Data from a pre-publication independent replication initiative examining ten moral judgement effects

We present the data from a crowdsourced project seeking to replicate findings in independent laboratories before (rather than after) they are published. In this Pre-Publication Independent Replication (PPIR) initiative, 25 research groups attempted to replicate 10 moral judgment effects from a single laboratory's research pipeline of unpublished findings. The 10 effects were investigated using online/lab surveys containing psychological manipulations (vignettes) followed by questionnaires. Results revealed a mix of reliable, unreliable, and culturally moderated findings. Unlike any previous replication project, this dataset includes the data from not only the replications but also from the original studies, creating a unique corpus that researchers can use to better understand reproducibility and irreproducibility in science

The pipeline project: Pre-publication independent replications of a single laboratory's research pipeline

This crowdsourced project introduces a collaborative approach to improving the reproducibility of scientific research, in which findings are replicated in qualified independent laboratories before (rather than after) they are published. Our goal is to establish a non-adversarial replication process with highly informative final results. To illustrate the Pre-Publication Independent Replication (PPIR) approach, 25 research groups conducted replications of all ten moral judgment effects which the last author and his collaborators had “in the pipeline” as of August 2014. Six findings replicated according to all replication criteria, one finding replicated but with a significantly smaller effect size than the original, one finding replicated consistently in the original culture but not outside of it, and two findings failed to find support. In total, 40% of the original findings failed at least one major replication criterion. Potential ways to implement and incentivize pre-publication independent replication on a large scale are discussed

Hysteroscopic versus cervical injection for sentinel node detection in endometrial cancer: A multicenter prospective randomised controlled trial from the Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian cancer (MITO) study group

Aim: During the last years, the role of sentinel lymph node mapping (SLNM) for endometrial cancer (EC) surgical treatment has increased in popularity. However, several controversies remain about different technical steps of SLNM. Thus, a randomised control trial was designed to compare cervical (CI) and hysteroscopic (HI) indocyanine green (ICG) injection for SLNM of newly diagnosed EC undergoing surgical staging. The primary end-point of the study was to compare these two techniques in terms of para-aortic detection rate. Methods: Patients with apparent stage I or II histologically confirmed EC undergoing surgery were included in the study. This randomised trial distinguished patients in two study groups according to two different techniques of ICG SLNM: CI versus HI injection. Patients who met the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to CI or HI injection in a 1:1 ratio. The central randomisation system allocated patient randomisation numbers sequentially in the order in which the patients were enrolled. This randomised trial was not blinded for either patients or the surgeons. Results: From March 2017 until April 2019, a total of 165 patients were randomised in this study: 85 (51.5%) in the CI group and 80 (48.5%) in the HI group. After randomisation, 14 (8.5%) patients were excluded from the study. Finally, 151 patients were included in the analysis: 82 (54.3%) in the CI group and 69 (45.7%) in the HI group. Hysteroscopy injection shows an ability to detect Sentinel nodes (SNLs) in the para-aortic area of about 10% greater compared with CI injection, although this difference did not reach statistical significance. The HI technique was superior in detecting isolated para-aortic SLNs (5.8% Versus 0%). The CI injection was correlated with higher SLN detection rates at the pelvic level compared with HI injection. Pelvic and overall detection was higher in the CI group. Conclusions: The present study supports the adoption of CI instead of HI injection because the former allows better identification of sentinel nodes (especially in the pelvic area). Detection of SLN in the para-aortic area was slightly higher in patients receiving a HI injection, but the difference with the CI route was not statistically significant

Recurrence rate after loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) and laser Conization: A 5-year follow-up study

Objective: Conization aims to remove pre-neoplastic lesions of the uterine cervix. Several techniques for conization have been compared, but evidence regarding the most effective therapeutic option is scant. Here, we aimed to compare the recurrence rate following laser conization and loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) in patients with high-grade cervical dysplasia (HSIL/CIN2+). Methods: This is a retrospective multi-institutional study. Medical records of consecutive patients with HSIL/CIN2+ undergoing conization between 2010 and 2014 were retrieved. A propensity-score matching (PSM) was applied in order to reduce allocation bias. The risk of developing recurrence was estimated using Kaplan-Meir and Cox hazard models. Results: Overall, 2966 patients had conization over the study period, including 567 (20%) and 2399 (80%) patients having laser conization and LEEP, respectively. Looking at predictors of recurrence, diagnosis of CIN3 (HR:3.80 (95%CI:2.01,7.21); p < 0.001) and HPV persistence (HR:1.81 (95%CI:1.11,2.96); p < 0.001) correlated with an increased risk of recurrence. After applying a PSM we selected 500 patients undergoing laser conization and 1000 undergoing LEEP. Patients undergoing LEEP were at higher risk of having positive surgical margins in comparison to patients undergoing laser conization (11.2% vs. 4.2%). The risk of having persistence of HPV was similar between the two groups (15.0% vs. 11.6%;p = 0.256). Five-year recurrence rate was 8.1% and 4% after LEEP and laser conization, respectively (p = 0.023). HPV persistence was the only factor associated with [5-]year recurrence after both laser conization (p = 0.003) and LEEP (p = 0.001). Conclusions: HPV persistence is the only factor associated with an increased risk of recurrence after either laser conization or LEEP. Owing to the lack of data regarding obstetrical outcomes, we are not able to assess the best therapeutic option for women with cervical dysplasia

Assessing the long-term role of vaccination against hpv after loop electrosurgical excision procedure (Leep): A propensity-score matched comparison

Background: Primary prevention through vaccination is a prophylactic approach aiming to reduce the risk of developing human papillomavirus (HPV)-related lesions. No mature and long-term data supported the adoption of vaccination in women undergoing conization. Methods: This is a retrospective multi-institutional study. Charts of consecutive patients undergoing conization between 2010 and 2014 were collected. All patients included had at least 5 years of follow-up. We compared outcomes of patients undergoing conization plus vaccination and conization alone. A propensity-score matching algorithm was applied in order to reduce allocation biases. The risk of developing recurrence was estimated using Kaplan-Meir and Cox hazard models. Results: Overall, charts of 1914 women were analyzed. The study group included 116 (6.1%) and 1798 (93.9%) women undergoing conization plus vaccination and conization alone, respectively. Five-year recurrence rate was 1.7% (n = 2) and 5.7% (n = 102) after conization plus vaccination and conization alone, respectively (p = 0.068). After the application of a propensity-score matching, we selected 100 patients undergoing conization plus vaccination and 200 patients undergoing conization alone. The crude number of recurrences was 2 (2%) and 11 (5.5%) for patients undergoing conization plus vaccination and conization alone, respectively (p = 0.231). Vaccination had no impact on persistent lesions (no negative examination between conization and new cervical dysplasia; p = 0.603), but reduced the risk of recurrent disease (patients who had at least one negative examination between conization and the diagnosis of recurrent cervical dysplasia; p = 0.031). Conclusions: Patients having vaccination experience a slightly lower risk of recurrence than women who had not, although not statistically significantly different. Further evidence is needed to assess the cost effectiveness of adopting vaccination in this setting

Assessing the Long-Term Role of Vaccination against HPV after Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure (LEEP): A Propensity-Score Matched Comparison

Background: Primary prevention through vaccination is a prophylactic approach aiming to reduce the risk of developing human papillomavirus (HPV)-related lesions. No mature and long-term data supported the adoption of vaccination in women undergoing conization. Methods: This is a retrospective multi-institutional study. Charts of consecutive patients undergoing conization between 2010 and 2014 were collected. All patients included had at least 5 years of follow-up. We compared outcomes of patients undergoing conization plus vaccination and conization alone. A propensity-score matching algorithm was applied in order to reduce allocation biases. The risk of developing recurrence was estimated using Kaplan-Meir and Cox hazard models. Results: Overall, charts of 1914 women were analyzed. The study group included 116 (6.1%) and 1798 (93.9%) women undergoing conization plus vaccination and conization alone, respectively. Five-year recurrence rate was 1.7% (n = 2) and 5.7% (n = 102) after conization plus vaccination and conization alone, respectively (p = 0.068). After the application of a propensity-score matching, we selected 100 patients undergoing conization plus vaccination and 200 patients undergoing conization alone. The crude number of recurrences was 2 (2%) and 11 (5.5%) for patients undergoing conization plus vaccination and conization alone, respectively (p = 0.231). Vaccination had no impact on persistent lesions (no negative examination between conization and new cervical dysplasia; p = 0.603), but reduced the risk of recurrent disease (patients who had at least one negative examination between conization and the diagnosis of recurrent cervical dysplasia; p = 0.031). Conclusions: Patients having vaccination experience a slightly lower risk of recurrence than women who had not, although not statistically significantly different. Further evidence is needed to assess the cost effectiveness of adopting vaccination in this setting