Very little is known about the natural history of oral HPV infection. Several different methods exist to collect oral specimens and detect HPV, but their respective performance characteristics are unknown. We compared two different methods for oral specimen collection (oral saline rinse and commercial saliva kit) from 96 individuals and then analyzed the samples for HPV by two different PCR detection methods (single GP5+/6+ PCR and nested MY09/11 and GP5+/6+ PCR). For the oral rinse samples, the oral HPV prevalence was 10.4% (GP+ PCR; 10% repeatability) vs 11.5% (nested PCR method; 100% repeatability). For the commercial saliva kit samples, the prevalences were 3.1% vs 16.7% with the GP+ PCR vs the nested PCR method (repeatability 100% for both detection methods). Overall the agreement was fair or poor between samples and methods (kappa 0.06-0.36). Standardizing methods of oral sample collection and HPV detection would ensure comparability between future oral HPV studies.
|Authors||de Souza, Marjorie M A; Hartel, Gunter; Whiteman, David C; Antonsson, Annika|
|Journal||DIAGNOSTIC MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASE|
|Funding Body||Queensland Head and Neck Cancer Centre|