ArticleJournal of applied oral science : revista FOB
Higher prevalence and gene amplification of HPV16 in oropharynx as compared to oral cavity.
Article in Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Association of oral Epstein-Barr virus with periodontal health in Japanese adults.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2021Article
- Association of oral HPV16 infection with periodontal inflammation and the oral microbiome in older women.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2021Article
- Oral human cytomegalovirus prevalence and its relationships with periodontitis and Porphyromonas gingivalis in Japanese adults: a cross-sectional study.Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB · 2020Article
- High HPV16 E6 viral load in the oral cavity is associated with an increased number of bacteria: A preliminary study.Biomedical reports · 2018Article
- Endogenous Retrovirus 3 - History, Physiology, and Pathology.Frontiers in microbiology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to clarify differences regarding HPV16 infection and gene amplification between the oral cavity and oropharynx in healthy individuals. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe subjects were 94 healthy asymptomatic individuals (41 males, 53 females; mean age 58.6 years, range 16-97 years) who visited the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Reconstructive Surgery of the Hiroshima University Hospital from 2014 to 2015. Oral epithelial cells were collected from oral rinse and pharynx gargle samples and placed in saline. The human endogenous retrovirus gene ERV3-1 was used as a reference to estimate the number of human cells in each sample. DNA samples were extracted from approximately 10,000 human cells and tested for HPV16 DNA by PCR using a type-specific primer. Similarly, we analyzed the HPV16 viral copy number in HPV16-positive cases using real-time PCR to examine genomic amplification.
resultsThe percentage of HPV16-positive cases was higher in the gargle (28.7%) as compared to the rinse (16.0%) samples. In the oral rinse samples, males (26.8%) showed a significantly higher rate of HPV16 than females (7.5%) (P=0.021). Importantly, in older subjects (aged 60-89 years), gargle samples showed a significantly higher rate of HPV16 (33.3%) than oral rinse samples (13.7%) (P=0.034). The average number of viral copies was approximately 8 times higher in the gargle than in the oral rinse samples (0.16±0.27 vs. 1.35±1.26 copy numbers per cell), a significant difference (P<0.001).
conclusionOur findings suggest that the oropharynx is more susceptible to HPV16 infection as compared to the oral cavity, while HPV16 gene amplification is also more commonly found in the oropharynx.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.