切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版) ›› 2009, Vol. 05 ›› Issue (06) : 577 -579. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2009.06.103

论著

三种方法检测人乳头瘤病毒的比较
贺国丽, 符生苗   
  1. 570311 海南海口,海南省人民医院
  • 出版日期:2009-12-01

Comparison of Three Methods to Detect the Human Papilloma Virus

Guo-li HE, Sheng-mia FU   

  1. Hainan Provincial People's Hospital, Haikou 570311, Hainan Province, China
  • Published:2009-12-01
  • Supported by:
    * Project No. 80463, supported by the Natural Science Fund of Hainan Province
引用本文:

贺国丽, 符生苗. 三种方法检测人乳头瘤病毒的比较[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2009, 05(06): 577-579.

Guo-li HE, Sheng-mia FU. Comparison of Three Methods to Detect the Human Papilloma Virus[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2009, 05(06): 577-579.

目的

比较基因芯片分型法、PCR荧光定量法、免疫组织化学法检测人乳头瘤病毒(human papilloma virus,HPV)的敏感性,为临床人乳头瘤病毒检测提供适用的方法。

方法

收集2002至2007年在本院就诊的宫颈癌病例200例,采用新鲜宫颈癌组织进行人乳头瘤病毒基因芯片分型检测;在上述200例患者中,选取自愿接受荧光定量PCR检测的患者134例,收取宫颈癌灶分泌物,采用荧光定量PCR检测方法检测人乳头瘤病毒;对在上述134例宫颈癌患者中,选取自愿接受免疫组织化学检测的患者利用石蜡包埋宫颈癌组织,采用免疫组织化学法检测人乳头瘤病毒。

结果

基因芯片分型法检测人乳头瘤病毒呈阳性为188例,阳性率为94.00%(188/200),其中HPV–16/–18阳性率为95.74%(180/188)。荧光定量PCR法检测HPV–16/–18阳性率为36.57%(49/134);免疫组化法检测HPV–16/–18阳性率为46.51%(60/129)。荧光定量PCR检测和免疫组化法检测人乳头瘤病毒呈阳性者,在基因芯片分型法检测中均呈阳性。基因芯片分型法人乳头瘤病毒检出率与荧光定量PCR检测和免疫组化法比较,差异有显著意义(P<0.05),而后两种方法比较,差异无显著意义(P>0.05)。

结论

基因芯片分型技术检测人乳头瘤病毒具有敏感性好,且同时可以分型的明显优势,适用于临床人乳头瘤病毒感染的诊断和研究。

Objective

To compare the susceptibility of human papilloma virus (HPV) by the detecting methods of genotyping chip system, fluorescence quantitative PCR and immunohistochemistry.

Methods

From 2002 to 2007, a total of 200 fresh freezen tissues of cervical cancer were detected for the susceptibility of human papilloma virus by the human papilloma virus genotyping chip system, 134 secretion of cervical lesion were detected by fluorescence quantitative PCR, and 129 paraffin-imbedded of cervical cancer were detected by immunohistochemistry.

Results

The human papilloma virus positive rate of the genotyping chip method was 94.00% (188/200), among them, HPV-16/-18 accounted for 95.74% (180/188). The positive rate of HPV-16/-18 which was detected by the fluorescence quantitative PCR was 36.57% (49/134). The positive rate of HPV-16/-18 which was detected by immunohistochemical method was 46.51% (60/129). The positive cases who were detected by fluorescence quantitative PCR and immunohistochemistry were all positive in human papilloma virus genotyping chip system. There had statistical difference of detecting rates among human papilloma virus genotyping chip method and fluorescence quantitative PCR or immunohistochemistry (P<0.05), while significance difference was not found between fluorescence quantitative PCR and immunohistochemistry (P>0.05).

Conclusion

The human papilloma virus genotyping chip system is good and can divide the types, meanwhile its outcomes are objective and directly perceived through the senses. Human papilloma virus genotyping chip system is suitable to clinical diagnosis and study.

1 Villa LL, Denny L. Methods for detection of HPV infection and its clinical utility. Int J Gynecol Obstet, 2006, 94 (suppl 1): 571–580.
2 An HJ, Cho NH, Lee SY, et al. Correlation of cervical carcinoma and precancerous lesions with human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes detected with the HPV DNA chip microarray method. Cancer, 2003, 97(7): 1672–1680.
3 Lee SA, Kang D, Seo SS, et al. Multiple HPV infection in cervical cancer screened by HPVDNAChip. Cancer Lett, 2003, 198(2): 187–192.
4 Lo KW, Wong YF, Chan MK, et al. Prevalence of human papillomavirus in cervical cancer: A multicenter study in China. Int J Cancer, 2002, 100(3): 327–331.
5 Franceschi S. The IARC commitment to cancer prevention: The example of papillomavirus and cervical cancer. Recent Results Cancer Res, 2005, 166(3): 277–297.
6 Duttagupta C, Sengupts S, Roy M, et al. Oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and uterine cervical cancer: A screening strategy in the perspective of rural India. Eur J Cancer Prev, 2002, 11(5): 447–456.
[1] 卫怡妙, 李亚芹, 赵卫红. 环状RNA与宫颈癌发病机制的研究现状[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2022, 18(05): 512-516.
[2] 杨春, 陈悦悦, 周琳, 张丹. 阴道微环境失衡与高危型人乳头瘤病毒持续感染[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2021, 17(06): 740-744.
[3] 薛钰, 吴丹, 李柱南, 张峥嵘, 林婧, 许颖, 熊振虹, 曹丹. CO2激光治疗宫颈上皮内瘤变和阴道上皮内瘤变临床疗效[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2020, 16(04): 483-491.
[4] 陈锐, 冯凌, 付艳, 王黎明, 谭洁, 廖秦平. 派特灵治疗宫颈病变术后高危型人乳头瘤病毒持续呈阳性的临床研究[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2020, 16(04): 438-443.
[5] 王文豪, 王卉, 郝敏. 宫颈癌与叶酸相关信号通路的研究进展[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2020, 16(02): 245-248.
[6] 余娟平, 魏琦, 王倩倩, 常中宝, 叶红, 徐庆华, 李晓华. 安徽地区17 160例健康体检女性人乳头瘤病毒感染状况及基因分型[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2019, 13(05): 389-395.
[7] 蔡曼妮, 韩向阳, 黄咏东, 何周桃, 王裕宣, 张东艳, 颜超, 刘宁. 假性蛋白激酶3在结肠息肉癌变过程中的表达意义[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2020, 14(06): 439-442.
[8] 李沐宸, 温星桥. 前列腺癌与微生物的联系[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(02): 188-192.
[9] 李秘, 邱华娟, 纪燕琴, 周明辉. P16、Ki67表达及病毒载量对宫颈上皮内瘤变Ⅱ合并高危型人乳头瘤病毒感染患者病变转归的影响[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 272-278.
[10] 朱琳琳, 赵帆, 闫琳琳, 郑凤芝, 王静, 胡守奎. 北京京西地区女性高危型HPV感染状况及基因型分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(09): 897-901.
[11] 杨旭梅, 金蓉蓉, 周慧玲, 蒋小芹, 于鸿. HPV疫苗研究进展及推广接种过程中的影响因素[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(03): 218-223.
[12] 孔蕊, 姚群, 吴晓博, 张小红, 范颖. 高危型人乳头状瘤病毒感染类型及载量与子宫颈癌前病变严重程度及病变范围的相关性[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2020, 14(05): 376-379.
[13] 秦毓, 杨苗, 畅锴, 王舒宁. 山西省女性人乳头瘤病毒感染现状分析[J]. 中华临床实验室管理电子杂志, 2023, 11(02): 105-108.
[14] 马丽娜, 范海博, 张俊涛, 李胜男. 黑龙江24 597例宫颈癌筛查女性HPV分型检测结果分析[J]. 中华临床实验室管理电子杂志, 2019, 07(04): 223-225.
[15] 尹嫚, 杨林青, 王云飞. 女性生殖道同期发生的黏液上皮化生和肿瘤的诊断学特征并文献复习[J]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2022, 10(03): 193-196.
阅读次数
全文


摘要