Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22376902›Full record

ArticleInfectious agents and cancer2012

Evaluation of a combined triple method to detect causative HPV in oral and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas: p16 Immunohistochemistry, Consensus PCR HPV-DNA, and In Situ Hybridization.

Giuseppe Pannone, Vito Rodolico, Angela Santoro, Lorenzo Lo Muzio, Renato Franco, Gerardo Botti, Gabriella Aquino, Maria Carmela Pedicillo, Simona Cagiano, Giuseppina Campisi and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Infectious agents and cancer, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
13.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 125 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Molecular Insights into Oral Malignancy.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2022
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Giuseppe PannoneDepartment of Surgical Sciences - Section of Anatomic Pathology and Cytopathology, University of Foggia, Viale Luigi Pinto 1, 71122 Foggia, Italy. angelasantoro1@hotmail.it.
Vito Rodolico
Angela Santoro
Lorenzo Lo Muzio
Renato Franco
Gerardo Botti
Gabriella Aquino
Maria Carmela Pedicillo
Simona Cagiano
Giuseppina Campisi
Corrado Rubini
Silvana Papagerakis
Gaetano De Rosa
Maria Lina Tornesello
Franco M Buonaguro
Stefania Staibano
Pantaleo Bufo
University of Foggia · ITIstituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS "Fondazione G. Pascale" · ITUniversity of Naples Federico II · ITUniversity of Palermo · ITMarche Polytechnic University · ITUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent emerging evidences identify Human Papillomavirus (HPV) related Head and Neck squamous cell carcinomas (HN-SCCs) as a separate subgroup among Head and Neck Cancers with different epidemiology, histopathological characteristics, therapeutic response to chemo-radiation treatment and clinical outcome. However, there is not a worldwide consensus on the methods to be used in clinical practice. The endpoint of this study was to demonstrate the reliability of a triple method which combines evaluation of: 1. p16 protein expression by immunohistochemistry (p16-IHC); 2. HPV-DNA genotyping by consensus HPV-DNA PCR methods (Consensus PCR); and 3 viral integration into the host by in situ hybridization method (ISH). This triple method has been applied to HN-SCC originated from oral cavity (OSCC) and oropharynx (OPSCC), the two anatomical sites in which high risk (HR) HPVs have been clearly implicated as etiologic factors. Methylation-Specific PCR (MSP) was performed to study inactivation of p16-CDKN2a locus by epigenetic events. Reliability of multiple methods was measured by Kappa statistics.

resultsAll the HN-SCCs confirmed HPV positive by PCR and/or ISH were also p16 positive by IHC, with the latter showing a very high level of sensitivity as single test (100% in both OSCC and OPSCC) but lower specificity level (74% in OSCC and 93% in OPSCC).Concordance analysis between ISH and Consensus PCR showed a faint agreement in OPSCC (κ = 0.38) and a moderate agreement in OSCC (κ = 0.44). Furthermore, the addition of double positive score (ISHpositive and Consensus PCR positive) increased significantly the specificity of HR-HPV detection on formalin-fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) samples (100% in OSCC and 78.5% in OPSCC), but reduced the sensitivity (33% in OSCC and 60% in OPSCC). The significant reduction of sensitivity by the double method was compensated by a very high sensitivity of p16-IHC detection in the triple approach.

conclusionsAlthough HR-HPVs detection is of utmost importance in clinical settings for the Head and Neck Cancer patients, there is no consensus on which to consider the 'golden standard' among the numerous detection methods available either as single test or combinations. Until recently, quantitative E6 RNA PCR has been considered the 'golden standard' since it was demonstrated to have very high accuracy level and very high statistical significance associated with prognostic parameters. In contrast, quantitative E6 DNA PCR has proven to have very high level of accuracy but lesser prognostic association with clinical outcome than the HPV E6 oncoprotein RNA PCR. However, although it is theoretically possible to perform quantitative PCR detection methods also on FFPE samples, they reach the maximum of accuracy on fresh frozen tissue. Furthermore, worldwide diagnostic laboratories have not all the same ability to analyze simultaneously both FFPE and fresh tissues with these quantitative molecular detection methods. Therefore, in the current clinical practice a p16-IHC test is considered as sufficient for HPV diagnostic in accordance with the recently published Head and Neck Cancer international guidelines. Although p16-IHC may serve as a good prognostic indicator, our study clearly demonstrated that it is not satisfactory when used exclusively as the only HPV detecting method. Adding ISH, although known as less sensitive than PCR-based detection methods, has the advantage to preserve the morphological context of HPV-DNA signals in FFPE samples and, thus increase the overall specificity of p16/Consensus PCR combination tests.

Identifiers

PMID22376902
PMCPMC3313884
OpenAlexW2102086481

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.