4.7 Article

Intratypic variants of human papillomavirus type 16 and risk of cervical Neoplasia in Taiwan

Journal

JOURNAL OF MEDICAL VIROLOGY
Volume 85, Issue 9, Pages 1567-1576

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/jmv.23651

Keywords

HPV 16; variants; prevalence; cervical neoplasia; Taiwan

Categories

Funding

  1. National Science Council [94-2314-B-001-011, 95-2314-B-001-007, 96-2314-B-001-004, 97-2314-B-001-001-MY3]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The associations between variants of human papillomavirus (HPV) 16 and risk of cervical neoplasia have been reported, but nucleotide variations of HPV 16 in Asian populations and their association with cervical neoplasia have not been evaluated extensively. During 1991-1992, 11,923 women from seven townships in Taiwan were enrolled. The HPV DNA in cervical cells was detected and genotyped using EasyChip HPV blot. Nucleotide variations in the long control region (LCR), E6, and E7 genes were determined using DNA sequencing for 170 HPV 16-positive cervical samples. The Asian variant was the most prevalent variant (81.8%) of HPV 16 in Taiwan, and was also associated with increased prevalence of histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse, showing an age-adjusted odds ratio (exact confidence limits) of 10.70 (1.62-451.05; P=0.0049) compared to the HPV 16 European variant. Similar significant associations with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse were also observed for distinct nucleotide substitutions, including T178A/G, A647G, A7730C/G, T7781C, G7842A, and C24T/G. These results demonstrate that non-European variants (non-E) of HPV 16, predominantly Asian variants, are associated with increased risk for severe cervical neoplasia, compared with European variants. Molecular mechanisms accounting for varied cervical neoplasia risk among different HPV 16 variants warrant further investigation. J. Med. Virol. 85:1567-1576, 2013. (c) 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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