4.5 Article

The Impact of High-Risk HPV Genotypes Other Than HPV 16/18 on the Natural Course of Abnormal Cervical Cytology: A Korean HPV Cohort Study

期刊

CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT
卷 48, 期 4, 页码 1313-1320

出版社

KOREAN CANCER ASSOCIATION
DOI: 10.4143/crt.2016.013

关键词

Human papillomavirus; Genotype; Cytology

类别

资金

  1. Chronic Infectious Disease Cohort Study from the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [4800-4859-304-260, 2013-E51005-02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of high-risk human papillomaviruses (HPVs) other than HPV 16/18 on the natural course of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) or low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL). Materials and Methods The study population was derived from the Korean HPV cohort (2010-2014). Women aged 20 to 60 who satisfied the, criteria of having both HPV infection and abnormal cervical cytology of either ASC-US or LSIL were recruited from five institutions nationwide. Enrolled patients underwent cervical cytology and HPV DNA testing every 6 months. Results A total of 1,158 patients were enrolled. The 10 most common HPV types were HPV 16 (12.3%), 58 (10.0%), 56 (8.8%), 53 (8.4%), 52 (7.7%), 39 (6.2%),18 (6.0%), 51(5.7%), 68 (5.1%), and 66 (4.6%). Among these patients, 636 women were'positive for high-risk HPVs other than HPV 16 or 18, and 429 women were followed for more than 6 months. Cytology evaluations showed progression in 15.3% of women, no change in 22.6%, and regression in 62.1% of women at 12 months. In cases of HPV 58 single infection, a more highly significant progression rate, compared to other high-risk types, was observed at 6 months (relative risk [RR], 3.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.04 to 5.30; p < 0.001) and 12 months (RR, 5.03; 95% CI, 2.56 to 9.91; p < 0.001). Conclusion HPV genotypes numbered in the 50s were frequent in Korean women with ASC-US and LSIL. HPV 58 was the second most common type, with a high progression rate of cervical cytology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据