Chlamydia Trachomatis Infection-Associated Risk of Cervical Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As whether Chlamydia trachomatis infection increases the risk of cervical cancer is controversial in the literature, we performed a meta-analysis.Based on a comprehensive search of publications in the Medline, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases, we identified and extracted data from all relevant articles examining C. trachomatis infection and the risk of cervical cancer. The quality of each included study was assessed according to the 9-star Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The strength of association between the C. trachomatis and risk of cervical cancer was estimated by odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). This review was registered at PROSPERO with registration No. CRD42014015672. A total of 22 studies with 4291 cervical cancer cases and 7628 controls were identified. Overall, C. trachomatis was significantly linked to increased cervical cancer risk in prospective studies (OR = 2.21, 95% CI: 1.88-2.61, P < 0.001), as well as in retrospective studies (OR = 2.19, 95% CI: 1.74-2.74, P < 0.001). Additionally, with a multivariate logistic regression analysis adjusted for HPV and age, C. trachomatis infection was identified as an independent predictor of cervical cancer in 11 studies (OR = 1.76, 95% CI: 1.03-3.01, P = 0.04). Coinfection of human papilloma virus and C. trachomatis has a higher risk of cervical cancer (OR = 4.03, 95% CI: 3.15-5.16, P < 0.001). A subgroup analysis based on histological type indicated an elevated risk for both squamous cell carcinoma (OR = 2.21, 95% CI: 2.00-2.45, P < 0.001), and adenocarcinoma (OR = 1.61, 95% CI: 1.21-2.15, P = 0.001), in associated with C. trachomatis. Subgroup analysis by where C. trachomatis infection was detected showed a significantly higher risk of cervical cancer associated with C. trachomatis infection detected in serum (OR = 2.20, 95% CI: 2.01-2.42, P < 0.001), cervical tissue blocks (OR = 2.88, 95% CI: 1.21-6.83, P = 0.02), and cervical secretion (OR = 2.71, 95% CI: 1.41-5.20, P = 0.003), especially in serum with no obvious heterogeneity.In conclusion, our novel data demonstrate that individuals infected with C. trachomatis have a higher risk of cervical cancer. Therefore, it is necessary to expand C. trachomatis infection screening and treat women with C. trachomatis promptly, particularly those with human papilloma virus infections. This approach will not only protect against pelvic inflammatory disease and infertility, but may also prevent cervical cancer.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.035 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".