4.7 Article

Obesity and Human Papillomavirus Infection in Perimenopausal Women

Journal

JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 208, Issue 7, Pages 1071-1080

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jit297

Keywords

adipokine; body mass index; discrete-time survival analysis; frailty model; human papillomavirus; obesity; waist circumference

Funding

  1. US National Cancer Institute [R01 CA123467]
  2. Institutional Research Cancer Epidemiology Fellowship
  3. National Cancer Institute [T32 CA0009314]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction. Obesity is known to increase susceptibility to certain infections in men. It is unclear whether obesity increases women's risk for human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. Methods. In a prospective cohort of 696 perimenopausal women enrolled in 2008-2012, we sought to determine whether obesity predicted incident HPV detection or nondetection. Obesity was defined as body mass index (BMI) >= 30 kg/m(2). Results. Baseline any type HPV prevalence was comparable between obese and nonobese women (18.7% vs 19.1%; P > .05). Over a median follow-up period of 17.9 months (interquartile range: 12.1-24.5), 187 new HPV detections occurred among 123 women, 60 of whom subsequently lost 76 detectable infections. When compared with nonobese participants, obese women had a similar rate of new HPV detection (7.1 vs 7.8 infections per 1000 infection-years; P > .05) or loss of detection (100.3 vs 85.8 infections per 100 infection-years; P > .05). Similar results were found after adjusting for age, menopausal status, smoking habit, and sexual exposure history. Conclusions. Results from the current analysis suggest little effect of obesity on HPV detection and loss of detection in mid-adult women. More research is needed to determine whether adipokines or cytokines better capture the potential immune modulating effects of obesity on HPV infection.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available