4.7 Article

CLINICAL EFFECT OF HUMAN PAPILLOMAVIRUS GENOTYPES IN PATIENTS WITH CERVICAL CANCER UNDERGOING PRIMARY RADIOTHERAPY

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.09.021

关键词

Human papillomavirus; Cervical cancer; Radiotherapy; Prognosis

资金

  1. National Science Council-Taiwan [NSC94-2314-B-182-011]
  2. Chang Gung Memorial Hospital [CMRPG340693]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To study the prognostic value of the human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes in cervical cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy. Patients and Methods: A total of 1,010 patients with cervical cancer after radiotherapy between 1993 and 2000 were eligible for this study. The HPV genotypes were determined by a genechip, which detects 38 types of HPV. The patient characteristics and treatment outcomes were analyzed using the Cox regression hazard model and classification and regression tree decision tree method. Results: A total of 25 genotypes of HPV were detected in 992 specimens (98.2%). The leading 8 types were HPV16, 58, 18, 33, 52, 39, 31, and 45. These types belong to two high-risk HPV species: alpha-7 (HPV18, 39,45) and alpha-9 (HPV16, 31, 33, 52, 58). Three HPV-based risk groups, which were independent of established prognostic factors, such as International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, age, pathologic features, squamous cell carcinoma antigen, and lymph node metastasis, were associated with the survival outcomes. The high-risk group consisted of the patients without HPV infection or the ones infected with the alpha-7 species only. Patients co-infected with the alpha-7 and alpha-9 species belonged to the medium-risk group, and the others were included in the low-risk group. Conclusion: The results of the present study have confirmed the prognostic value of HPV genotypes in cervical cancer treated with radiotherapy. The different effect of the alpha-7 and alpha-9 species on the radiation response deserves additional exploration. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据