AIMS: To monitor the association between the course of high risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) infection and the development of cervical neoplasia over time, from a baseline of normal cervical cytology. METHODS: This paper presents the follow up data from a previous cross sectional analysis. Women from a screening population who had normal cytology and who were HR-HPV positive were recalled after two to three years for cytology and HPV genotyping. The development of cervical neoplasia at follow up was related to the course of HPV infection (clearance, persistence, or sequential infection) and the presence of single or multiple HPV infections at baseline. A comparator control group of women who were HPV and cytologically negative at baseline were selected from the same population. RESULTS: Twelve cases of dyskaryosis were found in women who were HPV positive at baseline; four were high grade. Only three cases of low grade dyskaryosis were found in the control group. Women with type specific persistent infections were significantly more likely to develop cervical neoplasia than women who cleared the infection (p = 0.0001) or were sequentially infected with different types (p = 0.001). Women with multiple HPV infections at baseline were no more likely to develop cervical dyskaryosis than those with a single infection. CONCLUSIONS: Type specific persistent HR-HPV infection as monitored by genotyping can identify women at increased risk of cervical neoplasia more accurately than a single or repeated presence/absence HPV test. The cost effectiveness of such an approach should be investigated by an appropriate, large scale cost-benefit analysis.
AIMS: To monitor the association between the course of high risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) infection and the development of cervical neoplasia over time, from a baseline of normal cervical cytology. METHODS: This paper presents the follow up data from a previous cross sectional analysis. Women from a screening population who had normal cytology and who were HR-HPV positive were recalled after two to three years for cytology and HPV genotyping. The development of cervical neoplasia at follow up was related to the course of HPV infection (clearance, persistence, or sequential infection) and the presence of single or multiple HPV infections at baseline. A comparator control group of women who were HPV and cytologically negative at baseline were selected from the same population. RESULTS: Twelve cases of dyskaryosis were found in women who were HPV positive at baseline; four were high grade. Only three cases of low grade dyskaryosis were found in the control group. Women with type specific persistent infections were significantly more likely to develop cervical neoplasia than women who cleared the infection (p = 0.0001) or were sequentially infected with different types (p = 0.001). Women with multiple HPV infections at baseline were no more likely to develop cervical dyskaryosis than those with a single infection. CONCLUSIONS: Type specific persistent HR-HPV infection as monitored by genotyping can identify women at increased risk of cervical neoplasia more accurately than a single or repeated presence/absence HPV test. The cost effectiveness of such an approach should be investigated by an appropriate, large scale cost-benefit analysis.
Authors: K L Wallin; F Wiklund; T Angström; F Bergman; U Stendahl; G Wadell; G Hallmans; J Dillner Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1999-11-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jean-Paul Bory; Joël Cucherousset; Marianne Lorenzato; René Gabriel; Christian Quereux; Philippe Birembaut; Christine Clavel Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2002-12-10 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: M H Mayrand; F Coutlée; C Hankins; N Lapointe; P Forest; M de Ladurantaye; M Roger Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: N Ylitalo; P Sørensen; A M Josefsson; P K Magnusson; P K Andersen; J Pontén; H O Adami; U B Gyllensten; M Melbye Journal: Lancet Date: 2000-06-24 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: P A Rolón; J S Smith; N Muñoz; S J Klug; R Herrero; X Bosch; F Llamosas; C J Meijer; J M Walboomers Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2000-02-15 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Nubia Muñoz; F Xavier Bosch; Silvia de Sanjosé; Rolando Herrero; Xavier Castellsagué; Keerti V Shah; Peter J F Snijders; Chris J L M Meijer Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-02-06 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Patti E Gravitt; Robert D Burk; Attila Lorincz; Rolando Herrero; Allan Hildesheim; Mark E Sherman; Maria Concepcion Bratti; Ana Cecilia Rodriguez; Kathy J Helzlsouer; Mark Schiffman Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Erik J Nelson; John Hughes; J Michael Oakes; Bharat Thyagarajan; James S Pankow; Shalini L Kulasingam Journal: J Community Health Date: 2015-06
Authors: Dennis van Hamont; Maaike A P C van Ham; Judith M J E Bakkers; Leon F A G Massuger; Willem J G Melchers Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: S Hovland; M Arbyn; A K Lie; W Ryd; B Borge; E J Berle; H Skomedal; T M Kadima; L Kyembwa; E M Billay; D Mukwege; R B Chirimwami; T M Mvula; P J Snijders; C J L M Meijer; F Karlsen Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2010-03-02 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Anne F Rositch; Jill Koshiol; Michael G Hudgens; Hilda Razzaghi; Danielle M Backes; Jeanne M Pimenta; Eduardo L Franco; Charles Poole; Jennifer S Smith Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2012-10-11 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Valeska B Guzman; Anatoly Yambartsev; Amador Goncalves-Primo; Ismael D C G Silva; Carmen R N Carvalho; Julisa C L Ribalta; Luiz Ricardo Goulart; Natalia Shulzhenko; Maria Gerbase-Delima; Andrey Morgun Journal: Hum Mol Genet Date: 2008-03-12 Impact factor: 6.150
Authors: Jill Koshiol; Lisa Lindsay; Jeanne M Pimenta; Charles Poole; David Jenkins; Jennifer S Smith Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2008-05-15 Impact factor: 4.897