Epidemiologic natural history and clinical management of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Disease: a critical and systematic review of the literature in the development of an HPV dynamic transmission model

Ralph P Insinga, Erik J Dasbach, Elamin H Elbasha, Ralph P Insinga, Erik J Dasbach, Elamin H Elbasha

Abstract

Background: Natural history models of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and disease have been used in a number of policy evaluations of technologies to prevent and screen for HPV disease (e.g., cervical cancer, anogenital warts), sometimes with wide variation in values for epidemiologic and clinical inputs. The objectives of this study are to: (1) Provide an updated critical and systematic review of the evidence base to support epidemiologic and clinical modeling of key HPV disease-related parameters in the context of an HPV multi-type disease transmission model which we have applied within a U.S. population context; (2) Identify areas where additional studies are particularly needed.

Methods: Consistent with our and other prior HPV natural history models, the literature review was confined to cervical disease and genital warts. Between October 2005 and January 2006, data were gathered from the published English language medical literature through a search of the PubMed database and references were examined from prior HPV natural history models and review papers. Study design and data quality from individual studies were compared and analyses meeting pre-defined criteria were selected.

Results: Published data meeting review eligibility criteria were most plentiful for natural history parameters relating to the progression and regression of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) without HPV typing, and data concerning the natural history of HPV disease due to specific HPV types were often lacking. Epidemiologic evidence to support age-dependency in the risk of progression and regression of HPV disease was found to be weak, and an alternative hypothesis concerning the time-dependence of transition rates is explored. No data were found on the duration of immunity following HPV infection. In the area of clinical management, data were observed to be lacking on the proportion of clinically manifest anogenital warts that are treated and the proportion of cervical cancer cases that become symptomatic by stage.

Conclusion: Knowledge of the natural history of HPV disease has been considerably enhanced over the past two decades, through the publication of an increasing number of relevant studies. However, considerable opportunity remains for advancing our understanding of HPV natural history and the quality of associated models, particularly with respect to examining HPV age- and type-specific outcomes, and acquired immunity following infection.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Overview of epidemiologic structure of multi-HPV type model. HPV infection may progress to either genital warts or cervical disease, with regression possible for HPV infection, CIN grades 1–3 and genital warts. Only cervical cancer confers an added risk of mortality, as depicted in the figure. However, in the full model (not shown for simplicity) all individuals face an underlying age and sex-specific mortality rate due to non-cervical cancer-related causes. CIN = Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia; HPV = Human Papillomavirus.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Overview of clinical structure of multi-HPV typemodel. HPV infection may progress to either genital warts or cervical disease, with regression possible for HPV infection, CIN grades 1–3 and genital warts. Treated genital warts, CIN and cervical cancer may result in disease eradication with elimination of HPV infection, disease eradication with persistent HPV infection, or failure to eradicate disease or HPV infection. Once CIN is detected, women are followed with annual Pap screening. Women in all health states are also subject to an age-specific rate of hysterectomy for benign conditions (not shown for simplicity). CIN = Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia; HPV = Human Papillomavirus.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Annual Proportion of An Incident Cohort Progressing Under An Exponential Distribution. In this example, an incident cohort at year 0 progresses to a subsequent health state at an annual rate of 0.078, corresponding to a constant annual risk of 7.5%. This results in 7.5% (1*.075) of the original cohort progressing in year 1. By the start of year 10, 49.6% of the original cohort remains in the initial health state, and only 3.7% (.496*.075) progress during year 10. Regardless of the value for risk chosen, the absolute proportion progressing will be highest during year 1 and decline steadily with time. For simplicity, mortality and disease regression are not modeled here.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Illustration of Normally Distributed Progression Over Time In An Incident Cohort. In this example, an identical average annual rate (0.078) and risk (7.5%) of progression over a 25 year period has been modeled as in figure 3. However, through a transformation, the absolute risk of progression over time has now been rendered normally distributed (with standard deviation of 6) with the largest proportion of individuals now progressing near year 13 rather than year 1.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Incidence of CIN 2/3 Detected Through Screening and Cervical Cancer Incidence Prior to Screening. Rates are per 100,000 women undergoing routine cytologic screening for CIN 2/3, and per 100,000 women for cervical cancer. The peak incidence of invasive cervical cancer is observed approximately 25–30 years later than for CIN 2/3. Sources: CIN 2/3 incidence among screened women (Kaiser Permanente Northwest Health Plan, Portland, Oregon, 1998–2002) [73], Cervical cancer incidence among unscreened women (Connecticut, 1940–1944) [73].

References

    1. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin. 2005;55:74–108. doi: 10.3322/canjclin.55.2.74.
    1. Walboomers JM, Jacobs MV, Manos MM. Human papillomavirus is a necessary cause of invasive cervical cancer worldwide. J Pathol. 1999;189:12–19. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9896(199909)189:1<12::AID-PATH431>;2-F.
    1. Carter JJ, Madeleine MM, Shera K. Human papillomavirus 16 and 18 L1 serology compared across anogenital cancer sites. Cancer Res. 2001;61:1934–1940.
    1. Gillison ML, Koch WM, Capone RB. Evidence for a causal association between human papillomavirus and a subset of head and neck cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:709–720. doi: 10.1093/jnci/92.9.709.
    1. Koutsky L. Epidemiology of genital human papillomavirus infection. Am J Med. 1997;102:3–8. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9343(97)00177-0.
    1. Wiatrak BJ. Overview of recurrent respiratory papillomatosis. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2003;11:433–441. doi: 10.1097/00020840-200312000-00005.
    1. Goldie SJ, Kohli M, Grima D. Projected clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness of a human papillomavirus 16/18 vaccine. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96:604–615.
    1. Kulasingam SL, Myers ER. Potential health and economic impact of adding a human papillomavirus vaccine to screening programs. JAMA. 2003;290:781–789. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.6.781.
    1. Sanders GD, Taira AV. Cost-effectiveness of a potential vaccine for human papillomavirus. Emerg Infect Dis. 2003;9:37–48.
    1. Dasbach EJ, Elbasha EH, Insinga RP. Mathematical models for predicting the epidemiologic and economic impact of vaccination against human papillomavirus infection and disease. Epidemiol Rev. 2006;28:88–100. doi: 10.1093/epirev/mxj006.
    1. Brown AD, Garber AM. Cost-effectiveness of 3 methods to enhance the sensitivity of Papanicolaou testing. JAMA. 1999;281:347–353. doi: 10.1001/jama.281.4.347.
    1. Kulasingam SL, Hughes JP, Kiviat NB. Evaluation of human papillomavirus testing in primary screening for cervical abnormalities: comparison of sensitivity, specificity, and frequency of referral. JAMA. 2002;288:1749–1757. doi: 10.1001/jama.288.14.1749.
    1. Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Womack SM. Benefits and costs of using HPV testing to screen for cervical cancer. JAMA. 2002;287:2372–2381. doi: 10.1001/jama.287.18.2372.
    1. Elbasha EH, Dasbach EJ, Insinga RP. Model for assessing human papillomavirus vaccination strategies. Emerg Infect Dis. 2007;13:28–41.
    1. Barnabas RV, Laukkanen P, Koskela P, Kontula O, Lehtinen M, Garnett GP. Epidemiology of HPV 16 and Cervical Cancer in Finland and the Potential Impact of Vaccination: Mathematical Modelling Analyses. PLoS Med. 2006;3:e138. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0030138.
    1. Clifford GM, Smith JS, Plummer M, Munoz N, Franceschi S. Human papillomavirus types in invasive cervical cancer worldwide: a meta-analysis. Br J Cancer. 2003;88:63–73. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6600688.
    1. Brown DR, Schroeder JM, Bryan JT, Stoler MH, Fife KH. Detection of multiple human papillomavirus types in Condylomata acuminata lesions from otherwise healthy and immunosuppressed patients. J Clin Microbiol. 1999;37:3316–3322.
    1. Greer CE, Wheeler CM, Ladner MB. Human papillomavirus (HPV) type distribution and serological response to HPV type 6 virus-like particles in patients with genital warts. J Clin Microbiol. 1995;33:2058–2063.
    1. Harper DM, Franco EL, Wheeler C. Efficacy of a bivalent L1 virus-like particle vaccine in prevention of infection with human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 in young women: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2004;364:1757–1765. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17398-4.
    1. Villa LL, Costa RL, Petta CA. Prophylactic quadrivalent human papillomavirus (types 6, 11, 16, and 18) L1 virus-like particle vaccine in young women: a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled multicentre phase II efficacy trial. Lancet Oncol. 2005;6:271–278. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(05)70101-7.
    1. Kim JJ, Wright TC, Goldie SJ. Cost-effectiveness of alternative triage strategies for atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. JAMA. 2002;287:2382–2390. doi: 10.1001/jama.287.18.2382.
    1. Myers ER, McCrory DC, Nanda K, Bastian L, Matchar DB. Mathematical model for the natural history of human papillomavirus infection and cervical carcinogenesis. Am J Epidemiol. 2000;151:1158–1171.
    1. Berkhof J, de Bruijne MC, Zielinski GD, Meijer CJ. Natural history and screening model for high-risk human papillomavirus infection, neoplasia and cervical cancer in the Netherlands. Int J Cancer. 2005;115:268–275. doi: 10.1002/ijc.20846.
    1. Canfell K, Barnabas R, Patnick J, Beral V. The predicted effect of changes in cervical screening practice in the UK: results from a modelling study. Br J Cancer. 2004;91:530–536. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602002.
    1. Fahs MC, Mandelblatt J, Schechter C, Muller C. Cost effectiveness of cervical cancer screening for the elderly. Ann Intern Med. 1992;117:520–527.
    1. Goldie SJ, Grima D, Kohli M, Wright TC, Weinstein M, Franco E. A comprehensive natural history model of HPV infection and cervical cancer to estimate the clinical impact of a prophylactic HPV-16/18 vaccine. Int J Cancer. 2003;106:896–904. doi: 10.1002/ijc.11334.
    1. Cantor SB, Atkinson EN, Cardenas-Turanzas M, Benedet JL, Follen M, MacAulay C. Natural history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a meta-analysis. Acta Cytol. 2005;49:405–415.
    1. Melnikow J, Nuovo J, Willan AR, Chan BK, Howell LP. Natural history of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 1998;92:727–735. doi: 10.1016/S0029-7844(98)00245-2.
    1. Ostor AG. Natural history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a critical review. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1993;12:186–192. doi: 10.1097/00004347-199304000-00018.
    1. Syrjanen KJ. Spontaneous evolution of intraepithelial lesions according to the grade and type of the implicated human papillomavirus (HPV) Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1996;65:45–53. doi: 10.1016/0028-2243(95)02303-A.
    1. Woodman CB, Rollason T, Ellis J, Tierney R, Wilson S, Young L. Human papillomavirus infection and risk of progression of epithelial abnormalities of the cervix. Br J Cancer. 1996;73:553–556.
    1. Solomon D, Schiffman M, Tarone R. Comparison of three management strategies for patients with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: baseline results from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93:293–299. doi: 10.1093/jnci/93.4.293.
    1. Chenoy R, Billingham L, Irani S, Rollason TP, Luesley DM, Jordan JA. The effect of directed biopsy on the atypical cervical transformation zone: assessed by digital imaging colposcopy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1996;103:457–462.
    1. Woodman CB, Collins S. A critique of cohort studies examining the role of human papillomavirus infection in cervical neoplasia. BJOG. 2002;109:1311–1318. doi: 10.1046/j.1471-0528.2002.02008.x.
    1. Syrjanen K, Yliskoski M, Kataja V. Prevalence of genital human papillomavirus infections in a mass-screened Finnish female population aged 20–65 years. Int J STD AIDS. 1990;1:410–415.
    1. Koutsky LA, Holmes KK, Critchlow CW. A cohort study of the risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3 in relation to papillomavirus infection. N Engl J Med. 1992;327:1272–1278.
    1. Nuovo GJ, Blanco JS, Leipzig S, Smith D. Human papillomavirus detection in cervical lesions nondiagnostic for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: correlation with Papanicolaou smear, colposcopy, and occurrence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Obstet Gynecol. 1990;75:1006–1011.
    1. Jacobs MV, Snijders PJ, Voorhorst FJ. Reliable high risk HPV DNA testing by polymerase chain reaction: an intermethod and intramethod comparison. J Clin Pathol. 1999;52:498–503. doi: 10.1136/jcp.52.7.498.
    1. Kosel S, Burggraf S, Mommsen J, Engelhardt W, Olgemoller B. Type-specific detection of human papillomaviruses in a routine laboratory setting – improved sensitivity and specificity of PCR and sequence analysis compared to direct hybridisation. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2003;41:787–791. doi: 10.1515/CCLM.2003.119.
    1. Sastre-Garau X, Cartier I, Jourdan-Da Silva N, De Cremoux P, Lepage V, Charron D. Regression of low-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in patients with HLA-DRB1*13 genotype. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104:751–755.
    1. Winer RL, Kiviat NB, Hughes JP. Development and duration of human papillomavirus lesions, after initial infection. J Infect Dis. 2005;191:731–738. doi: 10.1086/427557.
    1. Insinga RP, Dasbach EJ, Elbasha EH, Liaw KL, Barr E. Incidence and duration of cervical human papillomavirus 6, 11, 16 and 18 infections in young women: An evaluation from multiple analytic perspectives. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2007;16:709–715. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0846.
    1. Insinga RP, Dasbach EJ, Elbasha EH, Liaw KL, Barr E. Progression and regression of incident cervical HPV 6, 11, 16 and 18 infections in young women. Infect Agent Cancer. 2007;2:15. doi: 10.1186/1750-9378-2-15.
    1. Holmes J, Hemmett L, Garfield S. The cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus screening for cervical cancer. A review of recent modelling studies. Eur J Health Econ. 2005;6:30–37. doi: 10.1007/s10198-004-0254-1.
    1. Brown DR, Shew ML, Qadadri B. A longitudinal study of genital human papillomavirus infection in a cohort of closely followed adolescent women. J Infect Dis. 2005;191:182–192. doi: 10.1086/426867.
    1. Giuliano AR, Harris R, Sedjo RL. Incidence, prevalence, and clearance of type-specific human papillomavirus infections: The Young Women's Health Study. J Infect Dis. 2002;186:462–469. doi: 10.1086/341782.
    1. Insinga RP, Glass AG, Rush BB. Pap screening in a U.S. health plan. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004;13:355–360.
    1. Mikhail MS, Merkatz IR, Romney SL. Clinical usefulness of computerized colposcopy: image analysis and conservative management of mild dysplasia. Obstet Gynecol. 1992;80:5–8.
    1. Kataja V, Syrjanen K, Mantyjarvi R. Prospective follow-up of cervical HPV infections: life table analysis of histopathological, cytological and colposcopic data. Eur J Epidemiol. 1989;5:1–7. doi: 10.1007/BF00145037.
    1. Molano M, Van den BA, Plummer M. Determinants of clearance of human papillomavirus infections in Colombian women with normal cytology: a population-based, 5-year follow-up study. Am J Epidemiol. 2003;158:486–494. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwg171.
    1. Syrjanen S, Shabalova I, Petrovichev N. Age-specific incidence and clearance of high-risk human papillomavirus infections in women in the former Soviet Union. Int J STD AIDS. 2005;16:217–223. doi: 10.1258/0956462053420211.
    1. Konno R, Paez C, Sato S, Yajima A, Fukao A. HPV, histologic grade and age. Risk factors for the progression of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Reprod Med. 1998;43:561–566.
    1. Hoyer H, Scheungraber C, Kuehne-Heid R. Cumulative 5-year diagnoses of CIN2, CIN3 or cervical cancer after concurrent high-risk HPV and cytology testing in a primary screening setting. Int J Cancer. 2005;116:136–143. doi: 10.1002/ijc.20955.
    1. Schneider A, Hoyer H, Lotz B. Screening for high-grade cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia and cancer by testing for high-risk HPV, routine cytology or colposcopy. Int J Cancer. 2000;89:529–534. doi: 10.1002/1097-0215(20001120)89:6<529::AID-IJC11>;2-G.
    1. Woodman CB, Collins S, Winter H. Natural history of cervical human papillomavirus infection in young women: a longitudinal cohort study. Lancet. 2001;357:1831–1836. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04956-4.
    1. Mao C, Koutsky LA, Ault KA. Efficacy of human papillomavirus-16 vaccine to prevent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107:18–27.
    1. Furber SE, Weisberg E, Simpson JM. Progression and regression of low-grade epithelial abnormalities of the cervix. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;37:107–112. doi: 10.1111/j.1479-828X.1997.tb02230.x.
    1. Aoyama C, Peters J, Senadheera S, Liu P, Shimada H. Uterine cervical dysplasia and cancer: identification of c-myc status by quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Diagn Mol Pathol. 1998;7:324–330. doi: 10.1097/00019606-199812000-00006.
    1. Evans MF, Mount SL, Beatty BG, Cooper K. Biotinyl-tyramide-based in situ hybridization signal patterns distinguish human papillomavirus type and grade of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Mod Pathol. 2002;15:1339–1347. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.3880698.
    1. Isacson C, Kessis TD, Hedrick L, Cho KR. Both cell proliferation and apoptosis increase with lesion grade in cervical neoplasia but do not correlate with human papillomavirus type. Cancer Res. 1996;56:669–674.
    1. Quade BJ, Park JJ, Crum CP, Sun D, Dutta A. In vivo cyclin E expression as a marker for early cervical neoplasia. Mod Pathol. 1998;11:1238–1246.
    1. Shroyer KR, Lovelace GS, Abarca ML. Detection of human papillomavirus DNA by in situ hybridization and polymerase chain reaction in human papillomavirus equivocal and dysplastic cervical biopsies. Hum Pathol. 1993;24:1012–1016. doi: 10.1016/0046-8177(93)90117-Y.
    1. Shi L, Sings HL, Bryan JT. GARDASIL: prophylactic human papillomavirus vaccine development – from bench top to bed-side. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2007;81:259–264. doi: 10.1038/sj.clpt.6100055.
    1. Munoz N, Bosch FX, de Sanjose S. Epidemiologic classification of human papillomavirus types associated with cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:518–527. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa021641.
    1. De Aloysio D, Miliffi L, Iannicelli T, Penacchioni P, Bottiglioni F. Intramuscular interferon-beta treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia II associated with human papillomavirus infection. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1994;73:420–424. doi: 10.3109/00016349409006256.
    1. Benedet JL, Bender H, Jones H III, Ngan HY, Pecorelli S. FIGO staging classifications and clinical practice guidelines in the management of gynecologic cancers. FIGO Committee on Gynecologic Oncology. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2000;70:209–262. doi: 10.1016/S0020-7292(00)90001-8.
    1. Schiffman M, Burk R. In: Viral Infections of Humans. 4. Evans A, Kaslow R, editor. New York, NY: Plenum Publishing Co; 1997. Human Papillomaviruses; pp. 983–1023.
    1. Westergaard L, Norgaard M. Severe cervical dysplasia. Control by biopsies or primary conization? A comparative study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1981;60:549–554.
    1. SEER*Stat 6.1.4 – SEER Cancer Incidence Public-Use Database, 1973–2002. 4-25-0005. Bethesda, MD, U.S.A., Cancer Statistics Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Insititutes of Health;
    1. Gustafsson L, Ponten J, Bergstrom R, Adami HO. International incidence rates of invasive cervical cancer before cytological screening. Int J Cancer. 1997;71:159–165. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0215(19970410)71:2<159::AID-IJC6>;2-#.
    1. Herrero R, Castle PE, Schiffman M. Epidemiologic profile of type-specific human papillomavirus infection and cervical neoplasia in Guanacaste, Costa Rica. J Infect Dis. 2005;191:1796–1807. doi: 10.1086/428850.
    1. Chesson HW, Blandford JM, Gift TL, Tao G, Irwin KL. The estimated direct medical cost of sexually transmitted diseases among American youth, 2000. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2004;36:11–19. doi: 10.1363/3601104.
    1. Insinga RP, Glass AG, Rush BB. Diagnoses and outcomes in cervical cancer screening: a population-based study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:105–113. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.01.043.
    1. Nygard JF, Nygard M, Skare GB, Thoresen SO. Screening histories of women with CIN 2/3 compared with women diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer: a retrospective analysis of the Norwegian Coordinated Cervical Cancer Screening Program. Cancer Causes Control. 2005;16:463–474. doi: 10.1007/s10552-004-6295-z.
    1. Laskey PW, Meigs JW, Flannery JT. Uterine cervical carcinoma in Connecticut, 1935–1973: evidence for two classes of invasive disease. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1976;57:1037–1043.
    1. Dorn HF, Cutler SJ. Morbidity from cancer in the United States. Public Health Monogr. 1959;73:1–207.
    1. Kessler II. Cervical cancer epidemiology in historical perspective. J Reprod Med. 1974;12:173–185.
    1. Evans MF, Mount SL, Vacek PM, Cooper K. High-risk human papillomavirus type does not predict grade of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2003;24:373–376.
    1. Oktay MH, Oktay K, Hamele-Bena D, Buyuk A, Koss LG. Focal adhesion kinase as a marker of malignant phenotype in breast and cervical carcinomas. Hum Pathol. 2003;34:240–245. doi: 10.1053/hupa.2003.40.
    1. Richardson H, Kelsall G, Tellier P. The natural history of type-specific human papillomavirus infections in female university students. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2003;12:485–490.
    1. Villa LL, Ault KA, Giuliano AR. Immunologic responses following administration of a vaccine targeting human papillomavirus Types 6, 11, 16, and 18. Vaccine. 2006;24:5571–5583. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2006.04.068.
    1. Koutsky LA, Ault KA, Wheeler CM. A controlled trial of a human papillomavirus type 16 vaccine. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1645–1651. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa020586.
    1. Viscidi RP, Schiffman M, Hildesheim A. Seroreactivity to human papillomavirus (HPV) types 16, 18, or 31 and risk of subsequent HPV infection: results from a population-based study in Costa Rica. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004;13:324–327. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-03-0166.
    1. af G V, Kibur M, Wang Z. Stability over time of serum antibody levels to human papillomavirus type 16. J Infect Dis. 1998;177:1710–1714. doi: 10.1086/517428.
    1. Matsumoto K, Yasugi T, Oki A. IgG antibodies to HPV16, 52, 58 and 6 L1-capsids and spontaneous regression of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Cancer Lett. 2006;231:309–313. doi: 10.1016/j.canlet.2005.02.023.
    1. Beutner KR, Wiley DJ, Douglas JM. Genital warts and their treatment. Clin Infect Dis. 1999;28(Suppl 1):S37–S56. doi: 10.1086/514722.
    1. Wiley DJ, Douglas J, Beutner K. External genital warts: diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. Clin Infect Dis. 2002;35:S210–S224. doi: 10.1086/342109.
    1. Friedman-Kien A. Management of condylomata acuminata with Alferon N injection, interferon alfa-n3 (human leukocyte derived) Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;172:1359–1368. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(95)90404-2.
    1. Wildman GM, Tang A. Have a nice day – do a wart audit. Int J STD AIDS. 2003;14:710–711. doi: 10.1258/095646203322387983.
    1. Ries L, Eisner M, Kosary C. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2002. Bethesda, MD, National Cancer Institute; 2005.
    1. Chen RJ, Lin YH, Chen CA, Huang SC, Chow SN, Hsieh CY. Influence of histologic type and age on survival rates for invasive cervical carcinoma in Taiwan. Gynecol Oncol. 1999;73:184–190. doi: 10.1006/gyno.1999.5364.
    1. Flores-Luna L, Salazar-Martinez E, Escudero-De los RP, Gonzalez-Lira G, Zamora-Munoz S, Lazcano-Ponce E. Prognostic factors related to cervical cancer survival in Mexican women. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2001;75:33–42. doi: 10.1016/S0020-7292(01)00471-4.
    1. Keshavarz H, Hillis SD, Kieke BA, Marchbanks PA. Hysterectomy surveillance-United States, 1994–1999. MMWR CDC Surveill Summ. 2002;51:1–8.
    1. Redburn JC, Murphy MF. Hysterectomy prevalence and adjusted cervical and uterine cancer rates in England and Wales. BJOG. 2001;108:388–395. doi: 10.1016/S0306-5456(00)00098-X.
    1. Analysis of women's health care utilization in Taiwan – cesaerean section, hysterectomy, service-specific and group specific utilization rate.: Final report. Taipei: Department of Health, Bureau of National Health Insurance; 2004.
    1. Fowles JB, Fowler E, Craft C, McCoy CE. Comparing claims data and self-reported data with the medical record for Pap smear rates. Eval Health Prof. 1997;20:324–342. doi: 10.1177/016327879702000305.
    1. Gordon NP, Hiatt RA, Lampert DI. Concordance of self-reported data and medical record audit for six cancer screening procedures. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85:566–570. doi: 10.1093/jnci/85.7.566.
    1. McGovern PG, Lurie N, Margolis KL, Slater JS. Accuracy of self-report of mammography and Pap smear in a low-income urban population. Am J Prev Med. 1998;14:201–208. doi: 10.1016/S0749-3797(97)00076-7.
    1. Newell S, Girgis A, Sanson-Fisher R, Ireland M. Accuracy of patients' recall of Pap and cholesterol screening. Am J Public Health. 2000;90:1431–1435. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.90.9.1431.
    1. Suarez L, Goldman DA, Weiss NS. Validity of Pap smear and mammogram self-reports in a low-income Hispanic population. Am J Prev Med. 1995;11:94–98.
    1. Wallihan DB, Stump TE, Callahan CM. Accuracy of self-reported health services use and patterns of care among urban older adults. Med Care. 1999;37:662–670. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199907000-00006.
    1. Chattopadhyay SK, Ebrahim SH, Tao G, McKenna MT. Use of cervical cancer screening among insured women: the extent of missed opportunities. Health Policy. 2005;73:194–201. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2004.11.012.
    1. Sirovich BE, Welch HG. The frequency of Pap smear screening in the United States. J Gen Intern Med. 2004;19:243–250. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.21107.x.
    1. Janerich DT, Hadjimichael O, Schwartz PE. The screening histories of women with invasive cervical cancer, Connecticut. Am J Public Health. 1995;85:791–794. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.85.6.791.
    1. Sung HY, Kearney KA, Miller M, Kinney W, Sawaya GF, Hiatt RA. Papanicolaou smear history and diagnosis of invasive cervical carcinoma among members of a large prepaid health plan. Cancer. 2000;88:2283–2289. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(20000515)88:10<2283::AID-CNCR12>;2-D.
    1. Insinga RP, Glass AG, Rush BB. Response to "Use of cervical cancer screening among insured women: the extent of missed opportunities" [Health Policy 73 (2005) 194–201] Health Policy. 2005.
    1. Warnecke RB, Sudman S, Johnson TP, O'Rourke D, Davis AM, Jobe JB. Cognitive aspects of recalling and reporting health-related events: Papanicolaou smears, clinical breast examinations, and mammograms. Am J Epidemiol. 1997;146:982–992.
    1. Hewitt M, Devesa SS, Breen N. Cervical cancer screening among U.S. women: analyses of the 2000 National Health Interview Survey. Prev Med. 2004;39:270–278. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2004.03.035.
    1. Schootman M, Jeffe DB, Baker EA, Walker MS. Effect of area poverty rate on cancer screening across US communities. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006;60:202–207. doi: 10.1136/jech.2005.041020.
    1. Cervical cancer screening program [2005/2006] National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme Statistics. Leeds, United Kingdom. 2007.
    1. Taiwan Pap Registry Annual Report, 2005. Bureau of Health Promotion, Department of Health, ROC; 2005.
    1. Louftalot M. Avances del programa de detección oportuna del cáncer cervical en México. Presented at the XI Congreso de Investigación en Salud Pública, Cuernavaca, Mexico; 2005.
    1. Saint M, Gildengorin G, Sawaya GF. Current cervical neoplasia screening practices of obstetrician/gynecologists in the US. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:414–421. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.09.026.
    1. Bigras G, de Marval F. The probability for a Pap test to be abnormal is directly proportional to HPV viral load: results from a Swiss study comparing HPV testing and liquid-based cytology to detect cervical cancer precursors in 13,842 women. Br J Cancer. 2005;93:575–581. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602728.
    1. Coste J, Cochand-Priollet B, De Cremoux P. Cross sectional study of conventional cervical smear, monolayer cytology, and human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervical cancer screening. BMJ. 2003;326:733. doi: 10.1136/bmj.326.7392.733.
    1. Cochand-Priollet B, Le Gales C, De Cremoux P. Cost-effectiveness of monolayers and human papillomavirus testing compared to that of conventional Papanicolaou smears for cervical cancer screening: protocol of the study of the French Society of Clinical Cytology. Diagn Cytopathol. 2001;24:412–420. doi: 10.1002/dc.1091.
    1. Mitchell MF, Schottenfeld D, Tortolero-Luna G, Cantor SB, Richards-Kortum R. Colposcopy for the diagnosis of squamous intraepithelial lesions: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 1998;91:626–631. doi: 10.1016/S0029-7844(98)00006-4.
    1. Distefano AL, Picconi MA, Alonio LV. Persistence of human papillomavirus DNA in cervical lesions after treatment with diathermic large loop excision. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol. 1998;6:214–219. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-0997(1998)6:5<214::AID-IDOG5>;2-I.
    1. Flannelly G, Langhan H, Jandial L, Mana E, Campbell M, Kitchener H. A study of treatment failures following large loop excision of the transformation zone for the treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;104:718–722.
    1. Luesley DM, Cullimore J, Redman CW. Loop diathermy excision of the cervical transformation zone in patients with abnormal cervical smears. BMJ. 1990;300:1690–1693. doi: 10.1136/bmj.300.6741.1690.
    1. Murdoch JB, Morgan PR, Lopes A, Monaghan JM. Histological incomplete excision of CIN after large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) merits careful follow up, not retreatment. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1992;99:990–993.
    1. Chen RJ, Chang DY, Yen ML, Chow SN, Huang SC. Loop electrosurgical excision procedure for conization of the uterine cervix. J Formos Med Assoc. 1994;93:196–199.
    1. Goff BA, Rice LW, Fleischhacker DS, Abu-Jawdeh GM, Muntz HG. Large loop excision of the transformation zone in patients with exocervical squamous intraepithelial lesions. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 1994;15:257–262.
    1. Wright TC Jr, Gagnon S, Richart RM, Ferenczy A. Treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia using the loop electrosurgical excision procedure. Obstet Gynecol. 1992;79:173–178.
    1. Bekkers RL, Melchers WJ, Bakkers JM. The role of genotype-specific human papillomavirus detection in diagnosing residual cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Int J Cancer. 2002;102:148–151. doi: 10.1002/ijc.10691.
    1. Gardeil F, Barry-Walsh C, Prendiville W, Clinch J, Turner MJ. Persistent intraepithelial neoplasia after excision for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89:419–422. doi: 10.1016/S0029-7844(96)00505-4.
    1. Cruickshank ME, Sharp L, Chambers G, Smart L, Murray G. Persistent infection with human papillomavirus following the successful treatment of high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. BJOG. 2002;109:579–581. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2002.01554.x.
    1. Paraskevaidis E, Arbyn M, Sotiriadis A. The role of HPV DNA testing in the follow-up period after treatment for CIN: a systematic review of the literature. Cancer Treat Rev. 2004;30:205–211. doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2003.07.008.
    1. Fen J, Yoshinouchi M, Nakamura K. Eradication of HPV post-surgical treatments, its correlation with specific types, types of surgery and the physical status. Oncol Rep. 2004;12:375–379.
    1. Arany I, Rady P, Tyring SK. Effect of interferon therapy on human papillomavirus copy number in patients with Condyloma acuminatum. Am J Med Sci. 1995;310:14–18. doi: 10.1097/00000441-199507000-00006.
    1. Syed TA, Ahmadpour OA, Ahmad SA, Ahmad SH. Management of female genital warts with an analog of imiquimod 2% in cream: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J Dermatol. 1998;25:429–433.
    1. Carey FM, Quah SP, Dinsmore W, Maw RD. Patient assessment of anogenital warts and the success of treatment with home applied therapy. Int J STD AIDS. 2004;15:316–318. doi: 10.1258/095646204323012797.
    1. Wiley DJ, Grosser S, Qi K. Validity of self-reporting of episodes of external genital warts. Clin Infect Dis. 2002;35:39–45. doi: 10.1086/340743.

Source: PubMed

3
Se inscrever