Sexual behavior, condom use, and human papillomavirus: pooled analysis of the IARC human papillomavirus prevalence surveys

Vaccarella S, Franceschi S, Herrero R, Muñoz N, Snijders PJ, Clifford GM, Smith JS, Lazcano-Ponce E et al.

Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2006

11,337 participants

Abstract

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a sexually transmitted infection but it is unclear whether differences in transmission efficacy exist between individual HPV types. Information on sexual behavior was collected from 11 areas in four continents among population-based, age-stratified random samples of women of ages > or = 15 years. HPV testing was done using PCR-based enzyme immunoassay. Unconditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) of being HPV positive and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Variables were analyzed categorically. When more than two groups were compared, floating confidence intervals were estimated by treating ORs as floating absolute risks. A total of 11,337 women (mean age, 41.9 years) were available. We confirmed that lifetime number of sexual partners is associated with HPV positivity (OR for > or = 2 versus 1, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.63-2.11) but the association was not a linear one for HPV18, 31, and 33 (i.e., no clear increase for > or = 3 versus 2 sexual partners). Women who had multiple-type infection and high-risk HPV type infection reported a statistically nonsignificant higher number of sexual partners than women who had single-type and low-risk type infections, respectively. Early age at sexual debut was not significantly related to HPV positivity. Husband's extramarital sexual relationships were associated with an OR of 1.45 (95% CI, 1.24-1.70) for HPV positivity in their wives after adjustment for age and lifetime…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 11,337 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

• DOI
• PubMed
• Publisher page

Related studies

• Understanding the factors influencing fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda J.E. Smith) damage in African smallholder maize fields and quantifying its impact on yield. A case study in Eastern Zimbabwe Crop Protection, 2019
• Alarming situation of emerging H5 and H7 avian influenza and effective control strategies Emerging Microbes and Infections, 2022
• Livestock and food security: vulnerability to population growth and climate change Global Change Biology, 2014
• Atmosphere–ocean oxygen and productivity dynamics during early animal radiations Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2019
• Characterization of the global distribution and diversified plasmid reservoirs of the colistin resistance gene mcr-9 Scientific Reports, 2020
• The global seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii in pigs: A systematic review and meta-analysis Veterinary parasitology, 2019

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free