ReviewEcancermedicalscience2015
Persistent infection with high-risk human papilloma viruses: cohort study, Mérida, Venezuela.
Review in Ecancermedicalscience, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vaginal Microbiota and HPV in Latin America: A Narrative Review.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Detecting Human Papillomavirus Type 16 in Cervical Cancer Patients with Molecular Variation of Gene L1 in Riau Province Indonesia.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cervical lesions have been associated with infection by high-risk human papilloma virus (high-risk HPV). In 409 women aged >15 years high-risk HPV lesions were identified. In a cohort of this population persistent infection was compared with cytological, colposcopic, and histological lesions. Cervical scrapes were taken and DNA was isolated. HPV was detected by PCR in the E6/E7 region. Genotyping was performed by PCR nested multiple E6/E7. HPV was detected in a 37.40% (153/409), high-risk HPV in 86% (153/178), HPV18 46.64% (83/178), HPV16 34.28% (61/178). Among these 53.93% (96/178) were multiple infections, and HPV18/16 (30/96) was the most frequent 31.25%. The cytology showed changes in 15% of positive patients. A 49.67% in women positive for HPV infection showed abnormalities in the colposcopic study, a relationship that turned out to be statistically significant ( p < 0.0019 test χ(2)). Among all 85% of the women were younger than 45 years of age. Fifty-seven patients were evaluated 15 months after the base study, with initial prevalence of morbidity 49.12% (28/57) and at the end 10.53% (6/57), showing in 89.29% (25/28) negative for HR-HPV infection, 10.34% (3/28) showed persistence of infection, 17.54% (10/57) presented cytological alterations, with 80% of positivity for HPV, and a regression of 100% (10/10) of the previously identified lesions. With colposcopy, 50% (14/28) presented alterations related to HPV, of these 85.71% (12/14) showed regression of such an alteration. The cumulative incidence for HPV was 10.34% (3/29). The incidence rate was 4.23% (3/71), which is equal to 4.23 new cases of HPV infection per 100 people, per year of follow-up. In conclusion, the present work shows a high frequency of infection by high-risk HPV, with predominance of HPV18 and 16 and in general for multiple infections. Colposcopy was better predictor than the Pap smear for infection. The follow-up study revealed a low percentage of persistent infection, and a high frequency of negativity for viral infection, high regression of cytological and colposcopic lesions, a low cumulative and incidence rate similar to that reported by other Latin American countries and higher than the European countries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.