JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, Feb. 2006, p. 513–517
0095-1137/06/$08.00⫹0 doi:10.1128/JCM.44.2.513–517.2006
Copyright © 2006, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Vol. 44, No. 2
Comparison of Physician- and Self-Collected Genital Specimens
for Detection of Human Papillomavirus in Men
Brenda Y. Hernandez,1* K. McDuffie,1 M. T. Goodman,1 L. R. Wilkens,1 P. Thompson,1
X. Zhu,1 W. Wong,2 and L. Ning2
Cancer Research Center of Hawaii1 and University Health Services,2 University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii
Received 13 October 2005/Returned for modification 23 November 2005/Accepted 29 November 2005
There is currently no consensus regarding the most appropriate methods of sampling for the detection of
genital human papillomavirus (HPV) in men. We employed a recently developed collection method involving
abrasion and moistened swabbing of the genital skin surface for the detection of HPV in a cohort of 136
university-affiliated males in Hawaii. Genital specimens collected by physicians using this method were
compared with self-collected specimens from the same individuals obtained 24 h later. Self-collected specimens
yielded a greater proportion of sufficient specimens than physician-collected specimens. HPV detection was
comparable in physician- and self-collected specimens; detection was highest in the penile shaft (51.2% and
51.5%, respectively, P ⴝ 0.96), followed by the scrotum (41.2% and 46.2%, P ⴝ 0.43), the glans/coronal sulcus
(31.9% and 33.1%, P ⴝ 0.84), and the foreskin (33.3% and 28.6%, P ⴝ 0.74). Site-specific agreement in HPV
detection between paired physician- and self-collected samples ranged from 67.2% (kappa ⴝ 0.34) for the
penile shaft to 95.0% (kappa ⴝ 0.89) for the foreskin. There was a high degree of concordance in HPV
genotypes in HPV-positive pairs. The most common type was HPV type 84, which comprised approximately 15%
of the specimens. The emery paper-swab method offers an efficient sampling method for genital HPV DNA
detection in men that could be used both within and outside of the clinical setting.
Natural-history studies of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection among males are an emerging area of epidemiological
research. The types and distributions of genital HPV are
largely uncharacterized. Because this is a novel area of scientific inquiry, there is currently no consensus on the most appropriate method of sampling for the detection of genital HPV
infection among men. Differences in methodology make it
difficult to compare penile HPV prevalence across studies and
populations (2, 3, 10, 13, 14, 17, 20). Weaver et al. (19) recently
reported enhanced specimen yield and HPV detection in male
genitals through abrasion with emery paper followed by swabbing with a moistened Dacron swab (19). We employed this
method to compare the detection of HPV DNA in genital
specimens collected by physicians to self-collected specimens
from the same individuals among a cohort of men in a university population.
period. During the baseline study visit, physicians collected separate cell specimens from the glans/coronal sulcus and shaft of the penis, as well as the scrotum,
of each study subject. Foreskin specimens were also collected from uncircumcised study participants.
Specimens were consecutively obtained from each genital site and placed in
separate collection vials. Physicians used disposable gloves which were changed
after each sample collection. Sampling of any visible genital warts and lesions was
avoided. (Results of the analysis of separate specimens collected from warts and
lesions were not included.)
Self-collected specimens were obtained approximately 24 h following the clinic
visit. Subjects were instructed to follow the same procedure used by the clinician,
with the exception of the use of disposable gloves, which were not used by study
participants. Written instructions and illustrations were provided with collection
kits. Self-collected specimens were returned to the clinic on the same day. All
specimens were transported to the laboratory and stored at minus 20°C until
testing.
The method of collection has been previously described (19). Briefly, a sterilized strip of emery paper (2 by 4 cm; 600A-grit Wetordry Tri-M-ite; 3M) was
used with steady pressure to repeatedly abrade the entire surface of the genital
site. Next, a sterile Dacron swab moistened with sterile saline was used with
steady pressure to swab the entire area. Both the emery paper and swab tip were
then immersed in the specimen transport medium (Digene Corporation, Gaithersburg, MD).
Glans/coronal sulcus samples included the entire exterior surface of the glans
of the penis extending from the tip to the coronal sulcus. Shaft samples included
the entire exterior surface from the base of the penis extending the length of the
penis to the area immediately below the coronal sulcus. The scrotum sample
included the entire exterior surface of the scrotum.
For uncircumcised men, the foreskin sample included the entire inner surface
of the retracted foreskin, the glans/coronal sulcus sample included the entire
head of the penis beneath the foreskin, and the shaft included the entire exterior
surface from the base of the penis extending to the tip of the unretracted outer
foreskin.
Interview. A structured survey was administered by a trained interviewer at
each study visit. At enrollment, a comprehensive survey queried social and
demographic information and medical, sexual, and reproductive histories.
HPV DNA testing and genotyping. DNA was extracted from genital specimens
with commercial reagents (QIAGEN Inc., Valencia, CA). The PCR used a
modified version of the original degenerate primer system, the PGMY09 and
PGMY11 primer pairs with HMB01, which together amplify a 450-bp region of
the L1 HPV genome (7). Primers GH20 and PC04 were used to coamplify a
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Recruitment. This study was approved by the Committee on Human Studies of
the University of Hawaii. Written informed consent was obtained from all study
subjects. The cohort study was initiated in July 2004 among a university population in Hawaii. Self-referred volunteers were recruited through campus-based
media, including flyers and newspaper advertisements. Eligible men were 18
years old and older and English speaking with no history of blood-clotting
disorders. Between July 2004 and April 2005, 136 adult males were recruited and
followed up at 2-month intervals. All study visits were conducted at the University Health Services of the University of Hawaii.
Genital specimen collection. A staff of seven university-based physicians were
specifically trained in the collection of genital HPV specimens with the objective
of standardizing the methodology prior to initiation of the study. A training video
was used to ensure uniformity of specimen collection throughout the study
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Cancer Research Center
of Hawaii, 1236 Lauhala Street, Honolulu, HI 96813. Phone: (808)
586-2992. Fax: (808) 586-2982. E-mail: brenda@crch.hawaii.edu.
513
514
HERNANDEZ ET AL.
J. CLIN. MICROBIOL.
TABLE 1. Sufficiency of male genital samples: clinically-collected
versus self-collected specimens
Sample collection site
No. of human beta-globin-positive
samples/total (%)
P valuea
Physician collected
Self-collected
Glans/coronal sulcus
Shaft
Scrotum
Foreskinb
116/136 (85.3)
129/136 (94.8)
119/136 (87.5)
21/22 (95.4)
133/136 (97.8)
134/136 (98.5)
130/136 (95.6)
21/22 (95.4)
0.0002
0.09
0.02
1.00
Any genital site
385/430 (89.5)
418/430 (97.2)
⬍0.0001
a
b
TABLE 2. HPV detection in male genital samples: clinically-collected
versus self-collected specimens a
Based on the chi-square test of association with one degree of freedom.
Foreskin specimens from uncircumcised men.
Site
Any genital site
Glans/coronal sulcus
Shaft
Scrotum
Foreskinc
Glans/coronal sulcus ⫹
shaft ⫹ scrotum
a
b
c
268-bp region of the human beta-globin gene as an internal control for sample
sufficiency.
Each 50-l reaction mixture consisted of 1⫻ PCR II Buffer (Perkin-Elmer,
Norwalk, CT); 6 mM MgCl2 (Perkin-Elmer, Wellesley, MA); 200 M each
dATP, dTTP, dGTP, and dCTP (Perkin-Elmer); 7.5 U of AmpliTaq Gold (PerkinElmer); 50 pmol each of PGMY09 and PGMY11 (Sigma, St. Louis, MO); 10
pmol of HMB01 (Sigma); 10 pmol each of GH20 and PC04 (Midland Certified
Reagent Co., Midland, TX); sterile H2O; and 5 l of specimen DNA. Positive
controls consisted of constructed plasmid DNA containing the entire genome of
cloned HPV type 16 (HPV-16) DNA. Negative controls were void of template.
PCR was performed in a 96-well format on a Perkin-Elmer 9600 as follows: 95°C
for 9 min; 40 cycles of 95°C for 30 s, 55°C for 1 min, and 72°C for 1 min; 72°C for
5 min; and holding at 4°C.
Amplified specimens were run on 2% precast agarose gels prestained with
ethidium bromide (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA). Specimens that were positive for
the 450- and 268-bp bands of HPV and beta-globin, respectively, were considered
to be positive. Specimens found negative for beta-globin on coamplification were
reamplified in a single amplification reaction. Those remaining negative for
beta-globin were excluded from analysis.
The original DNA samples from HPV-positive specimens were subsequently
genotyped by a reverse line blot detection method for 37 different HPV types
including 6, 11, 16, 18, 26, 31, 33, 35, 39, 40, 42, 45, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 58, 59,
61, 62, 64, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 81, 82, 83, 84, CP6108, and IS39 (8, 15).
Genotyping reagents were kindly supplied by Roche Molecular Systems (Pleasanton, CA). HPV PCR was performed under reaction conditions identical to
those described above, with the exception of the use of dUTP (instead of dTTP)
and 5⬘-biotinylated primers. PCR products were denatured and hybridized to a
nylon membrane containing the immobilized HPV probes. This genotyping assay
also included probes for high and low levels of the human beta-globin gene.
Amplicons hybridized to probes were detected by streptavidin-horseradish peroxidase-mediated color precipitation. HPV-positive specimens that were subsequently found to be negative in the genotyping assay were considered to be
unclassified HPV-positive specimens.
Statistical analyses. All analyses were conducted with SAS (version 8). The
detection of beta-globin and HPV DNAs was compared in physician-collected
and self-collected specimens by using the chi-square statistic with one degree of
freedom.
Physician- and self-collected specimens from the same individual were paired
to estimate agreement. For each individual, results from the self-collected specimen from a particular genital site were compared against results from the
physician-collected specimen from that site. Detection at any site was also compared for each individual. The detection of HPV DNA in paired specimens was
evaluated by using the percent agreement and the kappa statistic to determine
the agreement beyond that expected by chance (6).
RESULTS
The present analysis included baseline results for 136 men
enrolled in the cohort study. Foreskin samples were available
from 22 uncircumcised participants for whom both physiciancollected and self-collected specimens were obtained. Visible
genital warts were observed in 5.2% (7/136) of the study par-
No. of HPV-positive
samples/total (%)
Physician collected
Self-collected
129/385 (41.3)
37/116 (31.9)
66/129 (51.2)
49/119 (41.2)
7/21 (33.3 )
29/105 (27.6)
179/418 (42.8)
44/133 (33.1)
69/134 (51.5)
60/130 (46.2)
6/21 (28.6 )
32/127 (25.2)
P valueb
0.89
0.84
0.96
0.43
0.74
0.68
Beta-globin-negative specimens excluded.
Based on the chi-square test of association with one degree of freedom.
Foreskin specimens from uncircumcised men.
ticipants, and lesions were observed in 3.7% (5/136) of the
study participants.
Study subjects ranged in age from 18 to 63 years, but the
majority of the men were less than 30 (mean, 28.5; standard
deviation, 10.6) years old. Whites composed the majority of the
participants (60.3%), followed by Asians and Pacific Islanders
(including Hawaiians) (18.4%) and individuals of mixed race or
ethnicity (21.3%). Most of the men were born on the U.S. mainland (61.0%) and were single or never married (78.7%), and all
except one had at least some postsecondary education. The majority of the men were circumcised (82.4%) and heterosexual
(77.8%), and approximately half of the participants reported a
total of seven or more female sexual partners during their lifetimes (51.5%). Self-reported history of sexually transmitted infections included genital warts (11.8%), genital herpes (9.6%), chlamydia (7.4%), gonorrhea (3.7%), and human immunodeficiency
virus (HIV) (3.7%). Exchanging drugs and/or money for sex with
a female was reported by 12.6% of the men.
Sample sufficiency (beta-globin positivity) was significantly
higher among self-collected genital specimens (97.2%) than
among physician-collected specimens (89.5%; P ⬍ 0.0001)
(Table 1). The difference in sample sufficiency between the two
sampling procedures was greatest for the glans/coronal sulcus,
followed by the scrotum. Among physician-collected specimens, specimen sufficiency varied by genital site, ranging from
a low of 85.3% in glans/coronal sulcus specimens to more than
94% in shaft and foreskin samples. Only three beta-globinnegative specimens collected by physicians were HPV positive.
No self-collected specimens were negative for beta globin and
positive for HPV.
Site-specific detection of HPV in genital specimens was comparable in physician- and self-collected specimens (Table 2). Excluding beta-globin-negative specimens from analysis, the
overall prevalence of genital HPV DNA was 41.3% in physician-collected specimens and 42.8% in self-collected samples
(P ⫽ 0.89). HPV prevalence varied by site but was comparable
in physician- and self-collected specimens: HPV prevalence
was highest in the penile shaft, followed by the scrotum, the
glans/coronal sulcus, and the foreskin. More than one-fourth
of the individuals had concurrent HPV infection of the glans/
coronal sulcus, shaft, and scrotum in both physician- and selfcollected samples.
There was limited agreement in HPV detection between
VOL. 44, 2006
MALE GENITAL SPECIMENS FOR HPV DETECTION
TABLE 3. Agreement in HPV detection between paired
physician-collected and self-collected male genital specimensa
Site and result for
physician collected
samples
No. of selfcollected
samples
Agreement
HPV⫹
HPV⫺
Overall (%)
Kappa (95% CI)c
Glans/coronal sulcus
HPV⫹
HPV⫺
23
12
12
67
79.0
0.51 (0.33–0.68)
Shaft
HPV⫹
HPV⫺
43
20
22
43
67.2
0.34 (0.18–0.51)
Scrotum
HPV⫹
HPV⫺
31
21
15
48
69.0
0.36 (0.19–0.53)
Foreskinb
HPV⫹
HPV⫺
6
0
1
13
95.0
0.89 (0.67–1)
a
b
c
Beta-globin-negative specimens excluded.
Foreskin specimens from uncircumcised men.
CI, confidence interval.
515
paired physician- and self-collected specimens for all sites.
Agreement between physician-collected and self-collected
specimen pairs ranged from 67.2% in penile shaft specimens to
95.0% in foreskin specimens (Table 3).
A total of 28 different genotypes were detected in physiciancollected genital specimens, compared to 33 types detected in
self-collected specimens. The distribution of types was generally similar in physician-collected and self-collected specimens
(Fig. 1).
In the 159 HPV-positive specimens collected by physicians, a
total of 286 individual HPV types were detected, or an average of
1.8 genotypes per specimen. In the 179 HPV-positive specimens
collected by study subjects, a total of 340 individual HPV types
(average of 1.9 genotypes per specimen) were detected.
A greater proportion of infections detected in self-collected
specimens were composed of multiple HPV genotypes compared to physician-collected specimens. Overall, 60.8% (79/
130) of the infections in self-collected specimens were composed of two or more genotypes, compared to 49.6% (56/113)
of the infections in physician-collected specimens.
The most common genotype in both physician- and selfcollected specimens was nononcogenic HPV-84, which comprised 14.7% (42/286) of the individual types detected in HPVpositive physician-collected specimens and 15.3% (52/340) of
individual types detected in HPV-positive self-collected specimens. HPV-84 was also the most common genotype found in
FIG. 1. Distribution of genotypes in physician- and self-collected, HPV-positive specimens. Superscript numbers: 1, ocogenic types include
those classified as possibly carcinogenic, including HPV-26, -53, and -66; 2, ononcogenic types include those whose carcinogenic potential is
undetermined, such as HPV-83; 3, unclassified specimens are HPV-positive specimens that were not positive for any of the 37 genotypes detected
by the Roche assay.
516
HERNANDEZ ET AL.
J. CLIN. MICROBIOL.
TABLE 4. Genotype-specific HPV detection between paired
physician-collected and self-collected male genital specimens
No. (%) of samples
Agreement
Glans/coronal
sulcus
Shaft
Scrotum
Foreskin
All identical genotype(s)
10 (43.5)
19 (44.2)
10 (32.2)
3 (50)
Some identical genotypes
8 (34.8)
14 (32.6)
10 (32.3)
3 (50)
Different genotype(s)
0 (0)
0 (0)
1 (3.2)
0 (0)
Unclassified genotypes
One of the pair
Both of the pair
1 (4.3)
4 (17.4)
2 (4.6)
8 (18.6)
1 (3.2)
9 (29.0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
23 (100)
43 (100)
31 (100)
Total HPV-positive pairs
6 (100)
each of the four individual genital sites in both physician- and
self-collected specimens. Nononcogenic HPV-62 and -CP6108
and oncogenic HPV-16, -51, and -59 were other predominant
types. Unclassified HPV types composed a substantially greater
proportion of the HPV-positive specimens collected by physicians
(19.6%; 56/286) compared to HPV-positive self-collected specimens (13.8%; 47/340).
When HPV-positive specimen pairs were compared, we observed a high degree of genotype-specific agreement between
HPV-positive physician- and self-collected specimen pairs
(Table 4). For each genital site, when both clinician- and selfcollected specimens were HPV positive, the majority of the
specimen pairs had genotypes that were completely concordant or partially concordant. Only one HPV-positive pair had
completely different HPV genotypes. The remainder of the
HPV-positive pairs had undetermined genotypes in either
one of the pair or both specimens. Undetermined genotypes
in both paired specimens may likely indicate concordant
genotypes other than the 37 types detected by the assay.
DISCUSSION
Genital HPV is presumed to be transmitted between males
and females through direct physical contact during sexual intercourse. Cervical infection likely occurs when virus from the
infected male’s penis enters the basal layer of the squamous
epithelium (1, 18). Although genital contact during sexual intercourse is probably the dominant form of HPV transmission,
there is evidence that genital infection can be acquired through
fomites or other nonsexual means (4). Uncertainties about the
sexual transmission of HPV are complicated by evidence that
condoms may not protect against HPV infection (12).
Our results affirm that asymptomatic genital HPV infection
is common in men and often appears to be multifocal, with
concurrent infection of multiple genital sites. The ability to
detect HPV in genital specimens over a consecutive 2-day
period combined with genotype-specific concordance suggests
that genital infection in men does not reflect surface contamination but rather represents actual infection of the epithelium
by the virus. These results affirm that men are important
sources of HPV infection such that strategies to control viral
transmission should ideally target both sexes.
Previous estimates of genital HPV prevalence in men have
ranged widely, from 10% to 70% (2, 3, 10, 13, 14, 17, 19, 20).
Although this variation may be real, comparisons of genital
HPV prevalence between studies are hampered by differences
in the genital sites sampled, sampling techniques, and HPV
testing methods. The HPV prevalence of 41 to 43% overall is
higher than the 33% prevalence found in a university population in Washington State by using the same specimen collection method and the same PCR-based HPV DNA assay (19).
This difference may reflect our comparatively high-risk population with respect to sexual behavior.
Our cohort was older compared to the Washington State
population (mean, 20.5 years; range, 18 to 25 years) and had a
greater number of female sexual partners in their lifetimes
(median, four partners in the Washington State population).
Five study subjects reported being HIV positive compared to
no men testing positive for HIV type 1 in the Washington
population.
HPV-84, a nononcogenic genotype, appears to be the predominant type in men at all genital sites, and this is consistent
with a previous study of HPV in men, which used the same
genotyping assay (2). This finding contrasts with the consensus
that oncogenic HPV-16 is the most common genotype associated with cervical HPV infection (16). Furthermore, the distribution of other HPV genotypes observed in this cohort is
very different from that observed in female populations, including our own (9), in which HPV-16 was the most common
genotype and HPV-84 composed less than 3% of the types
found in the cervix. Interestingly, HPV-84 was the most common type detected in the anus among women in Hawaii who
were also HPV negative in the cervix (9).
The apparent inconsistency of HPV genotype distribution
observed in men and women is evidence that different HPV
types are selectively transmitted between the sexes due to differential tropism of types. HPV-84, a cutaneous type, is likely
to be more trophic to the male genitals compared to HPV-16,
which is trophic to the mucosa of the cervix. Genotype differences between males and females also raise the possibility of
other modes of transmission of HPV to the genitals, including
self-inoculation. In the same male cohort, HPV-84 was one of
the most common types observed in swabs of the hands (unpublished data), raising the prospect of hand-to-genital transmission in men.
Physician collection generally provided less sufficient samples than that yielded though self-collection. The poorer sufficiency of clinical specimens may have resulted from the
amount of pressure applied to abrade the skin surface. Physicians may have been hesitant to apply firm pressure with the
emery paper out of concern for the participant’s comfort. Furthermore, the application of uniform, firm pressure to sites
such as the scrotum may be particularly difficult because of the
large surface area and the presence of hair.
The overall and site-specific prevalence of HPV was similar
in physician- and self-collected specimens with sufficient material for analysis. However, agreement in HPV detection varied by the surface area of the genital site, with the best agreement observed for the foreskin, which has the smallest surface
area, and the poorest agreement for the shaft and scrotum.
The limited agreement in HPV detection between paired samples may reflect the variation in the sample yield between the
VOL. 44, 2006
MALE GENITAL SPECIMENS FOR HPV DETECTION
two methods, with generally more cells obtained through selfcollection.
Although there was a high degree of genotypic concordance
between HPV-positive specimens, a greater proportion of multiple genotypes and a greater number of total genotypes were
observed in the self-collected specimens than in the physiciancollected specimens.
The possibility must be considered that self-collected samples, which did not involve the use of gloves and which were
obtained outside the clinic, were more susceptible to contamination in the collection process. This could explain the higher
detection rates of beta-globin, as well as the detection of a
greater proportion of multiple types and more total genotypes
identified in self-collected samples. An alternative explanation
is that abrading the skin surface during clinical collection may
have resulted in a greater cell yield during self-collection 24 h
later when the skin was abraded a second time.
The development of effective strategies to prevent and control HPV, including the implementation of vaccination programs, requires knowledge of the natural history of HPV infection in men, as well as women. The paucity of knowledge of
HPV infection in men requires the development of simple and
reliable sampling methods for the detection of HPV. Given the
general transience of HPV infection in women (5, 11), an ideal
sampling method would facilitate repeated measurements of
HPV in men over time.
Based on the comparable rates of site-specific HPV detection and the high degree of genotypic concordance between
HPV-positive specimen pairs, the emery paper-swab method
appears to be a reliable method of sampling that could be used
within and outside of a clinical setting. Nevertheless, the variation in sample sufficiency, combined with the limited agreement in HPV detection between physician- and self-collected
specimens, underscores the importance of deliberate, thorough, and consistent sampling to maximize specimen yield
while taking care to limit the possibility of extraneous contamination.
2. Baldwin, S. B., D. R. Wallace, M. R. Papenfuss, M. Abrahamsen, L. C.
Vaught, J. R. Kornegay, J. A. Hallum, S. A. Redmond, and A. R. Guiliano.
2003. Human papillomavirus infection in men attending a sexually transmitted disease clinic. J. Infect. Dis. 187:1064–1070.
3. Bleeker, M. C. G., C. J. A. Hogewoning, F. J. Voorhorst, A. J. C. van den
Brule, J. Berkhof, A. T. Hesselink, M. Lettink, T. M. Starink, T. J. Stoof, P. J.
Snijders, and C. J. Meijer. 2005. HPV-associated flat penile lesions in men
of a non-STD hospital population: less frequent and smaller in size than in
male sexual partners of women with CIN. Int. J. Cancer 113:36–41.
4. Cason, J., and C. A. Mant. 2005. High-risk mucosal human papillomavirus
infections during infancy and childhood. J. Clin. Virol. 32(Suppl. 1):S52–S58.
5. Evander, M., K. Edlund, A. Gustafsson, M. Jonsson, R. Karlson, E.
Rylander, and G. Wadell. 1995. Human papillomavirus infection is transient
in young women: a population-based cohort study. J. Infect. Dis. 171:1026–
1030.
6. Fleiss, J. L., B. Levin, and M. C. Paik. 2003. Statistical methods for rates and
proportions, 3rd edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, N.Y.
7. Gravitt, P., C. L. Peyton, T. Q. Alessi, C. Wheeler, F. Coutlee, A. Hildesheim,
M. H. Schiffman, D. R. Scott, and R. J. Apple. 2000. Improved amplification
of genital human papillomaviruses. J. Clin. Microbiol. 38:357–361.
8. Gravitt, P. E., C. L. Peyton, R. J. Apple, and C. M. Wheeler. 1998. Genotyping of 27 human papillomavirus types by using L1 consensus PCR products by single-hybridization, reverse line blot detection method. J. Clin.
Microbiol. 36:3020–3027.
9. Hernandez, B. Y., K. McDuffie, X. Zhu, L. R. Wilkens, J. Killeen, B. Kessel,
M. T. Wakabayashi, C. C. Bertram, D. Easa, L. Ning, J. Boyd, C. Sunoo, L.
Kamemoto, and M. T. Goodman. 2005. Anal HPV infection in women and
its relationship with cervical infection. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.
14:2550–2556.
10. Hippelainen, M., S. Syrjanen, M. Hippelainen, H. Koskela, J. Pulkkinen, S.
Saarikoski, and K. Syrjanen. 1993. Prevalence and risk factors of genital
human papillomavirus (HPV) infections in healthy males: a study on Finnish
conscripts. Sex. Transm. Dis. 20:321–328.
11. Ho, G. Y. F., R. Bierman, L. Beardsley, C. J. Chang, and R. D. Burk. 1998.
Natural history of cervicovaginal papillomavirus infection in young women.
N. Engl. J. Med. 338:423–428.
12. Manhart, L. E., and L. A. Koutsky. 2002. Do condoms prevent genital HPV
infection, external genital warts, or cervical neoplasia? A meta analysis. Sex.
Transm. Dis. 29:725–735.
13. Munoz, N., X. Castellsague, F. X. Bosch, L. Tafur, S. de Sanjose, N.
Aristizabal, A. M. Ghaffari, and K. V. Shah. 1996. Difficulty in elucidating
the male role in cervical cancer in Colombia, a high-risk area for disease.
J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 88:1068–1075.
14. Nicolau, S. M., C. G. C. Camargo, J. N. Stavale, A. Castelo, G. B. Dores, A.
Lorincz, and G. R. de Lima. 2005. Human papillomavirus DNA detection in
male sexual partners of women with genital human papillomavirus. Urology
65:251–255.
15. Peyton, C. L., P. E. Gravitt, W. C. Hunt, R. S. Hundley, M. Zhao, R. J. Apple,
and C. M. Wheeler. 2001. Determinants of genital human papillomavirus
detection in a US population. J. Infect. Dis. 183:1554–1564.
16. Schiffman, M. H., H. M. Bauer, R. N. Hoover, A. G. Glass, D. M. Cadell,
B. B. Rush, D. R. Scott, M. E. Sherman, R. J. Kurman, S. Wacholder, et al.
1993. Epidemiologic evidence showing that human papillomavirus infection
causes most cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 85:958–
964.
17. Shin, H.-R., S. Franceschi, S. Vaccarella, J.-W. Roh, Y.-H. Ju, J.-K. Oh, H. J.
Kong, S. H. Rha, S. I. Jung, J. I. Kim, K. Y. Jung, L. J. van Doom, and W.
Quint. 2004. Prevalence and determinants of genital infection with papillomavirus in female and male university students in Busan, South Korea.
J. Infect. Dis. 190:468–476.
18. Stanley, M. A. 1994. Virus-keratinocytes interactions in the infectious cycle,
p. 116–131. In P. L. Stern and M. A. Stanley (ed.), Human papillomavirus
and cervical cancer: biology and immunology. Oxford University Press,
New York, N.Y.
19. Weaver, B. A., Q. Feng, K. K. Holmes, N. Kiviat, S.-K. Lee, and C. Meyer.
2004. Evaluation of genital sites and sampling techniques for detection of
human papillomavirus DNA in men. J. Infect. Dis. 189:677–685.
20. Wikstrom, A., C. Popescu, and O. Forslund. 2000. Asymptomatic penile
HPV infection: a prospective study. Int. J. STD AIDS 11:80–84.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Reagents for the HPV PGMY-LB assay were kindly supplied by
Roche Molecular Systems. We extend our gratitude to the following
individuals and organizations for assistance with this study: staff of the
Cancer Research Center of Hawaii, University of Hawaii; physicians
Daphne Myers, Foy Varner, Jennifer Frank, Kazu Hernandez, Kim
Wischman, Lily Ning, Michelle La Botz, and Wesley Wong; nurse
practitioner Gwen Barros; and staff of the University Health Services
of the University of Hawaii; Janet Kornegay, Roche Molecular Systems; and Bethany Weaver, University of Washington.
This study was supported by grant RR018727 from the National
Center for Research Resources, National Institutes of Health.
We have no commercial or other association that might pose a
conflict of interest.
REFERENCES
1. Androphy, E. J. 1994. Molecular biology of human papillomavirus infection
and oncogenesis. J. Investig. Dermatol. 103:248–256.
517