S12.1 Transmission of human papillomavirus infections
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background There have been few studies of the sexual transmission of human papillomavirus (HPV) between partners. Our objective was to estimate transmission rates among persons with documented sexual exposure to an infected partner and longitudinal follow-up. Methods We analysed data from the HITCH Cohort Study, a study of recently-formed couples. Women aged 18–24 attending a university or junior college in Montreal, Canada and their male partners were eligible. Self-collected vaginal swabs and clinician-obtained swabs of epithelial cells from the penis and scrotum were tested for DNA of 36 HPV types. We analysed follow-up data at visit 2 from 179 couples who were discordant for one or more HPV types at enrolment. We defined the index partner as that which was infected with a type(s) not found in the other partner, and a transmission event as subsequent detection of that HPV type in the non-index partner. Transmission rates are expressed as the number of transmissions per 100 person-months (PM), with 95% CI estimated using Poisson regression. Results Transmission was observed in 73 partnerships. There was little difference between the male-to-female (3.5 per 100PM, 95% CI 2.7 to 4.5) and the female-to-male transmission rate (4.0 per 100PM, 95% CI 3.0 to 5.5). These rates are consistent with a per-partnership transmission probability of 0.20 (95% CI 0.16 to 0.24) over 6 months. Transmission rates did not differ with the lifetime number of partners reported by the non-index partner at enrolment or with the circumcision status of the male partner. Rates were highest when the index partner was still positive for that type at follow-up; rates of male-to-female transmission quadrupled and female-to-male transmission tripled (5.2 and 6.2 per 100PM, respectively), compared to when the index partner was negative at follow-up (1.2 and 1.8 per 100PM, respectively, p<0.05). Conclusions Transmission rates based on follow-up of discordant partners are probably underestimates of the true rate due to clearance in index partner and the depletion of susceptibles. Our results contribute to a small but growing evidence base regarding the natural history of HPV transmission and the probability of transmission. These estimates may be of utility to improve forecasting estimates from mathematical modelling efforts to project the public health impact and cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,015 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».