...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Gynecologic Oncology >Can human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping classify non-16/18 high-risk HPV infection by risk stratification?
【24h】

Can human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping classify non-16/18 high-risk HPV infection by risk stratification?

机译：人类乳头瘤病毒（HPV）基因分型可以通过风险分层将非16/18高风险HPV感染分类吗？

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Objective Infection with high-risk genotypes of human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) is the major cause of invasive cervical cancers. HPV-16 and HPV-18 are known to be responsible for two-thirds of all invasive cervical carcinomas, followed by HPV-45, -31, and -33. Current guidelines only differentiate HPV-16/18 (+) by recommending direct colposcopy for treatment. We tried to evaluate whether there are differences in risk among 12 non-16/18 HR-HPV genotypes in this study. Methods The pathology archive database records of 1,102 consecutive gynecologic patients, who had results for cervical cytology and histology and for HPV testing, as determined by HPV 9G DNA chip, were reviewed. Results Among the 1,102 patients, 346 were non-16/18 HR-HPV (+) and 231 were HPV-16/18 (+). We calculated the odds ratios for ≥cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 (CIN 2) of 14 groups of each HR-HPV genotype compared with a group of HR-HPV (–) patients. Based on the odds ratio of each genotype, we divided patients with non-16/18 HR-HPV genotypes (+) into two groups: HPV-31/33/35/45/52/58 (+) and HPV-39/51/56/59/66/68 (+). The age-adjusted odds ratios for ≥CIN 2 of the HPV-31/33/35/45/52/58 (+) and HPV-39/51/56/59/66/68 (+) groups compared with a HR-HPV (–) group were 11.9 (95% CI, 7.6 to 18.8; p Conclusion The 12 non-16/18 HR-HPV genotypes can be further categorized (HPV-31/33/35/45/52/58 vs. HPV-39/51/56/59/66/68) by risk stratification. The HPV-31/33/35/45/52/58 genotypes might need more aggressive action. Large scale clinical trials or cohort studies are necessary to confirm our suggestion.
机译：目的感染高危基因型人乳头瘤病毒（HR-HPV）是侵袭性宫颈癌的主要原因。众所周知，HPV-16和HPV-18占所有浸润性宫颈癌的三分之二，其次是HPV-45，-31和-33。当前的指南仅建议直接阴道镜检查来区别HPV-16 / 18（+）。我们试图评估这项研究中12个非16/18 HR-HPV基因型之间的风险是否存在差异。方法回顾了1102例连续的妇科患者的病理学档案数据库记录，这些患者通过HPV 9G DNA芯片确定了宫颈细胞学和组织学检查结果以及HPV检测结果。结果在1,102例患者中，有346例是非16/18 HR-HPV（+），而231例是HPV-16 / 18（+）。我们计算了每组HR-HPV基因型的14组中≥宫颈上皮内瘤样变2（CIN 2）与一组HR-HPV（–）患者的比值比。基于每种基因型的优势比，我们将非16/18 HR-HPV基因型（+）的患者分为两组：HPV-31 / 33/35/45/52/58（+）和HPV-39 / 51/56/59/66/68（+）。与HR相比，HPV-31 / 33/35/45/52/58（+）和HPV-39 / 51/56/59/66/68（+）组中≥CIN 2的年龄调整后的优势比-HPV（–）组为11.9（95％CI，7.6至18.8; p结论）12个非16/18 HR-HPV基因型可以进一步分类（HPV-31 / 33/35/45/52/58 vs. HPV-39 / 51/56/59/66/68（按风险分层）HPV-31 / 33/35/45/52/58基因型可能需要更具攻击性的作用，需要大规模临床试验或队列研究来证实我们的建议。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号