Detection of Human Papillomavirus Type 16 DNA in Consecutive Genital Samples Does Not Always Represent Persistent Infection as Determined by Molecular Variant Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Persistent human papillomavirus (HPV) infection of the uterine cervix is a risk factor for progression to high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions. Detection in consecutive genital samples of HPV-16 DNA, a frequently encountered HPV type, may represent persistent infection or reinfection. We undertook a study using PCR-single-strand conformation polymorphism (SSCP) analysis and sequencing of PCR products (PCR-sequencing) to determine if consecutive HPV-16-positive samples contained the same HPV-16 variant. Fifty women (36 human immunodeficiency virus [HIV] seropositive, 14 HIV seronegative) had at least two consecutive genital specimens obtained at 6-month intervals that contained HPV-16 DNA as determined by a consensus L1 PCR assay. A total of 144 samples were amplified with two primer pairs for SSCP analysis of the entire long control region. Fifteen different SSCP patterns were identified in our population, while 22 variants were identified by PCR-sequencing. The most frequent SSCP pattern was found in 75 (53%) samples from 27 (54%) women. The SSCP patterns obtained from consecutive specimens were identical for 46 (92%) of 50 women, suggesting persistent infection. Four women exhibited in consecutive specimens different HPV-16 SSCP patterns that were all confirmed by PCR-sequencing. The additional information on the nature of persistent infection provided by molecular variant analysis was useful for 6% of women, since three of the four women who did not have identical consecutive specimens would have been misclassified as having persistent HPV-16 infection on the basis of HPV typing.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".