4.4 Article

Analysis of persistence of human papillomavirus infection in men evaluated by sampling multiple genital sites

Journal

Publisher

VERDUCI PUBLISHER

Keywords

HPV infection; Genital sampling; Men; Persistence; Multiple sampling

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE: Although human papillomavirus (HPV) infection has been studied extensively in women, data on male infection are limited. The purpose of this study was to investigate persistence of HPV infection at multiple genital sites in men and to define potential associations with socio-behavioural characteristics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Penile, urethral and seminal specimens were tested by the INNO-LiPA HPV system (Innogenetics) and a PCR assay. Persistence was defined as the detection of the same HPV type at >= 2 consecutive visits. The Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test were applied to estimate the likelihood of persistence. RESULTS: A total of 50 men (median age: 33 years) were followed for a median of 14.7 months. Altogether, 49%, 36%, 26% and 11% of baseline HPV-positive men had 6-, 12-, 18- and 24-month persistent infection with any HPV type, respectively. The 6-, 12- and 18- month persistence was more common for oncogenic HPV infections; 24-month persistence was similar. The median duration of persistence was 21.7 months for any HPV. The median duration of persistence for any HPV type was significantly longer in the penile sample (22.5 months, 95% CI:18.3-26.7) than the semen sample (15.3 months, 95% CI: 14.5-16.1). CONCLUSIONS: Over a third of type-specific HPV infections in men remained persistent over a 24-month period. The median duration of HPV infection was longer in penile samples compared to seminal samples. With increasing attention on HPV vaccination as a potential preventive approach for men, it is imperative to obtain additional insight on natural history of HPV infection in men, particularly as far as incidence and duration are concerned.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available