The effect of condom use on cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade I (CIN I)

Condom use in prevention of Human Papillomavirus infections and cervical neoplasia: systematic review of longitudinal studies

OBJECTIVES

Based on cross-sectional studies, the data on protection from Human Papillomavirus (HPV) infections related to using male condoms appear inconsistent. Longitudinal studies are more informative for this purpose. We undertook a systematic review of longitudinal studies on the effectiveness of male condoms in preventing HPV infection and cervical neoplasia.

METHODS

We searched PubMed using MeSH terms for articles published until May 2013. Articles were included if they studied a change in non-immunocompromized women's cervical HPV infection or cervical lesion status along with the frequency of condom use.

RESULTS

In total, 384 abstracts were retrieved. Eight studies reported in 10 articles met the inclusion criteria for the final review. Four studies showed a statistically significantly protective effect of consistent condom use on HPV infection and on regression of cervical neoplasia. In the remaining four studies, a protective effect was also observed for these outcomes, although it was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent condom use appears to offer a relatively good protection from HPV infections and associated cervical neoplasia. Advice to use condoms might be used as an additional instrument to prevent unnecessary colposcopies and neoplasia treatments in cervical screening, and to reduce the risk of cervical cancer.

Use of various contraceptives and human papillomavirus 16 and 18 infections in women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

The aim of the study was to evaluate the frequency of human papillomavirus (HPV) 16 and 18 infections in patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) according to the use of various contraceptive methods. In a study group of 1435 patients with histologically proven CIN, among whom 391 (27.2%) used no contraception, 44 (3.1%) used barrier methods, 705 (49.1%) used oral contraceptives and 295 (20.7%) used an intrauterine device (IUD), the presence of HPV infection was evaluated by DNA in situ hybridization. HPV 16 or 18 infection was present in 666 (46.4%) of all patients in 348 (49.4%) patients who used oral contraceptives, in 169 (43.2%) patients with no contraception, in 128 (43.4%) patients with an IUD and in 21 (47.7%) patients who used barrier methods. There were no significant differences in HPV 16 and 18 infection frequencies among all four groups of patients regarding the contraception method used.

Outcomes of patients who participate in randomized controlled trials compared to similar patients receiving similar interventions who do not participate

BACKGROUND

Some people believe that patients who take part in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) face risks that they would not face if they opted for non-trial treatment. Others think that trial participation is beneficial and the best way to ensure access to the most up-to-date physicians and treatments. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 1, 2005.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of patient participation in RCTs ('trial effects') independent both of the effects of the clinical treatments being compared ('treatment effects') and any differences between patients who participated in RCTs and those who did not. We aimed to compare similar patients receiving similar treatment inside and outside of RCTs.

SEARCH STRATEGY

In March 2007, we searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Methodology Register, SciSearch and PsycINFO for potentially relevant studies. Our search yielded 7586 new references. In addition, we reviewed the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized studies and cohort studies with data on clinical outcomes of RCT participants and similar patients who received similar treatment outside of RCTs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, assessed study quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 30 new non-randomized cohort studies (45 comparisons): no new RCTs were found. This update now includes five RCTs (yielding 6 comparisons) and 80 non-randomized cohort studies (130 comparisons), with 86,640 patients treated in RCTs and 57,205 patients treated outside RCTs. In the randomised studies, patients were invited to participate in an RCT or not; these comparisons provided limited information because of small sample sizes (a total of 412 patients) and the nature of the questions they addressed. When the results of RCTs and non-randomized cohorts that reported dichotomous outcomes were combined, there were 98 comparisons; there was also heterogeneity (P < 0.00001, I(2) = 42.2%) between studies. No statistical significant differences were found for 85 of the 98 comparisons. Eight comparisons reported statistically significant better outcomes for patients treated within RCTs, and five comparisons reported statistically significant worse outcomes for patients treated within RCTs. There was significant heterogeneity (P < 0.00001, I(2) = 58.2%) among the 38 continuous outcome comparisons. No statistically significant differences were found for 30 of the 38 comparisons. Three comparisons reported statistically significant better outcomes for patients treated within RCTs, and five comparisons reported statistically significant worse outcomes for patients treated within RCTs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review indicates that participation in RCTs is associated with similar outcomes to receiving the same treatment outside RCTs. These results challenge the assertion that the results of RCTs are not applicable to usual practice.

Outcomes of patients who participate in randomised controlled trials compared to similar patients receiving similar interventions who do not participate

BACKGROUND

Some people believe that patients who take part in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) face risks that they would not face if they opted for non-trial treatment. Others think that trial participation is beneficial and the best way to ensure access to the most up to date physicians and treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of patient participation in RCTs ('trial effects') independent both of the effects of the clinical treatments being compared ('treatment effects') and any differences between patients who participated in RCTs and those who did not.

SEARCH STRATEGY

In May 2001, we searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Methodology Register, SciSearch and PsycINFO for potentially relevant studies. Our search yielded over 10,000 references. In addition, we reviewed the reference lists of relevant articles and wrote to over 250 investigators to try to obtain further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised studies and cohort studies with data on clinical outcomes of RCT participants and similar patients who received similar treatment outside of RCTs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion, assessed study quality and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five randomised studies (yielding 6 comparisons) and 50 non-randomised cohort studies (85 comparisons), with 31,140 patients treated in RCTs and 20,380 patients treated outside RCTs. In the randomised studies, patients were invited to participate in an RCT or not; these comparisons provided limited information because of small sample sizes (a total of 412 patients) and the nature of the questions they addressed. There was statistically significant heterogeneity (P < 0.002, I(2) = 36.2%) among the 73 dichotomous outcome comparisons; none of the potential explanatory factors we investigated helped to explain this heterogeneity. No statistically significant differences were found for 63 of the 73 comparisons. Eight comparisons reported statistically significant better outcomes for patients treated within RCTs, and two comparisons reported statistically significant worse outcomes for patients treated within RCTs. There were no statistically significant differences in heterogeneity (P = 0.53, I(2) = 0%) or in outcomes (SMD 0.01, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.12) of patients treated within and outside RCTs in the 18 comparisons which had used continuous outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review indicates that participation in RCTs is not associated with greater risks than receiving the same treatment outside RCTs. These results challenge the assertion that the results of RCTs are not applicable to usual practice.

Treatment of anogenital warts

The treatment of anogenital warts has long been unsatisfactory, with high treatment failure rates and relapse rates. It would seem that a good cell-mediated immune response is important for successful treatment, and the development of immune response modifiers such as Imiquimod give hope for an improved outcome for many patients.

Anogenital warts and condom use--a survey of information giving

OBJECTIVE

To examine information giving by genitourinary medicine (GUM) consultants about the use of condoms for patients with anogenital warts (AGW).

METHOD

228 GUM consultants in the UK and Ireland were sent a questionnaire concerning the information about condom use which they usually discuss with patients with AGW. The survey was carried out in 1994.

RESULTS

There was a 46% response rate. Most consultants indicated giving information specifically with regard to the prevention of transmission of human papilloma virus (HPV), and not only in the context of safe sex. With regard to current AGW, consultants were more likely to discuss, than not to discuss, use of condoms with patients with regular sexual partners in terms of benefit, uncertain benefit, or no benefit. However, no significant difference in the likelihood of discussing, or not discussing, these issues was found for current AGW for patients without regular partners. For both groups, benefit of using condoms for current AGW was more likely to be discussed than no benefit. The majority of consultants indicated that they would discuss condom use after disappearance of AGW as being of uncertain benefit. However, many consultants also indicated discussing use of condoms for a specific period or an indefinite period of time, including many of those who specific discussing uncertain beneficial use of condoms after disappearance of AGW. The most common duration of condom use chosen for discussion was until 3 months after disappearance of AGW.

CONCLUSION

GUM consultants vary in the information they give about condom use specifically to prevent transmission of HPV. This survey suggests a need for evaluation by GUM physicians of management guidelines relating to information given about condom use for AGW, including utilising the available scientific evidence as well as dealing with issues of uncertainty.

Genitoanal papillomavirus infection: diagnostic and therapeutic objectives in the light of current epidemiological observations

During the past decade a wide span of heterogeneity has been demonstrated for human papillomaviruses (HPVs), and some basic properties of the HPV genome have been revealed. The use of hybridization assays for HPV DNA detection in infected epithelia, and the recent introduction of synthetic HPV peptides for detection of type-specific circulating antibodies, have resulted in a major rethinking of HPV epidemiology. Recent data indicate that various HPVs may be transmitted perinatally during early infancy and that a long latency with periodic reactivation seems to be quite common. The present review attempts to assess recent epidemiological data with the concept of genitoanal papillomavirus infection (GPVI) as a predominantly sexually transmitted disease. Some diagnostic and therapeutic aspects are outlined with a pragmatic approach to the clinical relevance of GPVI.