Human Papillomavirus Detection by Penile Site in Young Men From Kenya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on whether sampling from the penile shaft or urethra increases detection of penile HPV infection in men beyond that found in the glans and coronal sulcus. METHODS: Within a randomized clinical trial, a validation study of penile sampling was conducted in Kisumu, Kenya. Young men (18-24 years) were invited to provide penile exfoliated cells using prewetted Dacron swabs to determine the best site for HPV detection. beta-Globin gene PCR and HPV DNA type GP5+/6+ PCR status were ascertained from 3 anatomical sites. RESULTS: A total of 98 young HIV-seronegative, uncircumcised men participated. Penile HPV prevalence varied by anatomical site: 50% in penile exfoliated cells from the glans, coronal sulcus, and inner foreskin tissue; 43% in the shaft and external foreskin tissue; and 18% in the urethra (P <0.0001). For each anatomical site, over 87% of samples were beta-globin positive. Beyond that found in the glans/coronal sulcus, urethral sampling resulted in no increase in HPV positivity and shaft sampling resulted in an additional 7.3% of overall HPV positivity. The prevalence of high-risk HPV positivity varied by anatomical site: 39% in glans/coronal sulcus, 31% in shaft, and 13% in the urethra (P <0.0001). HPV 16 was the most common type identified. DISCUSSION: Penile HPV prevalence was approximately 50% among young men in Kisumu, Kenya. Urethral sampling for HPV detection in men added no sensitivity for HPV detection over that found from sampling the glans/coronal sulcus and penile shaft. These data will help inform studies on HPV transmission dynamics, and on the efficacy of HPV prophylactic vaccines on penile HPV carriage in men.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".