4.7 Review

HIV and HPV infections and ocular surface squamous neoplasia: systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 109, Issue 7, Pages 1981-1988

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2013.539

Keywords

human papillomavirus; HIV; conjunctiva; squamous cell carcinoma; SCCC; OSSN

Categories

Funding

  1. Fogarty International Center [R24TW008908]
  2. NIH Office of Research on Women's Health
  3. Office of AIDS Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The frequency of ocular surface squamous neoplasias (OSSNs) has been increasing in populations with a high prevalence of infection with human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) and infection with human papillomavirus (HPV). We aimed to quantify the association between HIV/AIDS and HPV infection and OSSN, through systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: The articles providing data on the association between HIV/AIDS and/or HPV infection and OSSN were identified in MEDLINE, SCOPUS and EMBASE searched up to May 2013, and through backward citation tracking. The DerSimonian and Laird method was used to compute summary relative risk (RR) estimates and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Heterogeneity was quantified with the I-2 statistic. Results: HIV/AIDS was strongly associated with an increased risk of OSSN (summary RR = 8.06, 95% CI: 5.29-12.30, I-2 = 56.0%, 12 studies). The summary RR estimate for the infection with mucosal HPV subtypes was 3.13 (95% CI: 1.72-5.71, I-2 = 45.6%, 16 studies). Four studies addressed the association between both cutaneous and mucosal HPV subtypes and OSSN; the summary RR estimates were 3.52 (95% CI: 1.23-10.08, I-2 = 21.8%) and 1.08 (95% CI: 0.57-2.05, I-2 = 0.0%), respectively. Conclusion: Human immunodeficiency virus infection increases the risk of OSSN by nearly eight-fold. Regarding HPV infection, only the cutaneous subtypes seem to be a risk factor.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available