Objectives: Human papilloma virus (HPV) is the primary cause of cervical cancer, and its prevention is crucial in reducing the risk of developing this cancer. To explore potential preventive measures, we conducted a double-blind randomized clinical trial aiming at investigating the impact of oral nanocurcumin on HPV infection clearance in women who had high-risk results from HPV genotyping. Materials and Methods: We enrolled women with high-risk HPV test results as participants in this study. Through a random assignment process, the participants were divided into two groups: one group received oral nanocurcumin (80 mg/d) along with standard treatment, while the other group received a placebo and standard treatment. The duration of the treatment period was 4 months. HPV clearance was the primary outcome measure, and we also closely monitored and recorded any adverse effects experienced by the patients as the secondary outcome. Results: In the intervention group, we observed an HPV clearance rate of 75.0%, compared to 42.8% in the placebo group. This difference was statistically significant, with a P value of 0.026, indicating a beneficial effect of oral nanocurcumin in promoting HPV clearance. For specific HPV subtype 16, the clearance rate was higher in the nanocurcumin intervention group (71.4%) compared to the placebo group (50.0%). Similarly, for HPV subtype 18, the nanocurcumin intervention group showed a clearance rate of 77.8%, while the placebo group had a clearance rate of 37.5%. Although the sub-group analysis did not yield statistically significant differences (P > 0.05), the observed difference indicated a potential beneficial effect of nanocurcumin. Conclusions: Our study suggests that oral nanocurcumin has the potential to enhance HPV infection clearance. Furthermore, the treatment with oral nanocurcumin appears to be safe, as we observed minimal major adverse events reported during the study period.
Nikfar et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: