| Literature DB >> 28284657 |
Zulqarnain Baloch1, Nafeesa Yasmeen2, Yuanyue Li3, Ke Ma4, Xiaomei Wu5, Shi-Hua Yang6, Xueshan Xia7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dai is a major Chinese ethnic minority group residing in rural areas of the southern part of Yunnan. However, no data exist on the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) prevalence and genotype distribution among Dai women.Entities:
Keywords: China; Dai; Genotypes; HPV; Prevalence; Rural; Urban
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28284657 PMCID: PMC9427817 DOI: 10.1016/j.bjid.2017.01.009
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Braz J Infect Dis ISSN: 1413-8670 Impact factor: 3.257
The prevalence of HPV and genotype distribution among women of different ethnicities.
| Variables | Dai ( | Others ( | Han ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive | P% (95%CI) | Positive | P% (95% CI) | Positive | P% (95% CI) | ||
| Overall | 32 | 9.9 (5.65–13.1) | 48 | 22.0 (16.5–27.5) | 35 | 13.9 (9.4–18.4) | 0.06 |
| High risk | 23 | 7.1 (4.3–9.9) | 48 | 22.0 (16.5–27.5) | 33 | 13.1 (8.9–17.3) | |
| Low risk or Mix | 9 | 2.8 (2.7–5.5) | – | 2 | 0.8 | – | |
| Single | 25 | 7.7 (4.8–11.5) | 43 | 19.7 (14.4–25.0) | 28 | 11.1 (7.2–15.0) | 0.12 |
| HPV-16 | 4 | 1.2 | 15 | 6.9 (3.5–10.3) | 7 | 2.8 (0.8–4.8) | 0.2 |
| HPV-52 | 8 | 2.5 (0.8–4.2) | 11 | 5.0 (2.1–7.9) | 6 | 2.4 (0.5–4.3) | 0.94 |
| HPV-39 | 3 | 0.9 | 4 | 1.8 (0.04–3.6) | 6 | 2.4 (0.5–4.3) | 0.16 |
| HPV-58 | 4 | 1.2 | 6 | 2.7 (0.55–4.8) | 2 | 0.8 | 0.75 |
| HPV-68 | 2 | 0.6 | 3 | 1.4 | – | – | – |
| HPV-51 | – | – | 1 | 0.4 | 2 | 0.8 | – |
| HPV-61 | – | – | 1 | 0.4 | 1 | 0.4 | – |
| HPV-66 | 1 | 0.3 | – | 1 | 0.4 | – | |
| HPV-33 | 1 | 0.3 | 1 | 0.4 | – | – | – |
| HPV-81 | 1 | 0.3 | – | – | – | – | – |
| HPV-84 | 1 | 0.3 | – | – | – | – | – |
| HPV-31 | – | – | 1 | 0.4 | – | – | – |
| HPV-11 | – | – | – | – | 1 | 0.4 | – |
| HPV-53 | – | – | – | – | 1 | 0.4 | – |
| HPV-56 | – | – | – | – | 1 | 0.4 | – |
| Multiple | 7 | 2.2 (0.6–3.8) | 5 | 2.3 (0.3–4.3) | 7 | 2.8 (0.8–4.8) | 0.83 |
| Double | 6 | 1.8 (0.4–3.2) | 5 | 2.3 (0.3–4.3) | 7 | 2.8 (0.8–4.8) | 0.45 |
| Triple | 1 | 0.3 | – | – | – | – | – |
n, total number of cases; P%, prevalence percentage; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval were obtained by using binomial distribution analysis model.
The HPV prevalence between the three ethnic groups was compared using Chi-square test. Bold type indicated statistically significant values.
The prevalence of HPV and genotype distribution among rural and urban women.
| Variables | Total ( | Rural ( | Urban ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive | P% (95% CI) | Positive | P% (95% CI) | Positive | P% (95% CI) | ||
| Overall | 115 | 14.5 (12.1–16.9) | 49 | 12.9 (9.5–16.3) | 66 | 16.0 (12.5–19.5) | 0.2 |
| High risk | 104 | 13.1 (11.8–15.5) | 46 | 12.1 (8.8–15.4) | 58 | 14.1 (10.7–14.5) | 0.4 |
| Low risk or Mix | 11 | 1.4 (0.6–2.2) | 3 | 0.8 | 8 | 1.9 | |
| Single infection | 96 | 12.1 (9.8–14.4) | 47 | 12.3 (8.0–15.5) | 49 | 11.9 (8.9–15.0) | 0.5 |
| HPV-16 | 26 | 3.3 (2.1–4.5) | 21 | 5.5 (3.2–7.8) | 5 | 1.2 (0.02–2.2) | |
| HPV-52 | 25 | 3.1 (1.9–4.3) | 10 | 2.6 (1.0–4.2) | 15 | 3.6 (1.8–5.4) | 0.5 |
| HPV-39 | 13 | 1.6 | 2 | 0.5 | 11 | 2.7 | |
| HPV-58 | 12 | 1.5 | 9 | 2.4 | 3 | 0.7 | |
| HPV-68 | 5 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.3 | 4 | 1.0 | 0.2 |
| HPV-51 | 3 | 0.4 | 3 | 0.7 | |||
| HPV-61 | 2 | 0.2 | 2 | 0.5 | |||
| HPV-66 | 2 | 0.2 | 1 | 0.3 | 1 | 0.2 | |
| HPV-33 | 2 | 0.2 | – | 2 | 0.5 | ||
| HPV-81 | 1 | 0.1 | – | 1 | 0.2 | ||
| HPV-84 | 1 | 0.1 | – | 1 | 0.2 | ||
| HPV-31 | 1 | 0.1 | 1 | 0.3 | |||
| HPV-11 | 1 | 0.1 | – | 1 | 0.2 | ||
| HPV-53 | 1 | 0.1 | – | 1 | 0.2 | ||
| HPV-56 | 1 | 0.1 | – | 1 | 0.2 | ||
| Multiple infection | 19 | 2.4 (1.3–3.5) | 2 | 0.5 | 17 | 4.1 (2.2–6.0) | |
| Double infection | 18 | 2.3 (1.3–3.3) | 2 | 0.5 | 16 | 3.9 (2.0–5.8) | |
| Triple infection | – | ||||||
n, total number of cases; P%, prevalence percentage; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval were obtained by using binomial distribution analysis model.
The HPV prevalence between the Rural and Urban group were compared using Chi-square test. Bold type indicated statistically significant values.
HPV prevalence according to histopathological analysis.
| HPV infection | Normal ( | CIN1 ( | CIN2 ( | CIN3 ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 89 (11.8) | 11 (45.8) | 10 (83.0) | 5 (83.3) |
| HR-HPV | 84 (11.2) | 6 (25.0) | 9 (75.0) | 5 (83.3) |
| LR-HPV | 5 (0.7) | 5 (20.8) | 1 (8.3) | – |
| Single | 78 (10.4) | 7 (29.2) | 8 (66.7) | 3 (50.0) |
| Multiple | 11 (1.5) | 4 (16.7) | 2 (16.7) | 2 (33.3) |
| HPV-16 | 19 (2.5) | 3 (12.5) | 1 (8.3) | 2 (33.3) |
| HPV-39 | 9 (1.2) | 2 (8.3) | 1 (8.3) | 1 (16.7) |
| HPV-52 | 17 (2.3) | 5 (20.8) | 1 (8.3) | – |
| HPV-58 | 6 (0.8) | 3 (12.5) | 2 (16.6) | 1 (16.7) |
| HPV-33 | – | 1 (4.2) | 1 (8.3) | – |
Comparison of age-specific overall, high-risk, single, and multiple HPV infection prevalence in four age-groups among rural and urban women.
| Rural women | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HPV infection | <29 ( | 30–39 ( | 40–49 ( | >50 ( | |
| Overall | 7 (8.7) | 13 (11.3) | 16 (11.0) | 13 (31.7) | |
| HR-HPV | 7 (8.7) | 13 (11.3) | 14 (9.6) | 12 (29.3) | |
| LR-HPV | – | – | 2 (1.4) | 1 (2.4) | |
| Single | 7 (8.7) | 13 (11.3) | 15 (10.3) | 12 (29.3) | |
| Multiple | 1 (0.7) | 1 (2.4) | |||
Detection of cervical human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA according to potential risk factors in rural and urban women.
| Variable | Rural ( | Urban ( | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total cases | Positives | OR | Total cases | Positives | OR2 (95% CI) | |||
| 0.16 | ||||||||
| Single | 113 | 13 | 1 | 299 | 37 | 1 | ||
| Double | 176 | 19 | 0.22 (0.08–0.62) | 78 | 20 | 2.1 (0.9–4.5) | ||
| Multiple | 92 | 17 | 0.48 (0.18–1.29) | 35 | 9 | 2.1 (0.7–6.8) | ||
| Yes | 241 | 26 | 1 | 367 | 64 | 1 | ||
| No | 140 | 23 | 3.9 (1.7–9.5) | 45 | 2 | 5.5 (1.8–17.4) | ||
| 0.15 | ||||||||
| Yes | 225 | 13 | 1 | 74 | 23 | 1 | ||
| No | 156 | 36 | 2.45 (1.1–5.3) | 338 | 43 | 0.3 (0.06–1.54) | ||
| Graduate | 17 | 0 | – | 178 | 29 | 1 | ||
| High | 15 | 0 | – | 66 | 12 | 0.9 (0.4–2.1) | ||
| Middle | 75 | 8 | – | 84 | 6 | 0.1 (0.02–0.36) | ||
| Primary | 188 | 19 | – | 47 | 15 | 0.3 (0.08–1.2) | ||
| No | 86 | 22 | – | 37 | 4 | 0.1 (0.01–0.4) | ||
| 0.5 | 0.56 | |||||||
| No work | 24 | 2 | 1 | 76 | 8 | 1 | ||
| Business | 353 | 47 | 0.4 (0.07–2.1) | 121 | 31 | 0.7 (0.3–1.9) | ||
| Job | 4 | – | – | 215 | 27 | 1.3 (0.4–3.9) | ||
n, total number of participants.
Odd ratio (OR) and their 95% confidence interval (CI) were obtained using the multiple logistic regression analysis model. The first category serves as a reference for OR calculation.
Bold type indicates statistically significant values.