MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a multicentre study with a total of 280 cases of cervical cancer from 4 referral centres in Malaysia, studied using real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) detection of 12 high risk-HPV genotypes.
RESULTS: Overall HPV was detected in 92.5% of cases, in 95.9% of squamous cell carcinomas and 84.3%of adenocarcinomas. The five most prevalent high-risk HPV genotypes were HPV 16 (68.2%), 18 (40%), 58 (10.7%), 33 (10.4%) and 52 (10.4%). Multiple HPV infections were more prevalent (55.7%) than single HPV infections (36.8%). The percentage of HPV positive cases in Chinese, Malays and Indians were 95.5%, 91.9% and 80.0%, respectively. HPV 16 and 18 genotypes were the commonest in all ethnic groups. We found that the percentage of HPV 16 infection was significantly higher in Chinese (75.9%) compared to Malays (63.7%) and Indians (52.0%) (p<0.05), while HPV 18 was significantly higher in Malays (52.6%) compared to Chinese (25.0%) and Indians (28%) (p<0.05). Meanwhile, HPV 33 (17.9%) and 52 (15.2%) were also more commonly detected in the Chinese (p<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the distribution of HPV genotype in Malaysia is similar to other Asian countries. Importantly, we found that different ethnic groups in Malaysia have different HPV genotype infection rates, which is a point to consider during the implementation of HPV vaccination.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women underwent self-sampling followed by gynecologist sampling during screening at two primary health clinics. Pap cytology of cervical specimens was evaluated for specimen adequacy, presence of endocervical cells or transformation zone cells and cytological interpretation for cells abnormalities. Cervical specimens were also extracted and tested for HPV DNA detection. Positive HPV smears underwent gene sequencing and HPV genotyping by referring to the online NCBI gene bank. Results were compared between samplings by Kappa agreement and McNemar test.
RESULTS: For Pap specimen adequacy, KSSD showed 100% agreement with gynecologist sampling but had only 32.3% agreement for presence of endocervical cells. Both sampling showed 100% agreement with only 1 case detected HSIL favouring CIN2 for cytology result. HPV DNA detection showed 86.2%agreement (K=0.64, 95% CI 0.524-0.756, p=0.001) between samplings. KSSD and gynaecologist sampling identified high risk HPV in 17.3% and 23.9% respectively (p= 0.014).
CONCLUSION: The self-sampling using Kato device can serve as a tool in Pap cytology and HPV DNA detection in low resource settings in Malaysia. Self-sampling devices such as KSSD can be used as an alternative technique to gynaecologist sampling for cervical cancer screening among rural populations in Malaysia.