Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Trichomonas vaginalis infection and risk of cervical neoplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Andarz Fazlollahpour-Naghibi ,

    Contributed equally to this work with: Andarz Fazlollahpour-Naghibi, Kimia Bagheri

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine Research Center, Health Research Institute, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran

    ⨯
  • Kimia Bagheri ,

    Contributed equally to this work with: Andarz Fazlollahpour-Naghibi, Kimia Bagheri

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft

    Affiliation Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine Research Center, Health Research Institute, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran

    ⨯
  • Mustafa Almukhtar,

    Roles Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Harlem Medical Center, Bridgeview, IL, United States of America

    ⨯
  • Seyed Reza Taha,

    Roles Data curation, Investigation, Methodology

    Affiliation Oncopathology Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    ⨯
  • Mahdieh Shariat Zadeh,

    Roles Data curation, Investigation, Methodology

    Affiliation Oncopathology Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    ⨯
  • Kimia Behzad Moghadam,

    Roles Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology

    Affiliation Independent Researcher, Former University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, CA, United States of America

    ⨯
  • Mehrdad Jafari Tadi,

    Roles Investigation, Methodology, Software

    Affiliation School of Medicine, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    ⨯
  • Safoura Rouholamin,

    Roles Investigation, Methodology

    Affiliation Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

    ⨯
  • Maryam Razavi,

    Roles Investigation, Methodology

    Affiliation Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Zahedan, Iran

    ⨯
  • Mahdi Sepidarkish ,

    Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodology, Software, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    mahdi.sepidarkish@gmail.com (MS); alirostami1984@gmail.com (AR)

    Affiliation Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran

    ⨯
  • Ali Rostami

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    mahdi.sepidarkish@gmail.com (MS); alirostami1984@gmail.com (AR)

    Affiliation Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine Research Center, Health Research Institute, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran

    ⨯

Abstract

Objectives

The evidence in the literature regarding the relationship between Trichomonas vaginalis (TV) infection and cervical neoplasia is conflicting. The main aim of this study was to evaluate the magnitude of the risk of cervical neoplasia associated with TV infection.

Methods

A meta-analysis of observational studies, which provided raw data on the association of TV infection with cervical neoplasia, was performed. For this aim, we searched scientific databases (PubMed/Medline, Scopus, the Web of Sciences, and Embase) from inception to March 15, 2023. A random-effects model was applied by Stata 17.0 to calculate the pooled and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), including subgroup, sensitivity, and cumulative analyses to explore sources of heterogeneity.

Results

Of the 2584 records initially identified, 35 eligible studies contributed data for 67,856 women with cervical neoplasia, and 933,697 healthy controls from 14 countries were included. The pooled (2.15; 1.61–2.87; I2 = 87.7%) and adjusted (2.17; 1.82–2.60; I2 = 31.27%) ORs indicated a significant positive association between TV infection and the development of cervical neoplasia. There was no significant change in pooled and adjusted ORs by applying sensitivity and cumulative analyses, indicating the robustness of our findings. The pooled OR was significant in most sub-group analyses. There was no publication bias in the included studies.

Conclusion

Our findings indicated that women with a TV infection are at significantly greater risk of cervical neoplasia. Future research, particularly longitudinal and experimental studies, should be done to better understand the various aspects of this association.

Citation: Fazlollahpour-Naghibi A, Bagheri K, Almukhtar M, Taha SR, Zadeh MS, Moghadam KB, et al. (2023) Trichomonas vaginalis infection and risk of cervical neoplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 18(7): e0288443. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288443

Editor: Andrea Giannini, Sapienza University of Rome: Universita degli Studi di Roma La Sapienza, ITALY

Received: May 4, 2023; Accepted: June 27, 2023; Published: July 12, 2023

Copyright: © 2023 Fazlollahpour-Naghibi et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding: The author(s) received no specific funding for this work

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Cervical cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer deaths among women worldwide [1]. Based on global estimates in 2020, it ranks as the 4th most frequent form of cancer and the 4th major cause of cancer mortality in women [1]. More than 0.5 million cases and 0.3 million deaths have been reported in 2018 in relation to cervical cancer [2]. The most prevalent type of cervical cancer is squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) [3]. Long-term infection with the human papillomavirus (HPV) is the primary factor contributing to cervical SCC’s development [4]. Pap smear (cytology) of the cervix with HPV testing is performed in high-risk women for cervical cancer (like SCC) screening and diagnosis [5]. In the early stages of SCC, precancerous lesions are referred to as squamous intraepithelial lesions (SIL) or cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), which is categorized according to the severity of dysplasia as either low-grade or high-grade (CIN1/LSIL and CIN2-3/HSIL, respectively) [6–8]. There may, however, be some morphological characteristics that are unclear for CIN/SIL classification based on the quality of the sample. In this situation, the “atypical squamous cells” (ASCs) category is used, which can be classified into atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) or high-grade cannot be ruled out (ASC-H) [9]. While high-grade lesions need management once they get confirmed with histology, monitoring and follow-up are enough for low-grade lesions because of their minimal chance of progressing into high-grade lesions and cancer [5, 10]. For this reason, it is essential to investigate the factors that contribute to the underlying processes that are involved in the development of cervical neoplasia in order to reduce the risk of cervical cancer and improve the effectiveness of treatments for the disease.

Even though HPV is an essential and recognized factor in abnormalities and cancer of the cervix, it is not a sufficient cause. There are several risk factors associated with HPV-associated cervical cancer, such as age at first sexual contact, the number of partners, smoking, oral contraceptives, the presence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), Herpes simplex, and co-infection with other genital or sexually transmitted infections (STIs) [11]. It is unknown why most women with HPV infection do not develop cervical neoplasia or cancer. It may be related to a lack of knowledge on vaginal infections impact on the evolution of cervical cancer [12]. It is possible that women who are infected with HPV and also have a co-infection have a decreased likelihood of spontaneous HPV clearance and progression to cancer. Epidemiological evidence shows that Trichomonas vaginalis (TV) infections may increase the risk of cervical cancer in infected women [13–15].

As a flagellated protozoan parasite, TV is capable of infecting both the male and female reproductive systems [16]. Approximately 270 million cases of trichomoniasis are reported each year worldwide, which is the most common non-viral STI [17]. The most significant symptoms in women are a foamy, yellow-green, unpleasant smell of vaginal discharge with genital irritation, itching, as well as pain during sexual intercourse and urination, but most of the women are asymptomatic, which affects women’s health outcomes [18]. Vaginal, cervical, urethral, and pelvic inflammation and pregnancy complications such as ectopic pregnancy, preterm delivery, and infertility are the complications that can be caused by TV infection [19, 20]. Although the relationship between TV infection and the development of cervical cancer is still not entirely understood, it is thought that the inflammatory response is the key factor [21, 22]. Inflammation is thought to make it easier for HPV to enter the epithelium’s basal layer. Thus, viral DNA is incorporated into the host genome. Moreover, TV infection could overexpress viral tumorigenesis, which helps activate cancer-causing pathways [23].

There are several clinical and observational studies evaluating the association between TV infection and cervical neoplasia [24–29]. A significant association has been shown in a combined analysis of 24 studies, which most of them were case reports or case series [30]; moreover, a meta-analysis of 17 observational studies in 2018 demonstrated a positive association between TV and the development of cervical cancer [31]. In this study, we determined whether the results of the new studies added had any impact on the results of the previous meta-analysis. As a result, in order to acquire a more in-depth understanding of the potential connection between TV infection and cervical neoplasia, we updated the previous meta-analysis.

Materials and methods

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) (S1 Checklist) and the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guidelines were followed for this systematic review and meta-analysis [32, 33]. In this study, cervical neoplasia was defined as cervical intraepithelial neoplasia ranging from atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) to invasive cancer confirmed by histopathological methods.

Search strategy and study selection

Two researchers (A.F.N. and K.B.) did a comprehensive systematic search in international scientific databases, including PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase, for all peer-reviewed, published studies assessing the relationship between TV infection and cervical neoplasia from database inception to March 15, 2023. We did not use any language, geographic, or date restrictions. For database searches, the following Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and keywords were combined using Boolean operators (i.e., "OR" and/or "AND"): "Trichomonas vaginalis", "Trichomonas vaginitis", "Trichomonas infections", "Trichomoniasis", "Trichomonas", "sexually transmitted infection", "cervical cancer", "cervical carcinoma", "cervical neoplasm", "cervical abnormality", "cervical dysplasia", "cancer of the cervix", "carcinoma of the cervix", and "cervical intraepithelial neoplasia" (S1 Fig). Additionally, the first 20 pages of Google Scholar and the reference list of relevant studies, including meta-analyses, were reviewed to ensure that no publications, such as gray literature, were missed. ’Google Translate’ was used to translate articles from other languages into English. Duplicate citations were removed after exporting by EndNote Reference Manager X8.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

After deleting duplicates, three trained researchers (K.B., K.B.M., and M.J.T.) independently screened the titles and abstracts and also evaluated the full-text of articles for eligibility. Ambiguous articles were examined by the lead investigator (AR). All the inconsistencies were resolved through discussion. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they investigated the correlation between TV infection and cervical neoplasia using a cross-sectional, cohort, or case-control design; gave a clear explanation of the methods for diagnosis of TV infection and cervical neoplasia; and had sufficient data to calculate the odds ratio (OR) or relative risk (RR) with 95% a confidence interval (95% CI). Studies that evaluated the association following the treatment, conference abstracts, reviews, systematic reviews, editorials, case reports, case series, and papers with not available full-text were excluded. In this meta-analysis, if multiple studies reported on the same population or datasets, the most recent or comprehensive study was chosen for inclusion.

Data extraction and quality assessment

Three independent investigators (A.F.N., S.R.T., and M.S.) performed data extraction from each relevant study. Consulting with the lead investigator (A. R.) helped resolve any disputes. The following information was extracted (if available): first author’s name, publication year, country, geographic region, type of study, diagnostic method for TV infection, number of women with cervical neoplasia as cases, number of women without cervical neoplasia as control group, number of infected women in case and control groups. Where available, adjusted ORs were extracted and used for meta-analysis to reduce confounding, as recommended by the Cochrane Handbook [34]. According to extractable data in included studies, we categorized cervical neoplasia into the following categories: (1) ASC-US; (2) ASC-H; (3) LSIL/CIN1; (4) HSIL/CIN2/CIN3; and (5) invasive cancer. The risk of bias for each study was independently assessed by two investigators using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools for cross-sectional, case-control, and cohort studies, and each study was classified as having a low, moderate, or high risk of bias, as recommended for these tools [35–37].

Data synthesis and statistical analysis

Meta-analysis was performed with Stata software version 17 (STATA Corp., College Station, TX, USA). For all tests, two-sided P-values were determined, with P-values less than 0.05 considered statistically significant. Summary pooled and adjusted ORs and related 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model (REM) for combining results across studies, which incorporates between- and within-study variance [38]. We used REM because heterogeneity was expected. Cochran’s Q test and I2 statistics were applied to measure between-study heterogeneity. An I2 value more than 75% was considered significant heterogeneity [39]. We also used subgroup and meta-regression analyses to determine the heterogeneity source. For this purpose, subgroup analyses were performed according to publication year (before 2005, 2006 to 2015, and 2016 to 2023), type of study (cross-sectional, case-control, and cohort studies), diagnostic method of TV infection (polymerase chain reaction (PCR), cytology, microscopy, and other), WHO-defined geographical region (Middle-East and Africa, Europe and North America, South America, Western Pacific, and South-East Asia), country’s income level (high, upper middle, and lower middle), and risk of bias for studies (low and moderate). Sensitivity analyses were performed by excluding individual studies to examine the robustness of the results and the effect of each study on the estimated ORs. Cumulative meta-analyses were applied to determine the reliability of the estimated ORs. Publication bias was evaluated using the Egger test and visual inspection of funnel plots [40].

Results

Study selection and characteristics

As shown in the PRISMA flow diagram (Fig 1), our initial search in databases, Google Scholar, and bibliographies of relevant studies identified a total of 2584 records. Following the removal of 865 duplicates, an extra 1626 records were also excluded after reviewing their titles and abstracts. Ninety-three studies were eligible for full-text review. Of these, 58 articles were excluded due to missing crucial data or failing to meet the study’s inclusion criteria, thus leaving a total of 35 eligible articles [22–29, 41–67]. The studies included in the meta-analysis, published from 1985 to 2021, comprised 67,856 women with cervical neoplasia in different stages and 933,697 healthy controls. Of the 35 studies, 11 were conducted in the Western Pacific [24, 28, 29, 47, 48, 57, 59, 62–65], 9 in Europe and North America [27, 41–44, 46, 49, 51, 52], 7 in South America [23, 26, 50, 54, 55, 66, 67], 4 in South-East Asia [22, 56, 58, 60], and 4 in the Middle East and Africa [25, 45, 53, 61]. All of these studies were observational: 20 case-control studies [22, 25, 41, 42, 44–51, 54, 58, 61–65, 67], 10 cross-sectional studies [23, 24, 26–28, 55, 57, 59, 60, 66], and five cohort studies [29, 43, 52, 53, 56]. TV infection was assessed by cytology in 13 studies [27, 29, 43, 45, 47–49, 52, 56, 58, 61, 62, 67], PCR-based methods in nine studies [23, 25, 26, 41, 53–55, 59, 66], microscopy in eight studies [22, 24, 28, 42, 44, 50, 60, 63], and other methods (hanging drop and medical reports) in five studies [46, 51, 57, 64, 65]. Based on methodological quality, 12 and 23 studies were categorized as moderate and low risk of bias studies, respectively (Table 1). The main characteristics of the included studies are summarized in Table 1. Considering stages of cervical neoplasia, extractable data were available for ASC-US in seven studies, for ASC-H in four studies, for LGSIL/CIN1 in 14 studies, for HGSIL/CIN2/CIN3 in 17 studies, and for invasive cancer in nine studies.

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 1. PRISMA flow chart showing study selection process.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288443.g001

thumbnail
Download:
Table 1. Characteristics of included studies.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288443.t001

Synthesis of results

As shown in Table 2, the pooled analysis of 35 studies yielded a summary crude OR of 2.15 (95% CI = 1.61–2.87), indicating that TV infection was significantly associated with an increased risk of cervical neoplasia. A substantial heterogeneity (χ2 = 553.21; I2 = 87.7%) was observed between the studies. The sensitivity analysis indicated that the exclusion of any of the studies did not have a significant impact on the pooled OR (range: minimum 2.01, maximum 2.27; S2 Fig), revealing the high stability of our results. Cumulative analysis indicated that except for the first study in 1985, the pooled OR was significant for other studies (S3 Fig). Employing the Egger’s regression test and Funnel plot, we found there is no publication bias in the studies included (β = -0.71, 95% CI: -1.67, 0.25; p-value = 0.143; S4 Fig). Considering different stages of cervical neoplasia REM, indicated TV infection is significantly associated with ASC-US (OR, 2.88; 95% CI, 2.31–3.59), LGSIL/CIN1 (OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.26–4.23) and invasive cancer (OR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.11–5.09).

thumbnail
Download:
Table 2. Sub-group analysis of the pooled prevalence and odds ratios for the association between Trichomonas vaginalis and cervical neoplasia.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288443.t002

Subgroup analysis considering type of studies indicated significant positive associations in case-control (OR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.81–3.19; χ2 = 50.34; I2 = 67.9%) and cohort (OR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.92–3.34; χ2 = 3.86; I2 = 16.01%) studies, while the association was not significant in cross-sectional studies (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 0.69–3.61; χ2 = 303.67; I2 = 94.18%). With regard to geographical regions, studies from regions of the Middle East and Africa (OR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.05–4.15; χ2 = 3.35; I2 = 0.0%), Europe and north America (OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.29–2.63; χ2 = 18.46; I2 = 63.78%), Western pacific (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 2.35–3.56; χ2 = 323.39; I2 = 92.1%), South east Asia (OR, 2.89; 95% CI, 2.35–3.56; χ2 = 4.01; I2 = 0.0%) demonstrated significant association, while studies from South America showed non-significant results (OR, 2.81; 95% CI, 0.72–11.02; χ2 = 54.06; I2 = 91.13%). According to diagnostic methods for detection of TV infection, subgroup analysis indicated significant association in studies that used cytological (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.49–2.51; χ2 = 23.19; I2 = 42.35%), microscopic (OR, 2.71; 95% CI, 1.37–5.32; χ2 = 103.08; I2 = 89.32%), and other (culture and medical records) (OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.11–3.92; χ2 = 29.52; I2 = 87.25%), while studies that used PCR showed a non-significant association (OR, 2.16; 95% CI, 0.76–6.13; χ2 = 52.89; I2 = 91.32%). The association was significant in all subgroup analyses based on publication year, income levels and risk of biases. More details on subgroup analyses are presented in Table 3.

thumbnail
Download:
Table 3. The relationship between Trichomonas vaginalis and cervical neoplasia based on stage of abnormality.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288443.t003

Thirteen studies have reported adjusted OR [24, 25, 29, 41, 43, 47–52, 54, 56], a REM on these studies also indicated significant positive association between TV infection and cervical neoplasia (aOR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.82–2.60; χ2 = 17.97; I2 = 31.27%; Fig 2). Employing the Egger’s regression test and Funnel plot, we found there is no publication bias in the studies included (β = 0.67, 95% CI: -1.05, 2.40; p-value = 0.411; S5 Fig). Cumulative analysis indicated that, the pooled adjusted OR was significant throughout all the years (S6 Fig). Sensitivity analysis showed that the estimates of the pooled adjusted OR range from 2.04 (95% CI: 1.71–2.42) to 2.30 (95% CI: 1.96–2.70), suggesting that no one study is substantially influencing the pooled estimate (S7 Fig).

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 2. Forest plot of adjusted ORs, pooled with random effects, regarding the association between Trichomonas vaginalis infection and cervical neoplasia.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288443.g002

Discussion

Cervical cancer incidence is rising quickly, and cervical cancer deaths are anticipated to be almost 0.5 million by 2030 globally [68]. Accordingly, this cancer is a serious health concern worldwide. Traditional treatments, such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery, can be given for cervical cancer at an early stage, but these treatments are not efficient for late-stage cancer [69]. The recurrence rate of cervical cancer after surgery in CIN 2+ is 5–10% at 5 years [70–72]. Additionally, these treatments are unsafe. An increased risk of preterm delivery, lower birth weight, and preterm premature rupture of the membrane before 37 weeks of pregnancy have been shown to be linked with surgical treatment of the CIN [73]. As a result, despite major therapy advancements, cervical cancer mortality remains high, and the 5-year survival rate for women with advanced-stage cervical cancer is just 17% [74, 75]. These findings show the importance of finding gaps in cervical cancer risk factors to prevent this cancer, which has a high mortality rate.

In the present updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the association between TV infection and cervical neoplasia, we found that women with TV infection had a significantly higher risk of developing cervical cancer. This significant correlation was found in most subgroup analyses, including cohort and case-control studies, most geographical regions, all time periods, and studies with both moderate and low risk of bias. Consistent with our findings, a previous meta-analysis study undertaken by Yang et al. [31] demonstrated a significant potential role of TV in the development of cervical neoplasia and cancer. Furthermore, a combined analysis in 1994 revealed that the risk of cervical neoplasia doubled in the presence of this parasite infection [30].

Infection with TV could also be related to the development of other types of urogenital abnormalities, including prostate and bladder cancers [76, 77]. A previous meta-analysis investigated the correlation between prostate cancer and TV infection as well and found that patients with TV infection had a 1.17-fold higher risk of prostate cancer, indicating the potential role of TV infection in the development of different types of cancer [77]. Our results are consistent with those of other meta-analyses, which also found that other STIs play a significant role in cervical cancer development. For example, Chlamydia trachomatis infection was significantly correlated with cervical cancer in meta-analyses [78–80]. In another study, genital mycoplasma infection was reported to be linked to HPV-related cervical neoplasia. They demonstrated that Mycoplasma genitalium and Ureaplasma urealyticum were correlated with an increased risk of infection with high-risk HPV viruses. A significantly elevated risk of abnormal cervical cytopathology has also been linked to Ureaplasma urealyticum, Ureaplasma parvum, and Mycoplasma hominis [81]. It has also been shown that HIV infection is linked to slower clearance and higher HPV infection rates. As a result of increased HPV persistence in HIV patients, higher rates of LSIL and HSIL and an increased incidence of cervical cancer were observed [82]. Even though epidemiological studies found a positive correlation between HSV-2 infection and cervical cancer risk, subgroup analysis in cohort studies did not find a significant association between HSV-2 infection and cervical cancer [83]. These findings indicate that cervical cancer progression is influenced by STIs other than HPV. The role and mechanism of these infections in cervical cancer need to be studied further.

Although the exact mechanisms by which TV causes cervical cancer are unknown, it seems likely that it is caused by a combination of factors that work together in a complicated way. Several studies have found molecular links between TV infection and cervical cancer progression. Chronic inflammation of the cervix is one possible mechanism by which TV contributes to cervical cancer. This leads to immune cell-attracting cytokines and chemokines, increased production of reactive oxygen species, which damage DNA, and genetic mutations that raise the risk of cancer development [19, 84–86]. TV infection is associated with the development of high-grade CIN due to damage and alterations to the cervical epithelium, which create a conducive environment for the organism’s proliferation. The immune response generated against the invading organism involves the recruitment of numerous leukocytes, leading to inflammation, which can promote DNA damage and mutations [11, 87]. Besides, TV generates cytotoxic chemicals that stimulate epithelial atypia and dysplasia, such as cell-detaching factors and N-nitrosamines. The organism thrives on tissue debris and serous exudate and produces significant tissue damage [88]. The pH level in the vagina also rises during TV infection, which further creates a favorable environment for the organism to proliferate [89]. In addition, TV can interact with HPV, a known risk factor for cervical cancer. The parasite can enhance HPV’s ability to infect host cells and promote the persistence of the virus in infected cells, which can increase the risk of cervical cancer [22, 23]. Another proposed mechanism is through nitric oxide (NO). The parasite can induce the production of NO by neutrophils in the cervix, which can cause DNA damage and promote the growth of abnormal cells. This can lead to pre-cancerous lesions and eventually cervical cancer. Moreover, HPV infection has also been shown to induce NO release, which may contribute to cervical cancer [90, 91].

This study has important strengths. By including 35 studies that examined 67,856 women with cervical neoplasia and 933,697 healthy controls and applying several subgroup, sensitivity, and cumulative analyses, this study provides the most up-to-date and comprehensive evidence considering the relationship between TV infection and the development of cervical neoplasia. We found no significant change for the pooled and adjusted ORs in sensitivity and cumulative analyses, which indicates the robustness of our findings. This study also has some limitations. Despite our comprehensive search, it is likely that some studies—mostly those that were published in non-indexed local journals—were overlooked. The information for potentially relevant confounding factors such as age, alcohol and tobacco use, high-risk behavior in sexual activity, and co-infection with HPV, HIV, and other STIs were not available or consistently reported in most studies; therefore, we were unable to extract and analyze these covariates. Nevertheless, we analyzed adjusted ORs reported in 13 studies, so this limitation has been addressed to a large extent. Most studies were cross-sectional or case-control, and there were only five cohort studies. Therefore, it is difficult to draw conclusions about the natural history of TV infection and cervical neoplasia due to the lack of longitudinal data. We found substantial heterogeneity in most of the meta-analytic estimates, although low non-significant heterogeneity was recorded for cohort studies (I2 = 16%) and adjusted ORs (I2 = 31%). Variation in diagnostic methods for the diagnosis of TV infection, definition and stages of cervical neoplasia, geographical region, country’s income levels, and publication year are likely to have contributed to the heterogeneity (Table 3).

Conclusion

This updated systematic review and meta-analysis confirmed findings of the previous meta-analysis and indicated that women with TV infection are at a higher risk of cervical neoplasia. Future research, particularly longitudinal and experimental studies, should be done to better understand various aspects of this association. Moreover, more investigation is needed to determine how TV interacts with other infectious agents and environmental covariates that may predispose women to cervical neoplasia, as well as to identify amenable factors and effective interventions that can be addressed by the public health system.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Search strategy in databases.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288443.s001

(TIF)

S2 Fig. Forest plot, sensitivity analysis of studies evaluating the association between Trichomonas vaginalis and cervical abnormalities.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288443.s002

(TIF)

S3 Fig. Forest plot, cumulative analysis of studies evaluating the association between Trichomonas vaginalis and cervical abnormalities.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288443.s003

(TIF)

S4 Fig. Funnel plot, publication bias in studies evaluating the association between Trichomonas vaginalis and cervical abnormalities.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288443.s004

(TIF)

S5 Fig. Funnel plot, publication bias in studies having adjusted ORs that evaluated the association between Trichomonas vaginalis and cervical abnormalities.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288443.s005

(TIF)

S6 Fig. Forest plot, sensitivity analysis of studies with adjusted OR evaluating the association between Trichomonas vaginalis and cervical abnormalities.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288443.s006

(TIF)

S7 Fig. Forest plot, cumulative analysis of studies with adjusted OR evaluating the association between Trichomonas vaginalis and cervical abnormalities.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288443.s007

(TIF)

S1 Checklist. PRISMA checklist 2020 for ‘Trichomonas vaginalis infection and risk of cervical neoplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis paper’.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288443.s008

(DOCX)

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Dr. Vahid Fallah Omrani (Calgary University, Canada), for his assistance during the preparation of this manuscript.

References

  1. 1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 2021;71(3):209–49. Epub 2021/02/05. pmid:33538338.
  2. 2. Arbyn M, Weiderpass E, Bruni L, de Sanjosé S, Saraiya M, Ferlay J, et al. Estimates of incidence and mortality of cervical cancer in 2018: a worldwide analysis. The Lancet Global health. 2020;8(2):e191–e203. Epub 2019/12/10. pmid:31812369; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7025157.
  3. 3. Kurman RJ, Carcangiu ML, Herrington CS. World Health Organisation classification of tumours of the female reproductive organs: International agency for research on cancer; 2014.
  4. 4. Chen T, Wei M, Liu Y, Wang H, Zhou W, Bi Y, et al. Rising Mortality Rate of Cervical Cancer in Younger Women in Urban China. Journal of general internal medicine. 2020;35(2):593. Epub 2019/07/17. pmid:31309406; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7018891.
  5. 5. Massad LS, Einstein MH, Huh WK, Katki HA, Kinney WK, Schiffman M, et al. 2012 updated consensus guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors. Journal of lower genital tract disease. 2013;17(5 Suppl 1):S1–s27. Epub 2013/03/27. pmid:23519301.
  6. 6. Nayar R, Wilbur DC. The Pap test and Bethesda 2014. Cancer cytopathology. 2015;123(5):271–81. Epub 2015/05/02. pmid:25931431.
  7. 7. Darragh TM, Colgan TJ, Cox JT, Heller DS, Henry MR, Luff RD, et al. The Lower Anogenital Squamous Terminology Standardization Project for HPV-Associated Lesions: background and consensus recommendations from the College of American Pathologists and the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology. Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine. 2012;136(10):1266–97. Epub 2012/06/30. pmid:22742517.
  8. 8. Waxman AG, Chelmow D, Darragh TM, Lawson H, Moscicki AB. Revised terminology for cervical histopathology and its implications for management of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions of the cervix. Obstetrics and gynecology. 2012;120(6):1465–71. Epub 2012/11/22. pmid:23168774; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4054813.
  9. 9. Alrajjal A, Pansare V, Choudhury MSR, Khan MYA, Shidham VB. Squamous intraepithelial lesions (SIL: LSIL, HSIL, ASCUS, ASC-H, LSIL-H) of Uterine Cervix and Bethesda System. CytoJournal. 2021;18:16. Epub 2021/08/05. pmid:34345247; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8326095.
  10. 10. Andersson S, Mints M, Wilander E. Results of cytology and high-risk human papillomavirus testing in females with cervical adenocarcinoma in situ. Oncology letters. 2013;6(1):215–9. Epub 2013/08/16. pmid:23946807; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3742506.
  11. 11. Ghosh I, Mandal R, Kundu P, Biswas J. Association of Genital Infections Other Than Human Papillomavirus with Pre-Invasive and Invasive Cervical Neoplasia. Journal of clinical and diagnostic research: JCDR. 2016;10(2):Xe01-xe6. Epub 2016/04/05. pmid:27042571; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4800637.
  12. 12. Tummidi S, Shankaralingappa A, Sharmila V. Applicability of On-Site Evaluation of Cervical Cytology Smears Stained with Toluidine Blue to Reduce Unsatisfactory Results. Acta Cytol. 2022;66(6):513–23. Epub 2022/10/11. pmid:36215977.
  13. 13. Kovachev SM. Cervical cancer and vaginal microbiota changes. Archives of microbiology. 2020;202(2):323–7. Epub 2019/10/30. pmid:31659380.
  14. 14. Muñoz-Ramírez A, López-Monteon A, Ramos-Ligonio A, Méndez-Bolaina E, Guapillo-Vargas MRB. Prevalence of Trichomonas vaginalis and Human papillomavirus in female sex workers in Central Veracruz, Mexico. Revista Argentina de microbiologia. 2018;50(4):351–8. Epub 2018/03/20. pmid:29548730.
  15. 15. Ginindza TG, Stefan CD, Tsoka-Gwegweni JM, Dlamini X, Jolly PE, Weiderpass E, et al. Prevalence and risk factors associated with sexually transmitted infections (STIs) among women of reproductive age in Swaziland. Infectious agents and cancer. 2017;12:29. Epub 2017/06/01. pmid:28559923; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5445272.
  16. 16. Kissinger P Epidemiology and treatment of trichomoniasis. Current infectious disease reports. 2015;17(6):484. Epub 2015/05/01. pmid:25925796; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5030197.
  17. 17. Aquino MFK, Hinderfeld AS, Simoes-Barbosa A. Trichomonas vaginalis. Trends in parasitology. 2020;36(7):646–7. Epub 2020/06/12. pmid:32526176.
  18. 18. Ifeanyi OE, Chinedum OK, Chijioke UO. Trichomonas vaginalis: complications and treatment. Int J Curr Res Med Sci. 2018;4(5):76–89.
  19. 19. Mielczarek E, Blaszkowska J. Trichomonas vaginalis: pathogenicity and potential role in human reproductive failure. Infection. 2016;44(4):447–58. Epub 20151106. pmid:26546373.
  20. 20. Moodley D, Sartorius B, Madurai S, Chetty V, Maman S. Pregnancy Outcomes in Association with STDs including genital HSV-2 shedding in a South African Cohort Study. Sexually transmitted infections. 2017;93(7):460–6. Epub 2017/04/12. pmid:28396556.
  21. 21. Mercer F, Johnson PJ. Trichomonas vaginalis: Pathogenesis, Symbiont Interactions, and Host Cell Immune Responses. Trends in parasitology. 2018;34(8):683–93. Epub 2018/07/31. pmid:30056833.
  22. 22. Ghosh I, Muwonge R, Mittal S, Banerjee D, Kundu P, Mandal R, et al. Association between high risk human papillomavirus infection and co-infection with Candida spp. and Trichomonas vaginalis in women with cervical premalignant and malignant lesions. Journal of clinical virology: the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology. 2017;87:43–8. Epub 2016/12/20. pmid:27992790.
  23. 23. Belfort IKP, Cunha APA, Mendes FPB, Galvão-Moreira LV, Lemos RG, de Lima Costa LH, et al. Trichomonas vaginalis as a risk factor for human papillomavirus: a study with women undergoing cervical cancer screening in a northeast region of Brazil. BMC Women’s Health. 2021;21(1). pmid:33892709
  24. 24. Li W, Liu LL, Luo ZZ, Han CY, Wu QH, Zhang L, et al. Associations of sexually transmitted infections and bacterial vaginosis with abnormal cervical cytology: A cross-sectional survey with 9090 community women in China. PloS one. 2020;15(3):e0230712. Epub 2020/03/28. pmid:32214342; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7098628.
  25. 25. Lazenby GB, Taylor PT, Badman BS, McHaki E, Korte JE, Soper DE, et al. An Association Between Trichomonas vaginalis and High-Risk Human Papillomavirus in Rural Tanzanian Women Undergoing Cervical Cancer Screening. Clinical Therapeutics. 2014;36(1):38–45. PubMed PMID: WOS:000330254100006. pmid:24417784
  26. 26. Costa-Lira E, Jacinto A, Silva LM, Napoleão PFR, Barbosa-Filho RAA, Cruz GJS, et al. Prevalence of human papillomavirus, Chlamydia trachomatis, and Trichomonas vaginalis infections in Amazonian women with normal and abnormal cytology. Genetics and molecular research: GMR. 2017;16(2). Epub 2017/04/30. pmid:28453175.
  27. 27. Vieira-Baptista P, Lima-Silva J, Pinto C, Saldanha C, Beires J, Martinez-de-Oliveira J, et al. Bacterial vaginosis, aerobic vaginitis, vaginal inflammation and major Pap smear abnormalities. European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases: official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology. 2016;35(4):657–64. Epub 2016/01/27. pmid:26810061.
  28. 28. Yang M, Li L, Jiang C, Qin X, Zhou M, Mao X, et al. Co-infection with trichomonas vaginalis increases the risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2–3 among HPV16 positive female: a large population-based study. BMC infectious diseases. 2020;20(1):642. Epub 2020/09/03. pmid:32873233; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7466445.
  29. 29. Zhang ZF, Graham S, Yu SZ, Marshall J, Zielezny M, Chen YX, et al. Trichomonas vaginalis and cervical cancer. A prospective study in China. Annals of epidemiology. 1995;5(4):325–32. Epub 1995/07/01. pmid:8520717.
  30. 30. Zhang ZF, Begg CB. Is Trichomonas vaginalis a cause of cervical neoplasia? Results from a combined analysis of 24 studies. International journal of epidemiology. 1994;23(4):682–90. Epub 1994/08/01. pmid:8002180.
  31. 31. Yang S, Zhao W, Wang H, Wang Y, Li J, Wu X. Trichomonas vaginalis infection-associated risk of cervical cancer: A meta-analysis. European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology. 2018;228:166–73. Epub 2018/07/07. pmid:29980111.
  32. 32. Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic reviews. 2015;4(1):1. Epub 2015/01/03. pmid:25554246; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4320440.
  33. 33. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Jama. 2000;283(15):2008–12.
  34. 34. Higgins JP, Li T, Deeks JJ. Choosing effect measures and computing estimates of effect. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. 2019:143–76.
  35. 35. Munn Z, Moola S, Lisy K, Riitano D, Tufanaru C. Methodological guidance for systematic reviews of observational epidemiological studies reporting prevalence and cumulative incidence data. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015;13(3):147–53. pmid:26317388
  36. 36. Moola S, Munn Z, Tufanaru C, Aromataris E, Sears K, Sfetcu R, et al. Chapter 7: Systematic reviews of etiology and risk. Joanna briggs institute reviewer’s manual The Joanna Briggs Institute. 2017;5.
  37. 37. Tufanaru C, Munn Z, Aromataris E, Campbell J, Hopp L. Systematic reviews of effectiveness. Joanna Briggs Institute reviewer’s manual: The Joanna Briggs Institute Adelaide, Australia; 2017. p. 3–10.
  38. 38. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials revisited. Contemporary clinical trials. 2015;45:139–45. pmid:26343745
  39. 39. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. Bmj. 2003;327(7414):557–60. pmid:12958120
  40. 40. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. Bmj. 1997;315(7109):629–34. Epub 1997/10/06. pmid:9310563; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2127453.
  41. 41. Donders GGG, Depuydt CE, Bogers JP, Vereecken AJ. Association of Trichomonas vaginalis and Cytological Abnormalities of the Cervix in Low Risk Women. PloS one. 2013;8(12). PubMed PMID: WOS:000329194700149. pmid:24386492
  42. 42. Guijon FB, Paraskevas M, Brunham R. The association of sexually transmitted diseases with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a case-control study. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 1985;151(2):185–90. Epub 1985/01/15. pmid:2982264.
  43. 43. Gram IT, Macaluso M, Churchill J, Stalsberg H. Trichomonas vaginalis (TV) and human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and the incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade III. Cancer Causes and Control. 1992;3(3):231–6. pmid:1319218
  44. 44. Guijon F, Paraskevas M, Rand F, Heywood E, Brunham R, McNicol P. Vaginal microbial flora as a cofactor in the pathogenesis of uterine cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics. 1992;37(3):185–91. pmid:1351005
  45. 45. Kharsany AB, Hoosen AA, Moodley J, Bagaratee J, Gouws E. The association between sexually transmitted pathogens and cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia in a developing community. Genitourinary medicine. 1993;69(5):357–60. Epub 1993/10/01. pmid:8244352; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1195117.
  46. 46. La Vecchia C, Gentile A, Parazzini F, Franceschi S, Decarli A, Fasoli M, et al. Sexual factors, venereal diseases, and the risk of intraepithelial and invasive cervical neoplasia. Cancer. 1986;58(4):935–41. pmid:3755077
  47. 47. Li C, Wu M, Wang J, Zhang S, Zhu L, Pan J, et al. A population-based study on the risks of cervical lesion and human papillomavirus infection among women in Beijing, People’s Republic of China. Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention: a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology. 2010;19(10):2655–64. Epub 2010/08/20. pmid:20719907.
  48. 48. Su RY, Ho LJ, Yang HY, Chung CH, Yang SS, Chen CY, et al. Association betweenTrichomonas vaginalisinfection and cervical lesions: a population-based, nested case-control study in Taiwan. Parasitology Research. 2020;119(8):2649–57. PubMed PMID: WOS:000543037100001. pmid:32583161
  49. 49. Schiff M, Becker TM, Masuk M, van Asselt-King L, Wheeler CM, Altobelli KK, et al. Risk factors for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in southwestern American Indian women. American journal of epidemiology. 2000;152(8):716–26. Epub 2000/10/29. pmid:11052549.
  50. 50. Silva LC, Miranda AE, Batalha RS, Monte RL, Talhari S. Trichomonas vaginalis and associated factors among women living with HIV/AIDS in Amazonas, Brazil. The Brazilian journal of infectious diseases: an official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases. 2013;17(6):701–3. Epub 2013/08/07. pmid:23916452; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9427415.
  51. 51. Slattery ML, Overall JC Jr., Abbott TM, French TK, Robison LM, Gardner J. Sexual activity, contraception, genital infections, and cervical cancer: support for a sexually transmitted disease hypothesis. American journal of epidemiology. 1989;130(2):248–58. Epub 1989/08/01. pmid:2546422.
  52. 52. Spinillo A, Zara F, Gardella B, Preti E, Gaia G, Maserati R. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cervicovaginal shedding of human immunodeficiency virus. Obstetrics and gynecology. 2006;107(2 Pt 1):314–20. Epub 2006/02/02. pmid:16449118.
  53. 53. Alotaibi HJ, Almajhdi FN, Alsaleh AN, Obeid DA, Khayat HH, Al-Muammer TA, et al. Association of sexually transmitted infections and human papillomavirus co-infection with abnormal cervical cytology among women in Saudi Arabia. Saudi journal of biological sciences. 2020;27(6):1587–95. Epub 2020/06/04. pmid:32489299; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7253883.
  54. 54. Amorim AT, Marques LM, Campos GB, Lobão TN, de Souza Lino V, Cintra RC, et al. Co-infection of sexually transmitted pathogens and Human Papillomavirus in cervical samples of women of Brazil. BMC infectious diseases. 2017;17(1):769. Epub 2017/12/17. pmid:29246195; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5732421.
  55. 55. de Abreu AL, Malaguti N, Souza RP, Uchimura NS, Ferreira É C, Pereira MW, et al. Association of human papillomavirus, Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Chlamydia trachomatis co-infections on the risk of high-grade squamous intraepithelial cervical lesion. American journal of cancer research. 2016;6(6):1371–83. Epub 2016/07/19. PubMed PMID: pmid:27429850; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4937739.
  56. 56. Dey S, Pahwa P, Mishra A, Govil J, Dhillon PK. Reproductive Tract infections and Premalignant Lesions of Cervix: Evidence from Women Presenting at the Cancer Detection Centre of the Indian Cancer Society, Delhi, 2000–2012. Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India. 2016;66(Suppl 1):441–51. Epub 2016/09/22. pmid:27651644; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5016428.
  57. 57. Feng RM, M ZW, Smith JS, Dong L, Chen F, Pan QJ, et al. Risk of high-risk human papillomavirus infection and cervical precancerous lesions with past or current trichomonas infection: a pooled analysis of 25,054 women in rural China. Journal of clinical virology: the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology. 2018;99–100:84–90. Epub 2018/02/06. pmid:29396352.
  58. 58. Gupta R, Singh N, Kalyan RK, Agrawal S. Case–Control Study to Find Association of Common RTIs with CIN and Cervical Cancer. Indian Journal of Gynecologic Oncology. 2020;18:1–6.
  59. 59. Kim HS, Kim TJ, Lee IH, Hong SR. Associations between sexually transmitted infections, high-risk human papillomavirus infection, and abnormal cervical Pap smear results in OB/GYN outpatients. Journal of gynecologic oncology. 2016;27(5):e49. Epub 2016/06/23. pmid:27329197; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4944016.
  60. 60. Mohanty G, Nayak B, Padhy AK. Studies on Cytological Anomalies of Microbial Co-infections in Cervical Lesions. Indian Journal of Gynecologic Oncology. 2020;18:1–6.
  61. 61. Muitta E, Were T, Nyamache AK, Muhoho N. Atypical cervical cytomorphologic predictors: a descriptive study of pre-cervical cancer patients of low education in Kenya. The Pan African medical journal. 2019;33:124. Epub 2019/09/29. pmid:31558923; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6754839.
  62. 62. Qiu T, Mao Q. Correlation of vaginal micro-ecology and human papilloma virus infection to cervical lesions. Biomed Res. 2017;28:8660–3.
  63. 63. Zheng JJ, Miao JR, Wu Q, Yu CX, Mu L, Song JH. Correlation between HPV-negative cervical lesions and cervical microenvironment. Taiwanese journal of obstetrics & gynecology. 2020;59(6):855–61. Epub 2020/11/22. pmid:33218401.
  64. 64. Qin Y, Wang H, Ren T. Correlation between reproductive tract infections and cervical cancer and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Chin J Nosocomiol. 2014;24:811–3.
  65. 65. Liu X, He Y. The effect of cervical cancer on vaginal environment and Common Flora. Pract J Cancer. 2015;30:1135–8.
  66. 66. Suehiro TT, Gimenes F, Souza RP, Taura SKI, Cestari RCC, Irie MMT, et al. High molecular prevalence of HPV and other sexually transmitted infections in a population of asymptomatic women who work or study at a Brazilian university. Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo. 2021;63:e1. Epub 2021/01/28. pmid:33503149; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7816866.
  67. 67. Barcelos ACM, Michelin MA, Adad SJ, Murta EFC. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: Bethesda classification and association with human papillomavirus. Infectious Diseases in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2011;2011. pmid:21760701
  68. 68. Bray F, Jemal A, Grey N, Ferlay J, Forman D. Global cancer transitions according to the Human Development Index (2008–2030): a population-based study. The Lancet Oncology. 2012;13(8):790–801. Epub 2012/06/05. pmid:22658655.
  69. 69. Shen S, Zhang S, Liu P, Wang J, Du H. Potential role of microRNAs in the treatment and diagnosis of cervical cancer. Cancer genetics. 2020;248–249:25–30. Epub 2020/09/29. pmid:32987255.
  70. 70. Giannini A, Di Donato V, Sopracordevole F, Ciavattini A, Ghelardi A, Vizza E, et al. Outcomes of High-Grade Cervical Dysplasia with Positive Margins and HPV Persistence after Cervical Conization. Vaccines. 2023;11(3). Epub 2023/03/31. pmid:36992282; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC10051663.
  71. 71. Bogani G, V DID, Sopracordevole F, Ciavattini A, Ghelardi A, Lopez S, et al. Recurrence rate after loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) and laser Conization: A 5-year follow-up study. Gynecologic oncology. 2020;159(3):636–41. Epub 2020/09/08. pmid:32893030.
  72. 72. Bogani G, Tagliabue E, Ferla S, Martinelli F, Ditto A, Chiappa V, et al. Nomogram-based prediction of cervical dysplasia persistence/recurrence. European journal of cancer prevention: the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP). 2019;28(5):435–40. Epub 2018/11/30. pmid:30489353.
  73. 73. Monti M, D’Aniello D, Scopelliti A, Tibaldi V, Santangelo G, Colagiovanni V, et al. Relationship between cervical excisional treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and obstetrical outcome. Minerva obstetrics and gynecology. 2021;73(2):233–46. Epub 2020/11/04. pmid:33140628.
  74. 74. Green JA, Kirwan JM, Tierney JF, Symonds P, Fresco L, Collingwood M, et al. Survival and recurrence after concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy for cancer of the uterine cervix: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet (London, England). 2001;358(9284):781–6. Epub 2001/09/21. pmid:11564482.
  75. 75. Pfaendler KS, Tewari KS. Changing paradigms in the systemic treatment of advanced cervical cancer. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 2016;214(1):22–30. Epub 2015/07/28. pmid:26212178; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5613936.
  76. 76. Yang H-Y, Su R-Y, Chung C-H, Huang K-Y, Lin H-A, Wang J-Y, et al. Association between trichomoniasis and prostate and bladder diseases: a population-based case–control study. Scientific Reports. 2022;12(1):15358. pmid:36100630
  77. 77. Najafi A, Nosrati MRC, Ghasemi E, Navi Z, Yousefi A, Majidiani H, et al. Is there association between Trichomonas vaginalis infection and prostate cancer risk?: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Microbial pathogenesis. 2019;137:103752. pmid:31539586
  78. 78. Bhuvanendran Pillai A, Mun Wong C, Dalila Inche Zainal Abidin N, Fazlinda Syed Nor S, Fathulzhafran Mohamed Hanan M, Rasidah Abd Ghani S, et al. Chlamydia Infection as a Risk Factor for Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Iranian journal of public health. 2022;51(3):508–17. Epub 2022/07/23. pmid:35865072; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9276600.
  79. 79. Zhu H, Shen Z, Luo H, Zhang W, Zhu X. Chlamydia Trachomatis Infection-Associated Risk of Cervical Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. Medicine. 2016;95(13):e3077. Epub 2016/04/05. pmid:27043670; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4998531.
  80. 80. Naldini G, Grisci C, Chiavarini M, Fabiani R. Association between human papillomavirus and chlamydia trachomatis infection risk in women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International journal of public health. 2019;64(6):943–55. Epub 2019/06/09. pmid:31175391.
  81. 81. Ye H, Song T, Zeng X, Li L, Hou M, Xi M. Association between genital mycoplasmas infection and human papillomavirus infection, abnormal cervical cytopathology, and cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Archives of gynecology and obstetrics. 2018;297(6):1377–87. Epub 2018/03/10. pmid:29520664.
  82. 82. Liu G, Sharma M, Tan N, Barnabas RV. HIV-positive women have higher risk of human papilloma virus infection, precancerous lesions, and cervical cancer. AIDS (London, England). 2018;32(6):795–808. Epub 2018/01/26. pmid:29369827; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5854529.
  83. 83. Cao S, Gan Y, Dong X, Lu Z. Herpes simplex virus type 2 and the risk of cervical cancer: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Archives of gynecology and obstetrics. 2014;290(6):1059–66. Epub 2014/07/18. pmid:25030659.
  84. 84. Zhang Z, Li D, Li Y, Zhang R, Xie X, Yao Y, et al. The correlation between Trichomonas vaginalis infection and reproductive system cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Infectious agents and cancer. 2023;18(1):15. Epub 20230302. pmid:36864428; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9979407.
  85. 85. Galego GB, Tasca T. Infinity war: Trichomonas vaginalis and interactions with host immune response. Microbial Cell. 2023;10(5):103–16. pmid:37125086
  86. 86. Khandia R, Munjal A. Interplay between inflammation and cancer. Adv Protein Chem Struct Biol. 2020;119:199–245. Epub 20191126. pmid:31997769.
  87. 87. Koss LG, Wolinska WH. Trichomonas vaginalis cervicitis and its relationship to cervical cancer. A histocytological study. Cancer. 1959;12:1171–93. pmid:14411232.
  88. 88. Sood S, Kapil A. An update on Trichomonas vaginalis. Indian Journal of Sexually Transmitted Diseases and AIDS. 2008;29(1):7.
  89. 89. Frost JK. Trichomonas vaginalis and cervical epithelial changes. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 1962;97(3):792–9. pmid:13945833
  90. 90. Frasson AP, De Carli GA, Bonan CD, Tasca T. Involvement of purinergic signaling on nitric oxide production by neutrophils stimulated with Trichomonas vaginalis. Purinergic Signal. 2012;8(1):1–9. Epub 20110811. pmid:21833696; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3286535.
  91. 91. Choudhari SK, Chaudhary M, Bagde S, Gadbail AR, Joshi V. Nitric oxide and cancer: a review. World J Surg Oncol. 2013;11:118. Epub 20130530. pmid:23718886; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3669621.