3.8 Article

Deep sequencing of HPV16 genomes: A new high-throughput tool for exploring the carcinogenicity and natural history of HPV16 infection

Journal

PAPILLOMAVIRUS RESEARCH
Volume 1, Issue -, Pages 3-11

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.pvr.2015.05.004

Keywords

HPV16; HPV epidemiology; HPV genomics

Categories

Funding

  1. Intramural Research Program of the Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics
  2. National Cancer Institute
  3. National Institutes of Health

Ask authors/readers for more resources

For unknown reasons, there is huge variability in risk conferred by different HPV types and, remarkably, strong differences even between closely related variant lineages within each type. HPV16 is a uniquely powerful carcinogenic type, causing approximately half of cervical cancer and most other HPV-related cancers. To permit the large-scale study of HPV genome variability and precancer/cancer, starting with HPV16 and cervical cancer, we developed a high-throughput next-generation sequencing (NGS) wholegenome method. We designed a custom HPV16 AmpliSegTM panel that generated 47 overlapping amplicons covering 99% of the genome sequenced on the Ion Torrent Proton platform. After validating with Sanger, the current gold standard of sequencing, in 89 specimens with concordance of 99.9%, we used our NGS method and custom annotation pipeline to sequence 796 HPV16-positive exfoliated cervical cell specimens. The median completion rate per sample was 98.0%. Our method enabled us to discover novel SNPs, large contiguous deletions suggestive of viral integration (OR of 27.3, 95% CI 3.3-222, P=0.002), and the sensitive detection of variant lineage coinfections. This method represents an innovative high -throughput, ultra-deep coverage technique for HPV genomic sequencing, which, in turn, enables the investigation of the role of genetic variation in HPV epidemiology and carcinogenesis. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available