Genotype profiles of high-risk human papillomavirus in women of reproductive age: A community-based study

Abstract

Purpose This research is a preliminary study to observe the high-risk HPV infection profile among asymptomatic women, as a basis for developing Indonesian-specific reagents and implementing a national vaccination program. Methods The research subjects were female employees/families of BUMN (state-owned enterprises) who underwent annual routine medical check-up. The research sample was a cervical swab which was examined using the Cobas® 6800 platform for HPV identification and INNO Lipa (Fujirebio) kit for identification of the genotype. Results Out of 858 cervical swab samples collected in this study, 31 samples were excluded as they had invalid results from the initial examination, so the remaining 827 samples continued this study protocol. Of those samples, 69 (8%) samples gave positive results, giving an overall HPV prevalence of 8%. Among HPV-positive samples, HPV 52 was the most common genotype (N = 15, 21.7%) found as both single-infection and multiple infections. The median age of subjects was 38 years. There were nine samples (13%) with multiple infections of two or more genotypes and seven samples (10.1%) with no specific genotype identified. Conclusion HPV prevalence was 8%, with HPV 52 being the most common high-risk type, making it a necessity to develop a diagnostic kit and vaccine for national vaccination program that is specific for Indonesian population which includes this genotype.

Survey of HPV genotypes using multiplex PCR and flow through hybridization in Jakarta, Indonesia

“…High-risk and low-risk HPV co-infection in immunosuppressed individuals may be due to more rapid viral replication or reactivation of latent infection (Setyowati, et al 2020). The results are in line with Wulandari et al [14] which states that genotype 52 is the most frequently found genotype. These results also support Wulandari et.…”

“…These results indicate that there are more HPV genotypes than Wulandari et al [14]. Meanwhile, this research only took samples in Jakarta, compared to Wulandari et al [14] who collected samples from Jakarta as well as Bogor, Bandung and Semarang and the number of samples almost doubled (> 800), using cervical swab sample media. These differences may also be caused by differences in sample processing methods.…”

“…These differences may also be caused by differences in sample processing methods. The author used a Hybrispot 12 manual-Vitro unit with the Multiplex PCR and Flow Through Hybridization method with the ability to detect 35 genotypes (18 HR HPV and 17 LR HPV) specifically and a non-specific Universal Probe HPV, while Wulandari et al [14] Used the Cobas® 6800 Platform for HPV identification and the INNO Lipa kit (Fujirebio) for HPV DNA genotype identification. The Cobas® 6800 tool for identifying HPV is an RT PCR method which has the ability to detect specific High Risk 16 and 18, as well as 12 non-specific HPV genotypes.…”

“…These results also support Wulandari et. al [14] that the finding of different HPV genotypes requires evaluation of immunization policies based on vaccine coverage with different genotypes. Other study by Pisani and Cenci [10] in Italy found that (22.48%) have infection with two to five genotype of HPV.…”

“…Therefore, as study using different method of test, which is PCR-hibridyzation are required. This method can detect 35 genotypes, consist of 18 high risk and 17 low risk [14]. This study aims at indentify level of prevalence of each HPV genotypes to support HPV vaccination and detection program.…”