Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28621317›Full record

ArticleModern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc2017

p16 immunohistochemistry in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: a comparison of antibody clones using patient outcomes and high-risk human papillomavirus RNA status.

Jeremy Shelton, Bibianna M Purgina, Nicole A Cipriani, William D Dupont, Dale Plummer, James S Lewis

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The Pathology according to p53 Pathway.Pathobiology : journal of immunopathology, molecular and cellular biology · 2024
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Jeremy SheltonDepartment of Pathology, Microbiology and Immunology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Bibianna M PurginaDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Nicole A CiprianiDepartment of Pathology, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
William D DupontDepartment of Biostatistics and Preventive Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA.
Dale PlummerDepartment of Biostatistics and Preventive Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA.
James S LewisDepartment of Pathology, Microbiology and Immunology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Vanderbilt University · USVanderbilt University Medical Center · USUniversity of Chicago · USUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High-risk human papillomavirus (HPV)-related oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas have a more favorable prognosis than HPV-negative ones. p16 immunohistochemistry has been recommended as a prognostic test in clinical practice. Several p16 antibodies are available, and their performance has not been directly compared. We evaluated three commercially available p16 antibody clones (E6H4, JC8 and G175-405) utilizing 199 cases of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma from a tissue microarray, read by three pathologists with three different cutoffs for positivity: any staining, >50% and >75%. Positive predictive values for high-risk HPV status by RNA in situ hybridization for the E6H4, JC8 and G175-405 clones were 98%, 100% and 99% at the 75% cutoff, but negative predictive values were much more variable at 86%, 69% and 56%, respectively. These improved using the 50% cutoff, becoming similar for all three antibodies. Intensity varied substantially, with 85% of E6H4, 72% of JC8 and 67% of G175-405 showing strong (3+) intensity. With Kaplan-Meier survival plots at the 75% cutoff, the E6H4 clone showed the largest differential in disease specific and overall survival between p16-positive and -negative results. Decreasing the cutoff to 50% increased correlation with HPV in situ hybridization and improved the survival differential for the JC8 and G175-405 clones without worsening of performance for the E6H4 clone. Interobserver agreement was also assessed by kappa scores and was highest for the E6H4 clone. Overall, these study results show modest but important performance differences between the three different p16 antibody clones, suggesting that the E6H4 clone performs best because of strongest staining intensity, greatest differential in outcomes between positive and negative results, lowest interobserver variability, and lowest background, nonspecific staining. The results also suggest that a 75% cutoff is very functional but that, in this patient population with high HPV incidence, 50% and any staining cutoffs may be more effective, particularly for the non-E6H4 clones.

Indexed as

ImmunohistochemistryAntibodiesBiomarkers, TumorBiopsyCarcinoma, Squamous CellCyclin-Dependent Kinase Inhibitor p16Head and Neck NeoplasmsHost-Pathogen InteractionsHumansIn Situ HybridizationKaplan-Meier EstimateObserver VariationOropharyngeal NeoplasmsPapillomaviridaePapillomavirus InfectionsPredictive Value of TestsAntibodiesBiomarkers, TumorCDKN2A protein, humanCyclin-Dependent Kinase Inhibitor p16RNA, Viral

Identifiers

PMID28621317
OpenAlexW2625513516

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.