Prevalence of HPV

Wednesday, February 28th 2007

Two studies in this weeks JAMA are getting major media attention. One of them on how antioxidant supplements actually increase your likelihood of death is interesting but the real gem is a look at the prevalence of human papillomavirus in women. And what do you know the article is free on JAMA’s website.


The Real Question: How Long Until The FDA Regulates It?

Off topic: How many other medical students out there who are AMA members actually read their copies of JAMA (which collect on my coffee table). I’m actually using it as bathroom reading recently, which I think is actually a good thing. Probably TMI.

Anyway, what is the prevalence of the HPV infection in women?

The overall HPV prevalence was 26.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.3%-30.9%) among US females aged 14 to 59 years (n = 1921). HPV prevalence was 24.5% (95% CI, 19.6%-30.5%) among females aged 14 to 19 years

So let’s put the statistics above in perspective.

1) Nearly one-fourth of teenage girls 14 and over have HPV. However, the vast majority of these carriers aren’t carrying type 16 or 18.

2) Still, that is a pretty amazing statistic because this was a point in time study. Most HPV infections are cleared, meaning at the single moment of collection of the sample for this study a quarter of teenage girls have a current HPV infection. This just reiterates the claim that the vast majority of women will get an HPV infection (even if asymptomatic) very soon after becoming sexually active.

The incidence of high risk types 16 and 18 is much less,

The overall prevalences of high-risk HPV types 16 and 18 were 1.5% (95% CI, 0.9%-2.6%) and 0.8% (95% CI, 0.4%-1.5%), respectively.

That may not look large but consider how it plays out when applied to the general public.The Merck vaccine protects against types 6 and 11 (the most common cause of genital warts) and 16 and 18 (found in the majority of cervical cancers).

Including those who were infected with types 6 and 11, by the study’s estimate more than 3 million women are infected with HPV type 6, 11, 16, or 18. More than 7 million women are infected with some HPV type at any one time. Obviously the vaccine could dramatically reduce the incidence of this.

As further circumstantial evidence of the sexual risks taken by teenagers - which is the argument for this vaccine - consider that other types which, while having less of a relationship to cervical cancer than types 16 and 18, were still classified as “high risk” by the researchers. Of all the “high risk” types of HPV (remember: the vaccine is not protective for all of these types), including types 16 and 18, the prevalence was more than 15% in girls aged 14 to 19.

Something to chew on at least.

 
 

Leave a comment

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture.
Anti-Spam Image

About The Blog


Medicine, healthcare policy, and random commentary from a medical student still on the naive side of the fence.
I'm a fourth year medical student in Texas.

I did my undergrad work in USC's School of Cinematic Arts. I have a Bachelors of Fine Arts in Writing for Screen & Television. I loved it, but a future of waiting tables and taking meetings with B-List producers was not for me.

This blog is ostensibly to discuss healthcare policy and maybe educate a few of my fellow medical students. But it will stray into current events, politics, and other science topics when they draw my interest



Other odd notes about me:

Disclaimer


Nothing on this website is to be taken as medical advice. Please seek counsel from a physician for any questions regarding your health.
Nothing on this website is to be taken as medical advice. I am not a physician. Please consult a physician concerning any health related questions.

This blog is entirely self funded. It accepts no advertising or other supporting revenue. The author has no relevant financial relationships to disclose.

Unless otherwise noted the media on this blog is under the copyright of the blog author, used under a Creative Common or free use license with appropriate accreditation or is in the public domain. If you believe images or video posted on this blog are copyrighted works used inappropriately please contact me.

Endorsements


"Please be more precise in your practice of medicine than you are in your blogging!"
- Mark Lanier

"Nice work."
- Commenter

"I really enjoy your blog. Thanks for taking the time to put it together."
- Rob Ebrahimi

"The guy who wrote this [blog] is an idiot."
- Commenter

Contact


Grand Rounds




To Host: granrounds@gmx.com

Posts & Links of Note

Recent Comments


Julia (on I Am Happy To Be Here): "haha you can delete that last post -thought the first one didn’t go through. sorry about blog spam."
Julia (on I Am Happy To Be Here): "hey great post! love it! will be reading your blog more often- found it on paul levy’s blog."
Julia (on I Am Happy To Be Here): "hey great post! will be reading your blog more -"
MoneyPerfectGenes (on First Full Face Transplant): "Indeed, people with inferior or otherwise undesirable genes with even the slightest chance..."

Education Links


Guidelines & Research Admissions Residency Match Pathology Pharmacology Microbiology Physical Exam Anatomy & Embryology Neuroscience Histology Biochemistry & Cell Biology Physiology Medicine Pediatrics Surgery Obstetrics & Gynecology Radiology Psychiatry

Policy Links


Medical News Groups & Resources Tort Reform Covering The Uninsured Reports & Essays

Currently Reading

Currently Doing

Currently Viewing

[Complete Photos]

Blogroll


Medical Students Health Professionals Patients Health Policy Wonks Politics Space & Technology

Archives

Social Internet



Meta









Credits