HPV genotype distribution according to severity of cervical neoplasia
Abstract
Objective To analyse the HPV genotype profile and the presence of multiple HPV infections according to severity of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Methods From a population of 424,143 women in Norway, we included all women (n=643) with histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+) and evaluable HPV test during 2005 and 2006. Histology revealed CIN2 in 135 women, CIN3/ACIS in 495, and invasive carcinoma in 13 women. HPV genotyping was performed on cell suspensions from cervix by linear array which differentiates 37 HPV genotypes. Results HPV was detected in 98.4% (633/643) of the women, of whom 52.5% (338/643) were infected with more than one HPV genotype. HPV16 was most common, being detected in 51.2% (329/643) of all cases, followed by HPV31, 33, 52, 18, and 51. Overall, HPV 16 or 18 were detected in 58.0% (373/643), with 34.7% (223/643) without concurrence of other high-risk genotypes. HPV16 and HPV33 as single infections were more common in women with CIN3+ as compared to CIN2 (age-adjusted odds ratio=5.93, 95% CI=2.73-12.87, and age-adjusted odds ratio=4.53, 95% CI=1.42-14.46, respectively). Concurrent infection with other HPV genotypes did not significantly alter the associations to CIN3+ for HPV16 or HPV33. A single HPV infection, other than HPV16, 18, 31, or 33, was used as the reference. HPV18 or multiple HPV infections not including HPV16 or HPV33 were not associated with the severity of cervical neoplasia. Conclusion HPV16…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Sexual activity is higher in younger women.
“Since sexual activity is higher in younger women, multiple genotype infection is higher at this age [30–32].”
From HPV Genotypes distribution in Indian women with and without cervical carcinoma: Implication for HPV vaccination program in Odisha, Eastern India (2017) · cites this paper as [31]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Senapati, R., Nayak, B., Kar, S. K., & Dwibedi, B. (2017) · BMC Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1186/s12879-016-2136-4 · Cited by 95 · see citing works
“Synergistic effect of multiple infections by HPV genotypes on carcinogenesis is supported by many studies [7–9, 17, 26], while contradicting studies [25, 29, 31, 32, 35] invoke confusion.”
Result
- Authors
- Sjoeborg, K. D., Tropé, A., Lie, A. K., Jonassen, C. M., Steinbakk, M., Hansen, M., Jacobsen, M. B., Cuschieri, K., & Eskild, A.
- Affiliations
- Akershus University Hospital (NO)
- Oslo University Hospital (NO)
- University of Oslo (NO)
- Edinburgh Royal Infirmary (GB)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Gynecologic Oncology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2010-07
- Volume
- 118
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 29-34
- ISSN
- 0090-8258 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2105193809
- Cited by
- 54
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 3.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Gynecologic Oncology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Health Region East (2769112)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
- Keywords
- human papillomavirus, HPV genotypes, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, multiple HPV infection, HPV16, HPV 33, HPV 18, HPV 31, HPV52, HPV51, cervical cancer, oncogenicity
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Uterine Cervical Dysplasia, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Female, Genotype, Humans, Middle Aged, Norway, Risk Factors, Severity of Illness Index, Papillomavirus Infections, Alphapapillomavirus, Young Adult
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review