4.5 Article

Epidemiology and genotype distribution of human papillomavirus (HPV) in Southwest China: a cross-sectional five years study in non-vaccinated women

期刊

VIROLOGY JOURNAL
卷 14, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12985-017-0751-3

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81501818]
  2. National Key Clinical Specialties Construction Program of China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Large-size data on type-specific HPV prevalence in Southwest China are required to estimate the cervical cancer burden in the country and to prepare for HPV-based cervical screening program and further HPV vaccination of China. This HPV study is a pooled analysis of data from five years in Chongqing of China, which is cross-sectional in design using data collecting. Results: The positivity of HPV was 26.2% (10542/40311), single type was 25.7% (10360/40311), multiple type was 8.2% (3306/40311), high-risk HPV was 30.9% (12490/40311), and low-risk HPV was 2.9%(1169/40311). The most common genotypes were HPV16,52,58 and 18. HPV-positive women (n = 10542) were triaged by cytology, colposcopy or histological diagnosis. Among HPV-positive women, 43.8% had normal, 22.5% had ASCUS, 0.2% had LSIL, 12.6% had HSIL and 6.0% had ICC. The most common HPV genotypes were HPV16, 58 and 18 in ASCUS, HPV16, 18 and 58 in LSIL, HPV16, 58 and 33 in HSIL, and HPV16, 58 and 18 in ICC. The prevalence of Group 1/2A HPV types increased with increasing CIN grade and accounted for 96.05% of the CIN 3+ lesions, while HPV16 accounted for 71.1%. HPV-positive women steadily increased with age, peaking at 31-40 years. Conclusion: The type-specific prevalence rate of HPV 16 and HPV 18 were a little lower than the mean of international meta-analyses. Single HPV genotype infection was predominantly detected in different groups of cervical lesions in Chongqing, and HPV16, 52, 58 were the priority HPV types. The HPV genotyping study was found to be valuable for planning further preventive program for cervical cancer.

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