Scholarlink

Background <p>Cervical cancer remains a major public health challenge in China, with persistent urban–rural disparities in screening coverage. The epidemiological landscape of HPV genotype distribution and screening outcomes across geographic settings remains incompletely characterized. We compared HPV prevalence, genotype distribution, and screening outcomes between urban and rural populations in Xi’an, China, during the post-COVID-19 pandemic period (2023–2025).</p> Methods <p>This retrospective cross-sectional study analysed HPV testing records from 16,365 women (11,449 urban, 4,916 rural) screened between January 2023 and December 2025. Primary urban–rural comparisons were restricted to the 15 high-risk genotypes common to both detection platforms (HPV16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 53, 56, 58, 59, 66, 68). Histopathological follow-up was characterised within the rural sub-cohort only (matched urban cascade data unavailable). Statistical analyses included chi-square with Bonferroni correction, Wilson 95% CIs, and network analysis for co-infection patterns; significance set at <i>p</i> &lt; 0.05.</p> Results <p>Age-standardised HPV prevalence was higher in urban (14.3%, 95% CI: 13.6–15.0%) than rural populations (12.4%, 95% CI: 11.4–13.4%; <i>p</i> = 0.007). HPV52 predominated in both settings (urban: 3.1%, rural: 3.2%), followed by HPV16 (2.4% in both) and HPV58 (urban: 2.4%, rural: 1.6%). Significant urban–rural differences: HPV58 (urban higher; <i>p</i> = 0.002), HPV33 (rural higher; <i>p</i> = 0.003), HPV39 (rural higher; <i>p</i> = 0.012); HPV16, HPV18, HPV52 did not differ. Urban women showed a U-shaped age distribution, while rural women showed a gradual age-related increase. Multiple infections were similar (urban: 4.0%, rural: 3.4%; <i>p</i> = 0.087). HPV52–HPV53 was the most frequent co-infection pair in both networks (urban: 32; rural: 16). Histopathological follow-up in the rural sub-cohort was 11.5% (70/609 HPV-positive women).</p> Conclusions <p>Urban–rural differences in HPV prevalence and genotype distribution were observed in Northwest China. The crude urban excess (15.5% vs. 12.4%) was substantially attenuated but not eliminated after platform-comparable, age-standardised analysis (14.3% vs. 12.4%; <i>p</i> = 0.007), reflecting detection-platform asymmetry, age structure, and differential healthcare access. HPV52 predominance underscores the need for region-specific vaccination strategies beyond HPV16/18. The 11.5% rural histopathological follow-up rate, far below the WHO 70% minimum, highlights a critical cascade-of-care gap; prospective matched-cohort studies are required to characterise the urban cascade and guide equitable diagnostic strengthening.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Urban–rural disparities in HPV prevalence and genotype distribution: a large-scale cervical cancer screening study in Xi’an, China

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月28日

查看全文
  • Jingrui Wu,
  • Jianhua Yi,
  • Le Fang,
  • Shuya Lei,
  • Haihui Yang,
  • Mangni Ma,
  • Yongle Hao,
  • Hongrae Kim,
  • Hyungsoo Shin,
  • Wansuk Choi

摘要

Background

Cervical cancer remains a major public health challenge in China, with persistent urban–rural disparities in screening coverage. The epidemiological landscape of HPV genotype distribution and screening outcomes across geographic settings remains incompletely characterized. We compared HPV prevalence, genotype distribution, and screening outcomes between urban and rural populations in Xi’an, China, during the post-COVID-19 pandemic period (2023–2025).

Methods

This retrospective cross-sectional study analysed HPV testing records from 16,365 women (11,449 urban, 4,916 rural) screened between January 2023 and December 2025. Primary urban–rural comparisons were restricted to the 15 high-risk genotypes common to both detection platforms (HPV16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 53, 56, 58, 59, 66, 68). Histopathological follow-up was characterised within the rural sub-cohort only (matched urban cascade data unavailable). Statistical analyses included chi-square with Bonferroni correction, Wilson 95% CIs, and network analysis for co-infection patterns; significance set at p < 0.05.

Results

Age-standardised HPV prevalence was higher in urban (14.3%, 95% CI: 13.6–15.0%) than rural populations (12.4%, 95% CI: 11.4–13.4%; p = 0.007). HPV52 predominated in both settings (urban: 3.1%, rural: 3.2%), followed by HPV16 (2.4% in both) and HPV58 (urban: 2.4%, rural: 1.6%). Significant urban–rural differences: HPV58 (urban higher; p = 0.002), HPV33 (rural higher; p = 0.003), HPV39 (rural higher; p = 0.012); HPV16, HPV18, HPV52 did not differ. Urban women showed a U-shaped age distribution, while rural women showed a gradual age-related increase. Multiple infections were similar (urban: 4.0%, rural: 3.4%; p = 0.087). HPV52–HPV53 was the most frequent co-infection pair in both networks (urban: 32; rural: 16). Histopathological follow-up in the rural sub-cohort was 11.5% (70/609 HPV-positive women).

Conclusions

Urban–rural differences in HPV prevalence and genotype distribution were observed in Northwest China. The crude urban excess (15.5% vs. 12.4%) was substantially attenuated but not eliminated after platform-comparable, age-standardised analysis (14.3% vs. 12.4%; p = 0.007), reflecting detection-platform asymmetry, age structure, and differential healthcare access. HPV52 predominance underscores the need for region-specific vaccination strategies beyond HPV16/18. The 11.5% rural histopathological follow-up rate, far below the WHO 70% minimum, highlights a critical cascade-of-care gap; prospective matched-cohort studies are required to characterise the urban cascade and guide equitable diagnostic strengthening.