MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414070924 · doi:10.31083/ceog36377

Natural History of Primary Vaginal Intraepithelial Neoplasia With and Without Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2025· article· en· W4414070924 on OpenAlexaff
Ugo Indraccolo, Chiara Borghi, Marta Gentili, Gennaro Scutiero, Emanuele Caselli, Alessandro Favilli

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsVernon Jubilee Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural historyConfidence intervalCervical intraepithelial neoplasiaMEDLINEMeta-analysisSeries (stratigraphy)Family history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Knowledge about evolution of treated and untreated primary vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia (VaIN) remains limited, as current guidelines recommend treatment. This study investigates the natural history of VaIN based on existing literature. Methods: This study is a systematic review and descriptive meta-analysis. We searched the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science (WoS), and Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) databases to identify clinical series reporting the no-regression rate(including persistence, recurrence, or progression events) of primary VaIN. We recorded data categorized by VaIN grade and treatment status. Clinical series that reported VaIN grade, follow-up time (median or mean of six months or more), treatment details, and whether treatment was performed were eligible for inclusion. Additionally, some internal hospital databases on VaIN were included. Data were pooled at each follow-up time point, using six-month intervals. From these pooled rates, trend curves were constructed to describe the natural history of treated (various therapies) and untreated low-grade and high-grade VaIN. Results: A total of 150 series were included in the data synthesis. Five subgroups were assessed for low-grade VaIN and twelve for high-grade VaIN. The estimated 5-year no-regression rate of untreated low-grade VaIN, predicted by trend curve, was 14.0% (95% confidence intervals (95% CI): 9.2%–44.0%), indicating that 86.0% of untreated low-grade VaIN would regress within 5-years. The 5-year no-regression rate for untreated high-grade VaIN, also predicted by trend curve, was 14.2% (95% CI: 10.2%–24.8%), indicating that 85.8% of untreated high-grade VaIN regress within 5-years. It cannot be determined to what extent treatment modifies the natural history of VaIN. Current assessments suggest that only low-level evidence is available on VaIN. Conclusion: A large proportion of untreated VaIN lesions, regardless of grade, would resolve after 5 years of follow-up, with at least 14% of lesions unlikely to resolve. Registration: The study has been registered on https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42023445810 (registration number: CRD42023445810).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical and Experimental Obstetrics & GynecologySame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207