4.5 Article

Geographic variation in human papillomavirus-related oropharyngeal cancer: Data from 4 multinational randomized trials

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/hed.24336

关键词

oropharynx; head and neck cancer; squamous cell carcinoma; human papillomavirus; prevalence

资金

  1. National Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment (NCC-HTA) [ISRCTN: 13735240]
  2. University of Warwick
  3. Glaxo Smith Kline PLC (GSK) [EGF105884, NCT00387127, EGF104334, NCT00371566, EGF102988, NCT00424255]
  4. Cancer Research UK [13407] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. National Institute for Health Research [NF-SI-0515-10101] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. There are variations in the proportions of head and neck cancers caused by the human papillomavirus (HPV) between countries and regions. It is unclear if these are true variations or due to different study designs and assays. Methods. We tested formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded diagnostic biopsies for p16 immunohistochemistry and HPV-DNA (by polymerase chain reaction [PCR] and in situ hybridization [ISH]) using validated protocols on samples from 801 patients with head and neck cancer recruited prospectively between 2006 and 2011 in 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Results. Twenty-one percent of patients (170 of 801) showed both HPV-DNA and p16-positivity, detected almost exclusively in oropharyngeal cancer (55%; 15 of 302); and only 1% of the patients (5 of 499) with nonoropharyngeal cancer were HPV positive. HPV-positive oropharyngeal cancer differed between Western and Eastern Europe (37%, 155 of 422 vs 6%, 8 of 144; p < .0001) and between Western Europe and Asia (37% vs 2%; 4 of 217; p < .0001). Other independent determinants of HPV positivity were tumor site and smoking. Conclusion. This is the first study to establish geographic variability as an independent risk factor in HPV-positive oropharyngeal cancer prevalence, with higher prevalence in Western Europe. (C) 2016 The Authors Head & Neck Published by Wiley Periodicals, 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

4.5
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