4.6 Article

Concurrent HPV-related oropharyngeal carcinoma in four couples

期刊

ORAL ONCOLOGY
卷 86, 期 -, 页码 33-37

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2018.09.003

关键词

Oropharynx; Squamous cell carcinoma; Human papillomavirus; HPV-16; Couples

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: Typically, HPV-related cancers are sexually transmitted, however, the natural history of HPV-related oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) is unclear. HPV16 transmission has been reported previously between five couples with OPSCC. We report the clinico-pathological features of a further four couples with HPV-related OPSCC and compare them with the published cases. Patients and methods: We identified four couples in long-term heterosexual relationships that all had HPV-related OPSCC. The couples were treated at three UK hospitals and presented between 2009 and 2015. HPV tests included p16 immunohistochemistry, high-risk HPV DNA in-situ hybridisation and Roche Cobas HPV test. DNA sequencing was used to determine the HPV variant. Results: The four couples represented < 2% of patients with HPV-related OPSCC at the three contributing hospitals (8 of 457 consecutive patients). The couples' tumours all contained HPV16. The mean age was 63 years old (range 52-72 years). The interval between the index cancer and the partner's cancer was 16, 24, 26 and 64 months respectively. The majority of patients had Stage I disease (UICC TNM8). Six of eight patients are disease free, one patient is alive with disease and there was one death from loco-regional recurrence. Conclusion: This report highlights the occurrence of HPV-related OPSCC in heterosexual couples and raises the possibility of transmission of HPV16. Despite increasing prevalence of HPV-related OPSCC and increased awareness of the disease, there is a paucity of couples with the disease, suggesting either under-reporting or that the development of OPSCC following HPV transmission between couples is a rare event.

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

4.6
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