Oral oncology · 2016
Prognostic significance of non-HPV16 genotypes in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mazul Angela L, Rodriguez-Ormaza Nidia, Taylor James M, Desai Dipan D, Brennan Paul, Anantharaman Devasena, Gheit Tarik, Tommasino Massimo, Abedi-Ardekani Behnoush, Olshan Andrew F, Zevallos Jose P
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Recent studies have found that cases with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) positive for HPV16 genotype have better overall survival compared with cases positive for other HPV genotypes. We sought to further replicate these studies and determine if this relationship is modified by expression of p16 tumor suppressor protein.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We identified 238 OPSCC cases from the Carolina Head and Neck Cancer Study (CHANCE) study, a population based case-control study. Tumors that tested positive solely for HPV16 genotype and no other genotypes with PCR were classified as HPV16-positive. Tumors positive for any other high-risk HPV genotype were classified as non-HPV16-positive. Expression of p16 in the tumor was determined with immunohistochemistry. Follow-up time was calculated from the date of diagnosis to date of death or December 31, 2013. Overall survival was compared with the Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank test. Hazard ratios (HR) adjusted for smoking, alcohol use, sex, race, and age was calculated with the Cox proportional hazard regression.
RESULTS: Cases with HPV16-positive OPSCC had better overall survival than cases with non-HPV16-positive OPSCC (log-rank p-value: 0.010). When restricted to OPSCC cases positive for p16 expression, the same trend continued (log-rank p-value: 0.002). In the adjusted model, cases with non-HPV16-positive OPSCC had greater risk of death compared to cases with HPV16-positive tumors (HR: 1.92; 95% CI: 1.03, 3.60).
CONCLUSIONS: This finding indicates that HPV genotyping carries valuable prognostic significance in addition to p16 status and future survival studies of OPSCC should take into account differing HPV genotypes.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We identified 238 OPSCC cases from the Carolina Head and Neck Cancer Study (CHANCE) study, a population based case-control study. Tumors that tested positive solely for HPV16 genotype and no other genotypes with PCR were classified as HPV16-positive. Tumors positive for any other high-risk HPV genotype were classified as non-HPV16-positive. Expression of p16 in the tumor was determined with immunohistochemistry. Follow-up time was calculated from the date of diagnosis to date of death or December 31, 2013. Overall survival was compared with the Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank test. Hazard ratios (HR) adjusted for smoking, alcohol use, sex, race, and age was calculated with the Cox proportional hazard regression.
RESULTS: Cases with HPV16-positive OPSCC had better overall survival than cases with non-HPV16-positive OPSCC (log-rank p-value: 0.010). When restricted to OPSCC cases positive for p16 expression, the same trend continued (log-rank p-value: 0.002). In the adjusted model, cases with non-HPV16-positive OPSCC had greater risk of death compared to cases with HPV16-positive tumors (HR: 1.92; 95% CI: 1.03, 3.60).
CONCLUSIONS: This finding indicates that HPV genotyping carries valuable prognostic significance in addition to p16 status and future survival studies of OPSCC should take into account differing HPV genotypes.