Annals of internal medicine · 2026
Benefits and Harms of Immediate Versus Delayed Treatment of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade 2 : A Target Trial Emulation.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cheung Li C, Mao Fangya, Rydzak Greg, Wentzensen Nicolas, Poitras Nancy E, Lorey Thomas S, Castle Philip E
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 (CIN 2) is an equivocal diagnosis of cervical precancer, and appropriate management continues to be debated.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of immediate (by 6 months) versus delayed (after 6 months or no) treatment of CIN 2.
DESIGN: Observational emulation of a target trial of immediate versus delayed treatment, using inverse probability weighting (IPW) to adjust for baseline factors.
SETTING: Routine cervical screening at Kaiser Permanente Northern California.
PATIENTS: 12 012 women with CIN 2 found on initial biopsy from 2017 to 2023.
INTERVENTION: Immediate treatment (excision by 6 months after initial CIN 2 without interim surveillance by screening or colposcopy) versus delayed treatment (continued surveillance by screening or colposcopy, regardless of subsequent excision timing, or excision ≥6 months after initial CIN 2).
MEASUREMENTS: 3-year probability of potentially unnecessary excision (less severe than CIN 2 [<CIN 2]), and 3-year risks for CIN grade 3 or more severe (CIN 3+) or invasive cervical cancer after initial CIN 2.
RESULTS: Immediate treatment was associated with a higher 3-year probability of <CIN 2 on excision compared with delayed treatment (36.2% vs. 7.8%). The IPW-standardized 3-year risks for cancer (0.39% vs. 0.43%) and CIN 3+ (8.85% vs. 10.31%) were similar under the 2 management strategies.
LIMITATION: Lack of randomized assignment to interventions; cancer was rare.
CONCLUSION: Immediate treatment did not reduce 3-year cancer risk compared with delayed treatment after CIN 2. Delaying treatment avoided some potentially unnecessary excisions but women with CIN 2 with immediate or delayed care were still at risk for cancer and required monitoring.
PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of immediate (by 6 months) versus delayed (after 6 months or no) treatment of CIN 2.
DESIGN: Observational emulation of a target trial of immediate versus delayed treatment, using inverse probability weighting (IPW) to adjust for baseline factors.
SETTING: Routine cervical screening at Kaiser Permanente Northern California.
PATIENTS: 12 012 women with CIN 2 found on initial biopsy from 2017 to 2023.
INTERVENTION: Immediate treatment (excision by 6 months after initial CIN 2 without interim surveillance by screening or colposcopy) versus delayed treatment (continued surveillance by screening or colposcopy, regardless of subsequent excision timing, or excision ≥6 months after initial CIN 2).
MEASUREMENTS: 3-year probability of potentially unnecessary excision (less severe than CIN 2 [<CIN 2]), and 3-year risks for CIN grade 3 or more severe (CIN 3+) or invasive cervical cancer after initial CIN 2.
RESULTS: Immediate treatment was associated with a higher 3-year probability of <CIN 2 on excision compared with delayed treatment (36.2% vs. 7.8%). The IPW-standardized 3-year risks for cancer (0.39% vs. 0.43%) and CIN 3+ (8.85% vs. 10.31%) were similar under the 2 management strategies.
LIMITATION: Lack of randomized assignment to interventions; cancer was rare.
CONCLUSION: Immediate treatment did not reduce 3-year cancer risk compared with delayed treatment after CIN 2. Delaying treatment avoided some potentially unnecessary excisions but women with CIN 2 with immediate or delayed care were still at risk for cancer and required monitoring.
PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute.