4.6 Review

Human Papillomavirus in Breast Carcinogenesis: A Passenger, a Cofactor, or a Causal Agent?

期刊

BIOLOGY-BASEL
卷 10, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/biology10080804

关键词

breast; human papillomavirus; cancer

类别

资金

  1. ANID-FONDECYT [3190723, 3190744]
  2. FONDECYT [1200656]
  3. CONICYT-FONDAP [15130011]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed malignancy in women globally and HPV is considered a potential risk factor for its development. However, further epidemiological and experimental evidence is required to determine the role of HR-HPV infection in the progression of BC.
Simple Summary Breast cancer (BC) is the most frequent tumor in women worldwide. A minority of BC patients have a family history of the disease, suggesting the importance of environmental and lifestyle factors. Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection has been detected in a subset of tumors, suggesting a potential role in BC. In this review, we summarized relevant information in respect to this topic and we propose a model of HPV-mediated breast carcinogenesis. Evidence suggests that breast tissue is accessible to HPV, which may be a causal agent of BC in a subset of cases. Breast cancer (BC) is the most commonly diagnosed malignancy in women worldwide as well as the leading cause of cancer-related death in this gender. Studies have identified that human papillomavirus (HPV) is a potential risk factor for BC development. While vaccines that protect against oncogenic HPVs infection have been commercially available, global disparities persist due to their high cost. Interestingly, numerous authors have detected an increased high risk (HR)-HPV infection in BC specimens when compared with non-tumor tissues. Therefore, it was suggested that HR-HPV infection could play a role in breast carcinogenesis in a subset of cases. Additional epidemiological and experimental evidence is still needed regarding the role of HR-HPV infection in the development and progression of BC.

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