Table 2.
Distribution of HPVs by their Clinical Presentation in Each Conglomerate Obtained by Two-Step Cluster Analysis
| E6a, % |
E7, % |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cluster1 | Cluster2 | Cluster3 | Cluster1 | Cluster2 | |||
| MucCutAsym (n = 90) | 97.8 | — | 2.2 | 94.4 | 5.6 | ||
| MucL (n = 25) | — | 100 | — | — | 100 | ||
| GenW (n = 13) | — | — | 100 | — | 100 | ||
| CutW (n = 28) | 3.6 | — | 96.4 | 3.6 | 96.4 | ||
| E1, % |
E2, % |
E4, % |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cluster1 | Cluster2 | Cluster3 | Cluster1 | Cluster2 | Cluster3 | Cluster1 | Cluster2 | |
| MucCutAsym (n = 90) | 94.4 | 3.4 | 94.4 | 94.4 | 3.4 | 2.2 | 94.4 | 5.6 |
| MucL (n = 25) | — | 100 | — | — | 100 | — | — | 100 |
| GenW (n = 13) | — | 100 | — | — | 100 | — | — | 100 |
| CutW (n = 28) | 3.6 | — | 3.6 | 3.6 | — | 96.4 | 3.6 | 96.4 |
| L2, % |
L1, % |
|||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cluster1 | Cluster2 | Cluster3 | Cluster1 | Cluster2 | Cluster3 | |||
| MucCutAsym (n = 90) | 94.4 | 3.4 | 2.2 | 94.4 | 3.4 | 2.2 | ||
| MucL (n = 25) | — | 100 | — | — | 100 | — | ||
| GenW (n = 13) | — | 92.3 | 7.7 | — | 84.6 | 15.4 | ||
| CutW (n = 28) | 3.6 | — | 96.4 | 3.6 | — | 96.4 | ||
Table should be read as follows, taking E7 as an example: For E7, two-step cluster analysis identifies two different clusters: Cluster 1 spans 94.4% (n = 85) of MucCutAsym HPVs and 3.6% (n = 1) of HPVs causing CutW. Cluster 2 spans 100% (n = 25) of HPV causing mucosal lesions, 100% (n = 13) of HPVs causing GenW, 96.4% (n = 27) of HPVs causing CutW and 5.6% (n = 5) of HPVs causing MucCutAsym infections.
aCutA in E6, n = 87.