Comparative study between the Hybrid Capture II test and PCR based assay for the detection of human papillomavirus DNA in oral submucous fibrosis and oral squamous cell carcinoma

Abstract

BackgroundOral malignancy is a major global health problem. Besides the main risk factors of tobacco, smoking and alcohol, infection by human papillomavirus (HPV) and genetic alterations are likely to play an important role in these lesions. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of HC-II assay and PCR for the detection of specific HPV type (HPV 16 E6) in OSMF and OSCC cases as well as find out the prevalence of the high risk HPV (HR-HPV) in these lesions.Methods and materialsFour hundred and thirty patients of the potentially malignant and malignant oral lesions were taken from the Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Moti Lal Nehru Medical College, Allahabad, India from Sept 2007-March 2010. Of which 208 cases were oral submucous fibrosis (OSMF) and 222 cases were oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). The HC-II assay and PCR were used for the detection of HR-HPV DNA.ResultThe overall prevalence of HR-HPV 16 E6 DNA positivity was nearly 26% by PCR and 27.4% by the HC-II assay in case of potentially malignant disorder of the oral lesions such as OSMF. However, in case of malignant oral lesions such as OSCC, 32.4% HPV 16 E6 positive by PCR and 31.4% by the HC-II assay. In case of OSMF, the two test gave concordant result for 42 positive samples and 154 negative samples, with an overall level of agreement of 85.4% (Cohen's kappa = 66.83%, 95% CI 0.553-0.783). The sensitivity and specificity of the test were 73.7% and 92.05% (p < 0.00). In case of OSCC, the two test gave concordant result for 61 positive samples and 152 negative samples, with an overall level of agreement of 88.3% (Cohen's kappa = 79.29, 95% CI 0.769-0.939) and the sensitivity and specificity of the test were 87.14% and 92.76% (p < 0.00).ConclusionThis study concluded that slight difference was found between the positivity rate of HR-HPV infection detected by the HC-II and PCR assay in OSMF and OSCC cases and the HC II assay seemed to have better sensitivity in case of OSCC.

No role for human papillomavirus infection in oral cancers in a region in southern India

“…[14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] For the studies using a methodology similar to ours (oral brushing to collect epithelial cells instead of biopsy, combined with PCR for detection and genotyping), the prevalence reported for oral cancer cases was 31.5 26 and 32.4%. 15 Our results are in agreement with two studies conducted in Gujarat and Mumbai in West India, which reported a null prevalence of HPV in oral cancer using biopsies (in one of the studies, only HPV-16 and 18 were tested). 27,28 However, considering the fact that only two previous studies showed a null prevalence in oral cancer in India, we explored other explanations for these results.…”

High-Risk Human Papillomavirus in Oral Cancer: Clinical Implications

“…The different HPV types are characterized by variations in the DNA sequences of L1 and divided into high-and low-risk types [15]. High-risk types include HPV- 16,18,31,32,33,35,39,45,51,52,56,58,59,66, and 68, and low-risk types are HPV-6, 11, 42, 43, and 44. The high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) types 16 and 18 are the most common etiological agents in 70% of cervical cancers globally.…”

“…The primers for the PCR-based assays constitute either MY09/ MY11 or GP5+/GP6+ regions with specificity of 91.19-92.76% and sensitivity of 87.14-100% [26,35] HPV types and formalin-fixed tissues are not usable; the specificity and sensitivity are comparable to HPV DNA PCR tests [36]. p16 is a cellular correlate of increased E6 and E7 expression in HPV-positive cancers and immunohistochemical detection of p16 is an inexpensive and standard technique for clinical assessment of HPV status irrespective of the HPV type.…”

A cornucopia of screening and diagnostic techniques for human papillomavirus associated cervical carcinomas

“…A c c e p t e d M a n u s c r i p t in biological specimen and detected by measuring chemiluminiscence (figure 3) (Chaudhary et al, 2010;Knoepp et al, 2010). It has been proposed that it can become an effective HPV screening tool in low and middle resource countries if performed in adjunct to highly specific cytological tests.…”