Evidence Hub

Prevalence of Oral High-Risk HPV and HPV16 infection among people living with HIV: a systematic review and meta-analysis

R. D. Dube Mandishora, Brittney L. Dickey, Anna Beltrame, Wen-Yi Fan, M. Haver, Anna R. Giuliano

International Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2025

3 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the natural history of oral HPV in people living with HIV (PLWH). This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated oral HPV prevalence among PLWH.

METHODS

Studies with ≥18-year-old PLWH (n≥10), published in English, were included from searching four databases: Ovid MEDLINE(R), Embase (Elsevier), Web of Science (Clarivate), and APA PsycArticles (EBSCO). The AXIS appraisal tool was used to assess the risk of bias of selected studies. A meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models, reporting the pooled prevalence (95% CI) for any HPV, HR-HPV, and HPV16. Heterogeneity was quantified via I². This systematic review was registered in the Open Science Framework (OSF) on December 4th 2024 and is available at [https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/NGMFV].

RESULTS

From 37 studies, pooled prevalence among PLWH was: any HPV, 22% (95% CI: 16-29%; I²=94%); HR-HPV, 12% (9-16%); HPV16, 4% (3-5%); LR-HPV, 16% (10-24%). HR-HPV prevalence was higher pre-2011 (15% [11-20%]) vs. post-2011 (9% [6-14%]) and similar between males (11%; 7-17%) and females (10%; 5-17%) (I²=89% and 75%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed oral HPV prevalence of 22%, about half of which was due to HR-HPV types, and a decline in HR-HPV prevalence post-2011, suggesting a potential impact of HPV vaccination programs. Our findings highlight the ongoing burden of oral HPV among PLWH and underscore the importance of continued vaccination and prevention efforts.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

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

Related studies

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