplasia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently abstracted data and assessed risk of bias.
MAIN RESULTS
We found only one RCT which included 30 women that met our inclusion criteria and this trial reported data on carbon dioxide laser (CO(2) laser) versus ultrasonic surgical aspiration (USA).There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of disease recurrence after one year follow-up, pain, presence of scarring, dysuria or burning, adhesions, infection, abnormal discharge and eschar between women who received CO(2) laser and those who received USA. The trial lacked statistical power due to the small number of women in each group and the low number of observed events, but was at low risk of bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The included trial lacked statistical power due to the small number of women in each group and the low number of observed events. Therefore in the absence of reliable evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of the two surgical techniques for the management of vulval intraepithelial neoplasia precludes any definitive guidance or recommendations for clinical practice.
Topics: Adult; Carcinoma in Situ; Female; Humans; Lasers, Gas; Precancerous Conditions; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Suction; Ultrasonic Therapy; Vulvar Neoplasms
PubMed: 21249698
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007928.pub2 -
PloS One 2014It is unclear whether L1-VLP-based human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines are efficacious in reducing the likelihood of anogenital pre-cancer in women with evidence of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
It is unclear whether L1-VLP-based human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines are efficacious in reducing the likelihood of anogenital pre-cancer in women with evidence of prior vaccine-type HPV exposure. This study aims to determine whether the combined results of the vaccine trials published to date provide evidence of efficacy compared with control (hepatitis A vaccine/placebo).
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. Randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and references of identified studies. The bivalent vaccine containing HPV-16 and 18 VLPs from GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals (Rixenstart, Belgium), the quadrivalent vaccine containing HPV-6, 11, 16, and 18 VLPs from Merck & Co., Inc., (Whitehouse Station, NJ USA), and the HPV-16 monovalent vaccine from Merck Research Laboratories (West Point, PA USA) were evaluated.
FINDINGS
Three RCT reports and two post-trial cohort studies were eligible, comprising data from 13,482 women who were included in the vaccine studies but had evidence of HPV infection at study entry. Data on efficacy was synthesized using the Mantel-Haenszel weighted fixed-effect approach, or where there was heterogeneity between studies, the DerSimonian and Laird weighted random-effect approach. The mean odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the association between Cervarix, Gardasil and HPV-16 monovalent vaccine and HPV-associated cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse was 0·90 (95% CI: 0·56, 1·44). For the association between Gardasil and HPV-associated vulval/vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia grades 2-3, the overall OR and 95% CI was 2.25 (95% CI: 0·78, 6.50). Sample size and follow-up were limited.
CONCLUSIONS
There was no evidence that HPV vaccines are effective in preventing vaccine-type HPV associated pre-cancer in women with evidence of prior HPV exposure. Small effects of vaccination however cannot be excluded and a longer-term benefit in preventing re-infection remains possible.
Topics: Alphapapillomavirus; Anus Neoplasms; Cohort Studies; Female; Genital Neoplasms, Female; Human Papillomavirus Recombinant Vaccine Quadrivalent, Types 6, 11, 16, 18; Humans; Papillomavirus Vaccines; Precancerous Conditions; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 24595046
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0090348 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2015This is an updated version of a review first published in theCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 4, in 2011. Vulval intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) is a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This is an updated version of a review first published in theCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 4, in 2011. Vulval intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) is a pre-cancerous condition of the vulval skin and its incidence is increasing in women under 50 years. High-grade VIN (also called usual-type VIN (uVIN) or VIN 2/3 or high-grade vulval intraepithelial lesion) is associated with human papilloma virus (HPV) infection and may progress to vulval cancer, therefore is usually actively managed. There is no consensus on the optimal management of high-grade VIN; and the high morbidity and relapse rates associated with surgical interventions make less invasive interventions highly desirable.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of medical (non-surgical) interventions for high-grade VIN.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 3), MEDLINE and EMBASE (up to 30 March 2015). We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed non-surgical interventions in women diagnosed with high-grade VIN.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used Cochrane methodology with two review authors independently abstracting data and assessing risk of bias. Where possible, we synthesised data in meta-analyses using random effects methods.
MAIN RESULTS
Five trials involving 297 women with high-grade VIN (defined by trial investigators as VIN 2/3 or VIN 3 or 'high-grade' lesions) met our inclusion criteria: three trials assessed the effectiveness of topical imiquimod versus placebo; one assessed topical cidofovir versus topical imiquimod; and one assessed low- versus high-dose indole-3-carbinol in similar types of participants. Three trials were at a moderate to low risk of bias, two were at a potentially high risk of bias.Meta-analysis of the three trials comparing topical imiquimod 5% cream to placebo found that women in the active treatment group were more likely to show an overall response (complete and partial response) to treatment at five to six months compared with the placebo group (Risk Ratio (RR) 11.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.21 to 44.51; participants = 104; studies = 3; I(2) = 0%; high-quality evidence). A complete response at five to six months occurred in 36/62 (58%) and 0/42 (0%) participants in the active and placebo groups, respectively (RR 14.40, 95% CI 2.97 to 69.80; participants = 104; studies = 3; I(2) = 0%). A single trial reported 12-month follow-up, which revealed a sustained effect in overall response in favour of the active treatment arm at 12 months (RR 9.10, 95% CI 2.38 to 34.77; moderate-quality evidence), with 9/24 (38%) and 0/23 (0%) complete responses recorded in the active and placebo groups respectively. Progression to vulval cancer was also documented in this trial (one versus two participants in the active and placebo groups, respectively) and we assessed this evidence as low-quality. Only one trial reported adverse events, including erythema, erosion, pain and pruritis at the site of the lesion, which were more common in the imiquimod group. Dose reductions occurred more frequently in the active treatment group compared with the placebo group (19/47 versus 1/36 participants; RR 7.77, 95% CI 1.61 to 37.36; participants = 83; studies = 2; I(2) = 0%; high-quality evidence). Only one trial reported quality of life (QoL) and there were no significant differences between the imiquimod and placebo groups.For the imiquimod versus cidofovir trial, 180 women contributed data. The overall response at six months was similar for the imiquimod and cidofovir treatment groups with 52/91 (57%) versus 55/89 (62%) participants responding, respectively (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.18). A complete response occurred in 41 women in each group (45% and 46%, respectively; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.37). Although not statistically different, total adverse events were slightly more common in the imiquimod group of this trial with slightly more discontinuations occurring in this group. Longer term response data from this trial are expected.The small trial comparing two doses of indole-3-carbinol contributed limited data. We identified five ongoing randomised trials of various interventions for VIN.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Topical imiquimod appears to be a safe and effective treatment for high-grade VIN (uVIN), even though local side-effects may necessitate dose reductions. However, longer term follow-up data are needed to corroborate the limited evidence that response to treatment is sustained, and to assess any effect on progression to vulval cancer. Available evidence suggests that topical cidofovir may be a good alternative to imiquimod; however, more evidence is needed, particularly regarding the relative effectiveness on longer term response and progression. We await the longer-term response data and the results of the five ongoing trials.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Adult; Aminoquinolines; Anticarcinogenic Agents; Antineoplastic Agents; Carcinoma in Situ; Cidofovir; Cytosine; Female; Humans; Imiquimod; Indoles; Organophosphonates; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vulvar Neoplasms
PubMed: 26284429
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007924.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2011Vulval intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) is a pre-malignant condition of the vulval skin; its incidence is increasing in women under 50 years. VIN is graded histologically... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Vulval intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) is a pre-malignant condition of the vulval skin; its incidence is increasing in women under 50 years. VIN is graded histologically as low grade or high grade. High grade VIN is associated with infection with human papilloma virus (HPV) infection and may progress to invasive disease. There is no consensus on the optimal management of high grade VIN. The high morbidity and high relapse rate associated with surgical interventions call for a formal appraisal of the evidence available for less invasive but effective interventions for high grade VIN.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of medical interventions for high grade VIN.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 3), MEDLINE and EMBASE (up to September 2010). We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed medical interventions, in adult women diagnosed with high grade VIN.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently abstracted data and assessed risk of bias. Where possible the data were synthesised in a meta-analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
Four trials met our inclusion criteria: three assessed the effectiveness of topical imiquimod versus placebo in women with high grade VIN; one examined low versus high dose indole-3-carbinol in similar women. Meta-analysis of three trials found that the proportion of women who responded to treatment at 5 to 6 months was much higher in the group who received topical imiquimod than in the group who received placebo (relative risk (RR) = 11.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.21 to 44.51). A single trial showed similar results at 12 months in (RR = 9.10, 95% CI 2.38 to 34.77). Only one trial reported adverse events, which were more common in the imiquimod group. One trial found no significant differences in quality of life (QoL) or body image between the imiquimod and placebo groups.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Imiquimod appears to be effective, but its safety needs further examination. Its use is associated with side effects which are tolerable, but more extensive data on adverse effects are required. Long term follow-up should be mandatory in view of the known progression of high grade VIN to invasive disease. Alternative medical interventions, such as cidofovir, should be explored.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Adult; Aminoquinolines; Anticarcinogenic Agents; Antineoplastic Agents; Carcinoma in Situ; Female; Humans; Imiquimod; Indoles; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vulvar Neoplasms
PubMed: 21491403
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007924.pub2