PloS one · 2013
Human papillomavirus detection from human immunodeficiency virus-infected Colombian women's paired urine and cervical samples.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Munoz Marina, Camargo Milena, Soto-De Leon Sara C, Sanchez Ricardo, Parra Diana, Pineda Andrea C, Sussmann Otto, Perez-Prados Antonio, Patarroyo Manuel E, Patarroyo Manuel A
Аннотация
Infection, coinfection and type-specific human papillomavirus (HPV) distribution was evaluated in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive women from paired cervical and urine samples. Paired cervical and urine samples (n = 204) were taken from HIV-positive women for identifying HPV-DNA presence by using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) with three generic primer sets (GP5+/6+, MY09/11 and pU1M/2R). HPV-positive samples were typed for six high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) (HPV-16, -18, -31, -33, -45 and -58) and two low-risk (LR-HPV) (HPV-6/11) types. Agreement between paired sample results and diagnostic performance was evaluated. HPV infection prevalence was 70.6% in cervical and 63.2% in urine samples. HPV-16 was the most prevalent HPV type in both types of sample (66.7% in cervical samples and 62.0% in urine) followed by HPV-31(47.2%) in cervical samples and HPV-58 (35.7%) in urine samples. There was 55.4% coinfection (infection by more than one type of HPV) in cervical samples and 40.2% in urine samples. Abnormal Papanicolau smears were observed in 25.3% of the women, presenting significant association with HPV-DNA being identified in urine samples. There was poor agreement of cervical and urine sample results in generic and type-specific detection of HPV. Urine samples provided the best diagnosis when taking cytological findings as reference. In conclusion including urine samples could be a good strategy for ensuring adherence to screening programs aimed at reducing the impact of cervical cancer, since this sample is easy to obtain and showed good diagnostic performance.