Cited by 27Cervical Cancer and HPV ResearchWomen's cancer prevention and managementReproductive tract infections research

The correlation between human papillomavirus positivity and abnormal cervical cytology result differs by age among perimenopausal women

Open access
Rositch, Anne F., Silver, Michelle I., Burke, Anne, Viscidi, Raphael, Chang, Kathryn, Duke, Cindy M.P., Shen, Wen, Gravitt, Patti E.·2013·Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We explored the age-stratified correlates and correlations between high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) infection and cervical abnormalities in perimenopausal women. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Human papillomavirus testing and Pap smear screening were performed at baseline on 841 routinely screened women age 35 to 60 years in the HPV in perimenopause cohort. Demographic, behavioral, and medical information was collected through telephone-administered questionnaires. Descriptive analyses were used to examine the correlation between HR-HPV infection and cervical abnormalities by age. Logistic regression was used to determine correlates of HPV and abnormalities in women younger and older than 45 years. RESULTS: The prevalence of HPV, HR-HPV, and cervical abnormalities decreased significantly with increasing age, as did the correlation between HR-HPV and cervical abnormalities. The prevalence of HR-HPV was 50% among younger women with abnormalities but this decreased steadily to 20% HR-HPV detection among 50- to 54-year-old women, and no abnormalities were detected in 55- to 60-year-old women. Different correlates of HR-HPV infection and abnormalities were observed in women 45 years or older, a pattern not seen in younger women. CONCLUSIONS: Although the relative proportion of low-grade and high-grade abnormalities did not change with age, we saw a loss of concordance between HR-HPV detection and cytological abnormalities with increasing age. Current guidelines for cervical cancer screening group together all women age 30 years and older. Our data raise important questions about the interpretation of HPV and Pap test results in this age group and suggest that ongoing surveillance of HPV and cytology in cervical cancer screening programs consider a third age stratification among older women.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/lgt.0b013e3182503402

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 absence of data on sexual history and lifestyle prevents granular analysis of behavioral risks.

    “The absence of data on sexual history and lifestyle prevents granular analysis of behavioral risks,2,10 and a 6-month follow-up period precludes assessment of long-term cancer incidence reduction.”

    From Integrating a “see-and-treat” approach with opportunistic human papilloma virus deoxyribonucleic acid (HPV DNA) based cervical cancer screening in India: a retrospective cross-sectional study (2026) · cites this paper as [10]

    The Methods (Study population and data collection) say the study collected lifetime sexual history and current sexual behavior, contrary to the claimed absence of sexual-history data. The Discussion also reports an age-stratified association between HPV detection and lifetime number of sex partners. Our copy does not establish whether other lifestyle data were available. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • These results reinforce the findings of anchor trials (Sankaranarayanan et al) that established the superior sensitivity of HPV molecular testing over VIA or cytology.

    “These results reinforce the findings of anchor trials (Sankaranarayanan et al) that established the superior sensitivity of HPV molecular testing over VIA or cytology.9,10,22”

    From Integrating a “see-and-treat” approach with opportunistic human papilloma virus deoxyribonucleic acid (HPV DNA) based cervical cancer screening in India: a retrospective cross-sectional study (2026) · cites this paper as [10]

    The Methods describe HPV DNA testing and Pap cytology, but do not compare their sensitivity or evaluate VIA. The Discussion says the study lacked pathologic confirmation needed to clarify differences in sensitivity and specificity (page unavailable). Searches for VIA and the named trials found no passage supporting the attributed finding. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. [1]Kohler BA Ward E McCarthy BJ Schymura MJ Ries LA Eheman C Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2007, featuring tumors of the brain and other nervous system J Natl Cancer Inst 2011 103 9 714 736 21454908 PMC3086878
  2. [2]Wright TC Jr Massad LS Dunton CJ Spitzer M Wilkinson EJ Solomon D 2006 consensus guidelines for the management of women with abnormal cervical cancer screening tests Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007 197 4 346 355 17904957
  3. [3]Clark JL Lescano AG Konda KA Leon SR Jones FR Klausner JD Syndromic management and STI control in urban Peru PLoS One 2009 4 9 e7201 19779620 PMC2745701
  4. [4]Moscicki AB Shiboski S Broering J Powell K Clayton L Jay N The natural history of human papillomavirus infection as measured by repeated DNA testing in adolescent and young women J Pediatr 1998 132 2 277 284 9506641
  5. [5]Smith JS Melendy A Rana RK Pimenta JM Age-specific prevalence of infection with human papillomavirus in females: a global review J Adolesc Health 2008 43 4 Suppl S5 S25 S e1 S e41 18809145
  6. [6]Watson M Saraiya M Benard V Coughlin SS Flowers L Cokkinides V Burden of cervical cancer in the United States, 1998–2003 Cancer 2008 113 10 Suppl 2855 2864 18980204
  7. [7]Peto J Gilham C Deacon J Taylor C Evans C Binns W Cervical HPV infection and neoplasia in a large population-based prospective study: the Manchester cohort Br J Cancer 2004 91 5 942 953 15292939 PMC2409880
  8. [8]Rodriguez AC Schiffman M Herrero R Hildesheim A Bratti C Sherman ME Longitudinal study of human papillomavirus persistence and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2/3: critical role of duration of infection J Natl Cancer Inst 2010 102 5 315 324 20157096 PMC2831050
  9. [9]Wright TC Jr Stoler MH Behrens CM Apple R Derion T Wright TL The ATHENA human papillomavirus study: design, methods, and baseline results Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012 206 1 46 e1 e11 21944226
  10. [10]Katki HA Kinney WK Fetterman B Lorey T Poitras NE Cheung L Cervical cancer risk for women undergoing concurrent testing for human papillomavirus and cervical cytology: a populationbased study in routine clinical practice Lancet Oncol 2011 12 7 663 672 21684207 PMC3272857
  11. [11]Marks MA Viscidi RP Chang K Silver M Burke A Howard R Differences in the concentration and correlation of cervical immune markers among HPV positive and negative perimenopausal women Cytokine 2011 56 3 798 803 22015106 PMC3831521
  12. [12]Gravitt PE Peyton CL Alessi TQ Wheeler CM Coutlee F Hildesheim A Improved amplification of genital human papillomaviruses J Clin Microbiol 2000 38 1 357 361 10618116 PMC88724
  13. [13]Coutlee F Gravitt P Kornegay J Hankins C Richardson H Lapointe N Use of PGMY primers in L1 consensus PCR improves detection of human papillomavirus DNA in genital samples J Clin Microbiol 2002 40 3 902 907 11880413 PMC120235
  14. [15]Castle PE Fetterman B Thomas Cox J Shaber R Poitras N Lorey T The age-specific relationships of abnormal cytology and human papillomavirus DNA results to the risk of cervical precancer and cancer Obstet Gynecol 2010 116 1 76 84 20567171
  15. [16]Ronco G Cuzick J Segnan N Brezzi S Carozzi F Folicaldi S HPV triage for low grade (L-SIL) cytology is appropriate for women over 35 in mass cervical cancer screening using liquid based cytology Eur J Cancer 2007 43 3 476 480 17223540
  16. [17]Thrall MJ Smith DA Mody DR Women >or=30 years of age with low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) have low positivity rates when cotested for high-risk human papillomavirus: should we reconsider HPV triage for LSIL in older women? Diagn Cytopathol 2010 38 6 407 412 19894254
  17. [18]Brismar-Wendel S Froberg M Hjerpe A Andersson S Johansson B Age-specific prevalence of HPV genotypes in cervical cytology samples with equivocal or low-grade lesions Br J Cancer 2009 101 3 511 517 19623178 PMC2720239
  18. [19]Human papillomavirus testing for triage of women with cytologic evidence of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions: baseline data from a randomized trial. The Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance/Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions Triage Study (ALTS) Group J Natl Cancer Inst 2000 92 5 397 402 10700419
  19. [20]Castle PE Jeronimo J Schiffman M Herrero R Rodriguez AC Bratti MC Age-related changes of the cervix influence human papillomavirus type distribution Cancer Res 2006 66 2 1218 1224 16424061
  20. [21]Castle PE Rodriguez AC Porras C Herrero R Schiffman M Gonzalez P A comparison of cervical and vaginal human papillomavirus Sex Transm Dis 2007 34 11 849 855 17621246 PMC3962831
  21. [22]Castle PE Schiffman M Herrero R Hildesheim A Rodriguez AC Bratti MC A prospective study of age trends in cervical human papillomavirus acquisition and persistence in Guanacaste, Costa Rica J Infect Dis 2005 191 11 1808 1816 15871112
  22. [23]Maucort-Boulch D Plummer M Castle PE Demuth F Safaeian M Wheeler CM Predictors of human papillomavirus persistence among women with equivocal or mildly abnormal cytology Int J Cancer 2010 126 3 684 691 19609952

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rositch, A. F., Silver, M. I., Burke, A., Viscidi, R., Chang, K., Duke, C. M. P., Shen, W., & Gravitt, P. E.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Venue
Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease
Published
2013-01
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
38-47
ISSN
1089-2591 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W567308209
Cited by
27
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (R01CA123467, T32CA0009314, T32CA009314)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
Keywords
high-risk HPV, cervical abnormalities, perimenopausal women, Pap smear, cervical cancer screening, older women
MeSH terms
Adult, Age Factors, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Severity of Illness Index, Cohort Studies, Prevalence, Papillomaviridae, Papillomavirus Infections, Perimenopause

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