Testing for human papillomavirus and measurement of viral load of HPV 16 and 18 in self‐collected vaginal swabs of women who do not undergo cervical cytological screening in Southern France
Rattachement africain : fr, pl. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Self-sampling using vaginal swabs could be a valuable alternative to screen for cervical cancer for women who do not attend regular cytological screening. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of high and low-risk HPV types and of HPV type 16 and 18 DNA load in self-collected vaginal swabs from 35- to 69-year-old Southern French women of low socioeconomic level or migrant populations who do not attend regular cervical screening. A good concordance (93.1%) was found between cervical brush and vaginal swabs in 29 samples. Self-collected vaginal swabs were examined from 120 women. HPV infection was found in 28 women (23.3%; median age 48 years), 17 (14.1%) of whom harbored high-risk HPV types. HPV type 16 was the high risk type found most frequently, followed by types 53, 31, 18, 58, and 66. The low-risk type detected most frequently was HPV type 6, followed by types 61, 70, and 81. The mean HPV 16 and 18 load was 6.3 log(10) copies/10(6) cells and 2.4 log(10) copies/10(6) cells, respectively. These results suggest that vaginal self-swabs can be a reliable tool for cervical cancer screening in non-attending and inadequately screened elderly women.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Testing for human papillomavirus and measurement of viral load of HPV 16 and 18 in self‐collected vaginal swabs of women who do not undergo cervical cytological screening in Southern France
- Date Crossref
- 22/06/2010
- Éditeur
- Wiley
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.