2000
DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1096-9071(200003)60:3<337::aid-jmv13>3.0.co;2-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

HPV16 E6 oncogene variants in women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

Abstract: Human papillomaviruses (HPVs) are strongly associated with the development of high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and cervical carcinoma, with between 40-80% of patients with cervical carcinoma being attributed to a single HPV type, HPV16 depending on the methods used and geographical location of the particular study [van den Brule et al., 1996]. An HPV16 E6 variant has been described which is strongly associated with high grade CIN [Ellis et al., 1997] and with the human leukocyte antigen (HLA… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
5
0

Year Published

2000
2000
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
1
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our results are consistent with many other recent findings that HPV16 E6 'variants' and 'prototype' have an equally malignant potential (Bontkes et al, 1998;Luxton et al, 2000). To finally elucidate the E6 variants-associated disease outcomes, longitudinal cohort studies should be conducted.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Our results are consistent with many other recent findings that HPV16 E6 'variants' and 'prototype' have an equally malignant potential (Bontkes et al, 1998;Luxton et al, 2000). To finally elucidate the E6 variants-associated disease outcomes, longitudinal cohort studies should be conducted.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…We investigated whether our E5 RFLP variants co-segregated with the E6 variant described by Ellis et al (1995) . However, only one of 66 subjects analysed had this E6 variant (data not shown) and we therefore conclude that this HPV-16 variant is rare in our locality (Luxton et al , 2000 ). Whilst the reason for the lack of co-segregation of our E5 variants with this E6 variant is not known, it may reflect demographic and lifestyle differences between the populations studied.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 66%
“…A classification of the variants on the basis of the presence of a single nucleotide alteration usually yielded inconsistent findings (12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23). Although data from studies comparing European (prototype-like) with non-European (non -prototype-like) variants have been relatively consistent, with non-European variants being associated with an increased risk of cervical lesions (24)(25)(26)(27)(28), a lack of association has also been reported (29)(30)(31).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%