| Literature DB >> 32724435 |
Yu Huang1, Xinzhi Wu1, Ying Lin2, Wenzhou Li1, Jiahua Liu1, Baozhi Song1.
Abstract
There is an indirect link between multiple sexual partners (MSP) and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) or even cervical cancer (CC). MSP may also lead to bacterial vaginosis (BV). The relationship among MSP, BV, human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and CIN/CC development in Chinese women remains unclear. The present study was designed to clarify their association. The study retrospectively analyzed 549 female patients who had visited a physical examination center. The MSP information was acquired, and vaginal microecology, HPV and cervical conization pathology (CCP) tests were performed when necessary. MSP status was distinct among patients with different levels of BV severity. In addition, as the severity of BV progressed, the HPV-positive ratio increased. Meanwhile, MSP was significantly associated with a positive HPV outcome, including HPV 16, HPV 18 and other high-risk HPV infections. The MSP group had a significantly higher percentage of positive CCP outcomes (particularly cases with CIN-II and CIN-III). Similarly, higher BV severity meant more severe CIN/CC progression. A logistic regression model based on age, MSP status and the Nugent score level was used in order to predict the CCP outcome. Furthermore, a receiver operating characteristic curve analysis resulted in an area under the curve of 0.834. In conclusion, the combination of MSP information and BV examination may provide a rapid, economic and accurate prediction of CIN/CC. Health education on sexual behavior and timely detection/treatment of BV should be conducted to reduce the risk of CC. Copyright: © Huang et al.Entities:
Keywords: Nugent score; bacterial vaginosis; cervical cancer; human papillomavirus; multiple sexual partners
Year: 2020 PMID: 32724435 PMCID: PMC7377087 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2020.11738
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncol Lett ISSN: 1792-1074 Impact factor: 2.967
Age and MSP status of enrolled patients.
| Index | Total (n=549) | BV negative (n=309) | BV mild (n=141) | BV severe (n=99) | F or χ2 | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 36.01±8.07 | 36.20±7.92 | 35.44±7.92 | 36.24±8.75 | 0.476 | 0.622 |
| MSP, n (%) | 41.964 | <0.001 | ||||
| No | 489 (89.1%) | 298 (96.4%) | 116 (82.3%) | 75 (75.8%) | ||
| Yes | 60 (10.9) | 11 (3.6%) | 25 (17.7%) | 24 (24.2%) |
BV, bacterial vaginosis; MSP, multiple sexual partners.
Association between BV severity and HPV infection.
| HPV infection | BV negative (%) | BV mild (%) | BV severe (%) | χ2 | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive | 60.833 | <0.001 | |||
| No | 174 (56.3) | 45 (31.9) | 15 (15.2) | ||
| Yes | 135 (43.7) | 96 (68.1) | 84 (84.8) | ||
| HPV 16 | 39.000 | <0.001 | |||
| No | 289 (93.5) | 111 (78.7) | 70 (70.7) | ||
| Yes | 20 (6.5) | 30 (21.3) | 29 (29.3) | ||
| HPV 18 | 20.946 | <0.001 | |||
| No | 298 (96.4) | 128 (90.8) | 82 (82.8) | ||
| Yes | 11 (3.6) | 13 (9.2) | 17 (17.2) | ||
| Other HPV types | 41.225 | <0.001 | |||
| No | 204 (66.0) | 70 (49.6) | 30 (30.3) | ||
| Yes | 105 (34.0) | 71 (50.4) | 69 (69.7) |
BV, bacterial vaginosis; HPV, human papillomavirus.
Association between MSP and HPV infection.
| HPV infection | No MSP (n=489) (%) | MSP (n=60) (%) | χ2 | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive | 23.630 | <0.001 | ||
| No | 226 (46.2) | 8 (13.3) | ||
| Yes | 263 (53.8) | 52 (86.7) | ||
| HPV 16 | 31.348 | <0.001 | ||
| No | 433 (88.5) | 37 (61.7) | ||
| Yes | 56 (11.5) | 23 (38.3) | ||
| HPV 18 | 24.536 | <0.001 | ||
| No | 462 (94.5) | 46 (76.7) | ||
| Yes | 27 (5.5) | 14 (23.3) | ||
| Other HPV types | 15.320 | <0.001 | ||
| No | 285 (58.3) | 19 (31.7) | ||
| Yes | 204 (41.7) | 41 (68.3) |
HPV, human papillomavirus; MSP, multiple sexual partners.
Association between MSP and CCP outcome.
| CCP outcome | No MSP (n=489) (%) | MSP (n=60) (%) | χ2 | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | 38.683 | <0.001 | ||
| Negative | 445 (91.0) | 38 (63.3) | ||
| Positive | 44 (9.0) | 22 (36.7) | ||
| Level | 39.991 | <0.001 | ||
| No-need-to-test | 443 (90.6) | 38 (63.3) | ||
| CIN-I | 2 (0.4) | 0 (0.0) | ||
| CIN-II | 24 (4.9) | 12 (20.0) | ||
| CIN-III | 19 (3.9) | 10 (16.7) | ||
| CC | 1 (0.2) | 0 (0.0) |
CCP, cervical conization pathology; CC, cervical cancer; CIN, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; MSP, multiple sexual partners.
Association between Nugent score level and CCP outcome.
| CCP outcome | BV negative (%) | BV mild (%) | BV severe (%) | χ2 | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | 74.886 | <0.001 | |||
| Positive | 297 (96.1) | 123 (87.2) | 63 (63.6) | ||
| Negative | 12 (3.9) | 18 (12.8) | 36 (36.4) | ||
| Level | 89.104 | <0.001 | |||
| No-need-to-test | 297 (96.1) | 123 (87.2) | 61 (61.6) | ||
| CIN-I | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (2.0) | ||
| CIN-II | 8 (2.6) | 11 (7.8) | 17 (17.2) | ||
| CIN-III | 4 (1.3) | 7 (5.0) | 18 (18.2) | ||
| CC | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (1.0) |
CCP, cervical conization pathology; BV, bacterial vaginosis; CC, cervical cancer; CIN, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.
Frequencies of positive cervical conization pathology outcome in six subgroups.
| Group | Negative (%) | Positive (%) | χ2 | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No-MSP-BV-negative | 287 (96.3 | 11 (3.7) | 95.301 | <0.001 |
| No-MSP-BV-mild | 106 (91.4) | 10 (8.6) | ||
| No-MSP-BV-severe | 52 (69.3) | 23 (30.7) | ||
| MSP-BV-negative | 10 (90.9) | 1 (9.1) | ||
| MSP-BV-mild | 17 (68.0) | 8 (32.0) | ||
| MSP-BV-severe | 11 (45.8) | 13 (54.2) |
BV, bacterial vaginosis; MSP, multiple sexual partners.
Variables in the logistic regression model of cervical conization pathology outcomes.
| Variable | B | Wald | P-value | Odd ratio | 95% CI of odd ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 0.095 | 22.282 | <0.0001 | 1.099 | 1.057–1.143 |
| MSP or not | 1.708 | 20.551 | <0.0001 | 5.518 | 2.637–11.548 |
| BV severity levels | 44.181 | <0.0001 | |||
| Mild vs. negative | 1.070 | 6.779 | 0.0090 | 2.915 | 1.303–6.523 |
| Severe vs. negative | 2.466 | 41.582 | <0.0001 | 11.780 | 5.566–24.930 |
Figure 1.Receiver operating characteristic curve for efficient analysis of risk factors in CIN/CC prediction. Two variables, AMN and MN, were used to predict the outcomes of cervical conization pathology. AMN, age, MSP and Nugent score; AUC, area under the curve; MN, MSP and Nugent score; MSP: Multiple sexual partners.