The Natural History of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grades 1, 2, and 3: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to obtain an updated overview of regression, persistence, and progression rates of conservatively managed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 (CIN 1)/CIN 2/CIN 3. METHODS: Data sources were MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane (January 1, 1973-April 14, 2020). Two reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. To estimate outcome rates, we pooled proportions of the individual study results using random-effects meta-analysis, resulting in point estimates and corresponding 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was quantified by the I2 and τ2 measures. RESULTS: Eighty-nine studies were included, 63 studies on CIN 1 (n = 6,080-8,767), 42 on CIN 2 (n = 2,909-3,830), and 7 on CIN 3 (n = 245-351). The overall regression, persistence, and progression to CIN 2 or worse and CIN 3 or worse rates for women with conservatively managed CIN 1 were 60% (95% CI = 55-65, I2 = 92%), 25% (95% CI = 20-30, I2 = 94%), 11% (95% CI = 8-13, I2 = 89%), and 2% (95% CI = 1-3, I2 = 82%), respectively. The overall regression, persistence, and progression rates for CIN 2 were 55% (95% CI = 50-60, I2 = 85%), 23% (95% CI = 19-28, I2 = 83%), and 19% (95% CI = 15-23, I2 = 88%), respectively. Finally, for CIN 3, these were 28% (95% CI = 17-41, I2 = 68%), 67% (95% CI = 36-91, I2 = 84%), and 2% (95% CI = 0-25, I2 = 95%), respectively. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 regression was significantly higher in women 30 years or younger and high-risk human papillomavirus-negative women (66%, 95% CI = 62-70, I2 = 76%; 94%, 95% CI = 84-99, I2 = 60%). Only 2/7,180 (0.03%) and 10/3,037 (0.3%) of the CIN 1 and CIN 2 cases progressed to cervical cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Most CIN 1/CIN 2 will regress spontaneously in less than 24 months, with the highest rates in high-risk human papillomavirus-negative and young women, whereas progression to cancer is less than 0.5%. Conservative management should be considered, especially in fertile women and with expected high compliance. Given the heterogeneity in regression rates of high-grade histology, this should be classified as CIN 2 or CIN 3 to guide management.
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 | 0.017 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.040 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".