Back

Efficacy of Combination Treatment for Cervical Precancer Among Women Living with HIV in South Africa: Secondary Outcomes from the ACT 2 Randomized Controlled Trial

Chibwesha, C.; Teodoro, N. S.; Mollan, K. R.; Keys, J. R.; Liu, C.; Mulongo, M.; Gumede, S.; Pasipamire, T.; Faesen, M.; Rahangdale, L.

2026-03-22 obstetrics and gynecology
10.64898/2026.03.19.26348810 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveWe report secondary histologic and high-risk HPV (hrHPV) outcomes from the Acceptability and Feasibility of Combination Treatment for Cervical Precancer Among South African Women Living with HIV (ACT 2) Trial. MethodsWe conducted a double-blind Phase 2b feasibility trial of loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) combined with adjuvant intravaginal 5-fluorouracil (5FU) cream. Women living with HIV (WLWH) and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2/3 underwent LEEP and were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 8 doses of 5FU or placebo cream. Our secondary outcomes were (a) regression of cervical disease and (b) clearance of hrHPV. ResultsFrom March 2023 to January 2025, 180 participants underwent LEEP and were randomized to 5FU or placebo cream. Median age was 41 years (IOR: 35-45), 29% had HPV16, 18% had HPV18/45; 99% of women were virologically suppressed (<200 copies/mL) and median CD4 count was 636 cells/uL (IOR: 376-873). 172 participants (95.6%) completed follow-up. At week 24, 96.3% (78/81) in the 5FU group and 82.0% (73/89) in the placebo group regressed to CIN1 or normal histology (PD 14.3%, CI 5.3%, 23.3%). Among participants with positive LEEP margins at week 0, 88.0% (22/25) in the 5FU versus 61.3% (19/31) in the placebo group regressed to CIN1 or normal (PD 26.7%, CI 5.4%, 48.1%). Genotype-specific hrHPV clearance was similar in both groups (5FU: 58.0%, 40/69; Placebo: 53.8%, 43/80; PD 4.2%, CI -11.7%, 20.2%). ConclusionClinical outcomes from our Phase 2b trial demonstrates that intravaginal 5FU post-LEEP may be a beneficial adjuvant treatment for CIN2/3. Clinical Trial RegistrationNCT05413811

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
15.2%
2
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 13%
12.9%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 14%
12.9%
4
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 2%
10.8%
50% of probability mass above
5
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
5.0%
6
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 33%
3.7%
7
Clinical Cancer Research
58 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.7%
8
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.7%
9
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
10
BMJ
49 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.1%
11
New England Journal of Medicine
50 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.0%
12
JAMA
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.8%
13
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 48%
1.3%
14
Health Expectations
12 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.1%
15
The Lancet Global Health
24 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.1%
16
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.0%
17
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
18
Clinical Microbiology and Infection
60 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.0%
19
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
20
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
21
The Lancet Infectious Diseases
71 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
22
EClinicalMedicine
21 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
23
Vaccine
189 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
24
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
25
American Journal of Epidemiology
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
26
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
134 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
27
British Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
28
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
120 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
29
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.5%
30
BMC Biology
248 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.5%