4.6 Article

Human papillomavirus DNA and p16 expression in Japanese patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma

期刊

CANCER MEDICINE
卷 2, 期 6, 页码 933-941

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cam4.151

关键词

DNA methylation; human papillomavirus; oropharynx; p16; squamous cell carcinoma

类别

资金

  1. Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare of Japan [H23-009]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a major etiologic factor for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). However, little is known about HPV-related OPSCC in Japan. During the study, formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded OPSCC specimens from Japanese patients were analyzed for HPV DNA by the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and for the surrogate marker p16 by immunohistochemistry. For HPV DNA-positive, p16-negative specimens, the methylation status of the p16 gene promoter was examined by methylation-specific PCR. Overall survival was calculated in relation to HPV DNA and p16 status and was subjected to multivariate analysis. OPSCC cell lines were examined for sensitivity to radiation or cisplatin in vitro. The study results showed that tumor specimens from 40 (38%) of the 104 study patients contained HPV DNA, with such positivity being associated with tumors of the tonsils, lymph node metastasis, and nonsmoking. Overall survival was better for OPSCC patients with HPV DNA than for those without it (hazard ratio, 0.214; 95% confidence interval, 0.074-0.614; P = 0.002). Multivariate analysis revealed HPV DNA to be an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (P = 0.015). Expression of p16 was associated with HPV DNA positivity. However, 20% of HPV DNA-positive tumors were negative for p16, with most of these tumors manifesting DNA methylation at the p16 gene promoter. Radiation or cisplatin sensitivity did not differ between OPSCC cell lines positive or negative for HPV DNA. Thus, positivity for HPV DNA identifies a distinct clinical subset of OPSCC with a more favorable outcome in Japanese.

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