. 2017 Oct 26;5(1):e45–e58. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3018(17)30149-2

Table 1.

Summary of studies reporting the association of ART use with high-risk HPV, cervical lesion outcomes and invasive cervical cancer incidence

	Location	Study period	Total sample	Mean or median age (IQR), years	ART users (%)	Cervical lesions
						Definition	Diagnostic method
High risk HPV prevalence
Zeier et al (2015)¹³	Western Cape, South Africa	2009–11	300	36 (ART); 31 (ART-naive)	68% initiated during follow-up^*	··	··
Rositch et al (2013)¹⁴	Rakai, Uganda	2007–10	96	35 (31–44)	0%^*	··	··
Minkoff et al (2010)¹⁵	5 cities, USA	1994–2002	286	NR	0%^*	··	··
Fife et al (2009)¹⁶	Puerto Rico/USA	2001–05	146	35	0%^*	··	··
Kelly et al (2017)¹⁷	Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso	2011–12	570	36 (31–41)	67%	··	··
Kelly et al (2017)¹⁷	Johannesburg, South Africa	2011–12	613	34 (30–40)	65%	··	··
Ezechi et al (2014)¹⁸	Ogun and Lagos, Nigeria	NR	220	37 (31–45)	72%	··	··
Reddy et al (2014)¹⁹	Lilongwe, Malawi	2011–12	294	36 (30–43)	85%	··	··
De Vuyst et al (2012)²⁰	Nairobi, Kenya	2009	497	38	75%	··	··
Jaquet et al (2012)²¹	Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire	Jun to Oct, 2010	254	36 (32–42)	75%	··	··
Veldhuijzen et al (2011)²²	Kigali, Rwanda	2006–09	124	27 (23–32)	40%	··	··
Menezes et al (2016)²³	Chennai, India	July to Aug, 2011	50	33	48%	··	··
Zhang et al (2014)²⁴	Yunnan, China	NR	301	34	64%	··	··
Mane et al (2012)²⁵	Pune, India	NR	277	33	56%	··	··
Aggarwal et al (2012)²⁶	Chandigarh, India	NR	130	34	75%	··	··
Rocha-Brischiliari et al (2014)²⁷	Maringa city, Brazil	Apr to Oct, 2011	178	Range: 18–66 years	79%	··	··
Dames et al (2014)²⁸	Nassau, Bahamas	Feb to Sep, 2008	165	40	81%	··	··
Grinsztejn et al (2009)²⁹	Rio de Janeiro, Brazil	1996–2006	634	36 (29–43)	68%	··	··
Konopnicki et al (2013)³⁰	Brussels, Belgium	2002–11	652	38 (31–45)	79%	··	··
Blitz et al (2013)³¹	11 cities, Canada	1993–2002	750	33 (28–38)	19%	··	··
HSIL-CIN2+ prevalence
Kelly et al (2017)¹⁷	Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso	2011–12	530	36 (31–41)	73%	HSIL-CIN2+	Histology
Kelly et al (2017)¹⁷	Johannesburg, South Africa	2011–12	566	34 (30–40)	65%	HSIL-CIN2+	Histology
De Vuyst et al (2012)²⁰	Nairobi, Kenya	2009	470	38	75%	HSIL-CIN2+	Histology
Memiah et al (2015)³²	Kiambu, Kenya	2009–10	686	52% <40 years	16%	HSIL-CIN2+	Histology
Huchko et al (2014)³³	Kisumu, Kenya	2007–10	3185	33 (29–39)	50%	HSIL-CIN2+	Histology
Mabeya et al (2012)³⁴	Eldoret, Kenya	NR	149	34	67%	HSIL-CIN2+	Histology
Ezechi et al (2014)³⁵	Ogun and Lagos, Nigeria	NR	490	37 (31–45)	76%	HSIL-CIN2+	Cytology
Firnhaber et al (2010)³⁶	Johannesburg, South Africa	NR	1010	34 (18–65)	65%	HSIL-CIN2+	Cytology
Mogtomo et al (2009)³⁷	Douala, Cameroon	NR	70	35	50%	HSIL-CIN2+	Cytology
Feng et al (2017)^†	Yunnan, China	2009	301	34	64%	HSIL-CIN2+	Histology
Sahasrabuddhe et al (2010)³⁸	Pune, India	2006–07	271	30 (27–34)	26%	HSIL-CIN2+	Histology
De Andrade et al (2011)³⁹	Rio de Janeiro, Brazil	1996–2007	340	34 (28–41)	26%	HSIL-CIN2+	Histology
Patrelli et al (2013)⁴⁰	Parma, Italy	1993–2010	194	41	66%	HSIL-CIN2+	Cytology
Kitchener et al (2007)⁴¹	6 cities, Europe	2000–04	1026	33	56–79%	HSIL-CIN2+	Cytology
SIL-CIN incidence
Minkoff et al (2010)¹⁵	5 cities, USA	1994–2002	286	NR	All ART initiators	Normal to ASCUS+	Cytology
Kelly et al (2017)¹⁷	Johannesburg, South Africa	2011–12	379	34 (30–40)	71% at end of follow-up	<CIN2 to CIN2/3	Histology
Adler et al (2012)⁵⁴	Soweto, South Africa	2003–10	767	33	2% at baseline; 17% initiation during follow-up	Normal to ASCUS	Cytology
Firnhaber et al (2012)⁵⁵	Johannesburg, South Africa	NR	326	35 (31–41)	71% at baseline	Normal to ASCUS+	Cytology
Kreitchmann et al (2013)⁵⁶	Porto Alegre, Brazil	1997–2007	349	32	38%	<LSIL to LSIL+,	Cytology
Sirera et al (2008)⁵⁷	Barcelona, Spain	1997–2006	127	35	71% at baseline	Normal to LSIL+	Cytology
Soncini et al (2007)⁵⁸	Parma, Italy	1993–2003	101	NR	43% through follow-up	Normal to LSIL+	Cytology
Lehtovirta et al (2006)⁵⁹	Helsinki, Finland	1989–2003	55	30–36	48% at baseline; 64% at follow-up	Normal to LSIL+	Cytology
Heard et al (2006)⁶⁰	Paris, France	1993–2005	298	33 (29–38)	49% through follow-up	Normal to ASCUS+	Cytology
Schuman et al (2003)⁶¹	4 cities, USA	1993–95	629	35	33% at baseline	Normal to LSIL+	Cytology
Ellerbrock et al (2000)⁶²	New York, USA	1991–96	328	47% <35 years	54% on ≥1 ARV during study period	Normal to ASCUS+	Cytology
Clifford et al (2016)⁶³	5 cities, Switzerland	1995–2013	1451	NR	54%	<CIN2 to CIN2/3	Histology
SIL progression
Blitz et al (2013)³¹	11 cities, Canada	1993–2002	326	33 (28–38)	19% at baseline; 64% by study end	ASCUS to any grade higher	Cytology
Adler et al (2012)⁵⁴	Soweto, South Africa	2003–10	1123	33	2% at baseline; 17% initiation during follow-up	Subsequent smear with worsening dysplasia	Cytology
Firnhaber et al (2012)⁵⁵	Johannesburg, South Africa	NR	326	35 (31–41)	71% at baseline	Normal to LSIL+; LSIL to HSIL+	Cytology
Schuman et al (2003)⁶¹	4 cities, USA	1993–95	629	35	33% at baseline	Normal/ASCUS to LSIL+; LSIL to HSIL	Cytology
Zeier et al (2012)⁶⁴	Western Cape, South Africa	2004–09	1048	33	18%	LSIL to HSIL+	Cytology
Omar et al (2011)⁶⁵	Soweto, South Africa	2003–10	1074	32 (28–37)	6% at baseline; 20% initiated during follow-up	Normal to LSIL+; LSIL to HSIL+/ASC-H	Cytology
Kim et al (2013)⁶⁶	New York, USA	1991–2011	245	37	NR	Normal to ASCUS+; ASCUS to LSIL+	Cytology
Paramsothy et al (2009)⁶⁷	4 cities, USA	1996–2000	537	34	47% during follow-up	Normal to ASCUS; ASCUS to LSIL; LSIL to HSIL	Cytology
Minkoff et al (2001)⁶⁸	6 cities, USA	1994–95	741	37	1% at baseline	Subsequent smear any grade higher than baseline	Cytology
Lillo et al (2001)⁶⁹	Milan, Italy	1995–97	163	34	46% through follow-up	Normal to LSIL+; LSIL to HSIL	Cytology
SIL or CIN regression
Minkoff et al (2010)¹⁵	5 cities, USA	1994–2002	286	NR	All ART initiators	SIL to lower grade	Cytology
Blitz et al (2013)³¹	11 cities, Canada	1993–2002	326	33 (28–38)	19% at baseline; 64% by study end	≥ASCUS to <ASCUS	Cytology
Adler et al (2012)⁵⁴	Soweto, South Africa	2003–10	1123	33	2% at baseline; 17% initiation during follow-up	Subsequent improvement in cytological results	Cytology
Schuman et al (2003)⁶¹	4 cities, USA	1993–95	629	35	33% at baseline	LSIL or HSIL to <LSIL	Cytology
Zeier et al (2012)⁶⁴	Western Cape, South Africa	2004–09	1048	33	18%	≥LSIL to <LSIL	Cytology
Paramsothy et al (2009)⁶⁷	4 cities, USA	1996–2000	537	34	47% during follow-up	HSIL to LSIL; LSIL to ASCUS; ASCUS to normal	Cytology
Minkoff et al (2001)⁶⁸	6 cities, USA	1994–95	741	37	1% at baseline	Lower grade abnormality than baseline	Cytology
Massad et al (2004)⁷⁰	6 cities, USA	1994–2002	202	38	22%	CIN1 to normal	Histology
Heard et al (2002)⁷¹	Paris, France	1993–99	168	33	56% through follow-up	Reversion to normal or from high to low grade	Cytology
Del Mistro et al (2004)⁷²	Vicenza and Padova, Italy	1994–2002	201	33	37%	Normal or lower SIL grade at subsequent exam	Cytology
Invasive cervical cancer incidence
Clifford et al (2016)⁶³	5 cities, Switzerland	1995–2013	80	NR	54%	<CIN2 to ICC	Unclear
Chen et al (2014)⁷³	Taiwan	2000–08	1360	32	28%	Incidence of CIS or ICC	Unclear
Guiguet et al (2009)⁷⁴	62 French university hospitals, France	1998–2006	14 406	39 (35–44)	17%	Incidence of ICC	ICD10

SIL diagnosed by cytology or CIN diagnosed by histology. Detailed description of studies in appendix (pp 2–5). HPV=human papillomavirus. HSIL=high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion. CIN=cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. ASCUS=atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. LSIL=low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion. ARV=antiretroviral. ART=antiretroviral therapy. ASC-H=atypical squamous cells-cannot exclude HSIL. CIS=carcinoma in situ. NR=not reported. ICD10=International Classification of Diseases version 10. ICC=invasive cervical cancer.

Studies that included women who initiated ART at enrolment.

^†

Personal communication.