Human Papillomavirus and the Long-term Risk of Cervical Neoplasia
Abstract
The risk of cervical neoplasia for women with normal Papanicolaou smears was calculated for those whose smears were human papillomavirus (HPV) positive and those whose smears were HPV negative. Data on 347 cases and controls were analyzed in a population-based, nested case-control study. Cases (n = 77) were women who participated in the Utrecht screening program (1976-1984) in the Netherlands and who developed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3 or microinvasive or invasive squamous cervical cancer after having a negative smear (1980-1986). Controls (n = 270) were matched on age (+/-5 years) and follow-up period. DNA was isolated from the Papanicolaou smears and was tested for the presence of HPV DNA by using the ultrasensitive broad-spectrum, general short-fragment polymerase chain reaction. HPV was found in 55 (71%) of the baseline smears of the 77 cases and in 31 (11%) of those of the 270 controls. The age-adjusted odds ratios for developing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or microinvasive or invasive cervical cancer were 19.2 (95 percent confidence interval (CI): 10.3, 35.7) for HPV positivity in general, 5.4 (95% CI: 1.5, 19.5) for infection with low-risk HPV genotypes, 24.0 (95% CI: 12.4, 46.4) for high-risk HPV genotypes, and 104.8 (95% CI: 29.5, 372.7) for HPV type 16.
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?
The role of multiple HPV infections in the progression of cervical disease is still controversial.
“The role of multiple HPV infections in the progression of cervical disease is still controversial.”
From Comparative evaluation of Allplex HPV28 and Anyplex II HPV28 assays for high-risk HPV genotyping in cervical samples (2025) · cites this paper as [8]
Other studies have suggested a significantly increased risk of cervical carcinogenesis among women with multiple HPV infections compared with women with single infections.
“Other studies have suggested a significantly increased risk of cervical carcinogenesis among women with multiple HPV infections compared with women with single infections [7–9].”
From Comparative evaluation of Allplex HPV28 and Anyplex II HPV28 assays for high-risk HPV genotyping in cervical samples (2025) · cites this paper as [8]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mafi, S., Theuillon, F., Meyer, S., Woillard, J.-B., Dupont, M., Rogez, S., Alain, S., & Hantz, S. (2025) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0320978 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
- Authors
- van der Graaf, Y.
- Venue
- American Journal of Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2002-07-15
- Volume
- 156
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 158-164
- ISSN
- 0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2163435230
- Cited by
- 96
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 4.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Journal of Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Otorhinolaryngology › Head and Neck Cancer Studies
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
- Keywords
- human papillomavirus, cervical neoplasia, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, cervical cancer, HPV testing, Pap smear, HPV genotypes, HPV16, high-risk HPV, low-risk HPV, cancer risk, cervical cancer screening
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, DNA, Viral, Female, Humans, Prospective Studies, Risk, Time Factors, Tumor Virus Infections, Vaginal Smears, Case-Control Studies, Papillomaviridae, Papillomavirus Infections, Papanicolaou Test
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