Use of multiple PCR primer sets for optimal detection of human papillomavirus

Karlsen, Frank; Kalantari, Mina; Jenkins, A. D.; Pettersen, Erik O.; Kristensen, Gunnar B.; Holm, Ruth; Johansson, Bo; Hagmar, Björn

doi:10.1128/jcm.34.9.2095-2100.1996

Cited by 222 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, an additional HPV type was detected in only 1/11 HPV 73-positive HSILs (HPV 73 and 54), but in none of the HPV 73-positive cancers. Furthermore, HPV 16 and 18 DNA could not be amplified in these specimens using type-specific primers, derived from the E6 and E7 genes (25) .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Distribution of HPV 53, HPV 73 and CP8304 in genital epithelial lesions with different grades of dysplasia

Meyer¹,

Arndt²,

Beckmann³

et al. 2001

Int J Gynecol Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To characterize the risk of malignant progression of cervical epithelial lesions associated with human papillomavirus (HPV) types of yet unknown oncogenic potential the prevalences of these HPVs in different cervical epithelial lesions of 809 patients were determined. HPV types 53, 73, and CP8304 were detected in genital specimens of 16, 22, and 12 of the patients, respectively. The ratio of prevalence in high grade dysplastic lesions or cancers and low grade dysplastic lesions or normal specimens was calculated and compared to corresponding values of well known high-risk (HR) and low-risk (LR) HPVs. For HPV 6, 11, 16, 18, 35, and 73 a ratio of 0.1, 0.2, 5.9, 6.5, 2.5, and 2.4, respectively, was calculated. The ratios of HPV53 and CP8304 were less than 1. Moreover, in contrast to HPV73, these viruses have never been detected in cancer specimens. Thus, HPV53 and CP8304 infections are probably not associated with a high risk of carcinogenesis, while HPV73 could be another HR-HPV type.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Distribution of HPV 53, HPV 73 and CP8304 in genital epithelial lesions with different grades of dysplasia

Meyer¹,

Arndt²,

Beckmann³

et al. 2001

Int J Gynecol Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Samples considered HPV-positive were run in an HPV typespecific PCR with primers specific for HPV-16 and (if not HPV-16-positive) for HPV-18 and HPV-33, 29 as previously described. 10 Positive controls consisted of an excess of plasmids with cloned HPV-16, -18 or -33.…”

Section: Hpv Type-specific Pcrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative genomic hybridization analysis of tonsillar cancer reveals a different pattern of genomic imbalances in human papillomavirus‐positive and ‐negative tumors

Dahlgren

Mellin

Wangsa

et al. 2003

Intl Journal of Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our aim was to map and compare genomic imbalances in human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive and -negative squamous cell carcinomas of the tonsil. Twenty-five primary carcinomas were analyzed by comparative genomic hybridization. Fifteen (60%) were found to be HPV-positive by PCR, and the majority were HPV-16. There were statistically significant differences in the distribution of DNA gains and losses between the HPV-positive and -negative samples. Eleven of 15 HPV-positive samples (73%) showed gain on chromosome 3q24-qter, while only 4/10 (40%) HPV-negative samples had the same gain (p ‫؍‬ 0.049). Furthermore, 4/10 (40%) HPV-negative samples but no HPV-positive samples had gain on chromosome 7q11.2-q22 (p ‫؍‬ 0.017). As expected, and similar to previous studies, patients with an HPV-positive tumor had a statistically significantly better disease-specific survival than patients with an HPV-negative tumor (p ‫؍‬ 0.002). Head-and-neck cancer constitutes 3.4% of all cancer cases each year in Europe 1 and is the fifth most common cancer type in the United States. 2 In approximately 50 -60% of patients, the tumor has spread to regional lymph nodes by the time of diagnosis, and it is known that formation of metastases reduces the chance of survival by about 50%. 2 Treatment of head-and-neck cancer has not improved greatly over the last years, and the 5-year survival rate remains low. 3 The main reasons for the low survival rate are advanced tumor stage at detection, high prevalence of recurrence and multiple primary tumors. 3 The major risk factors of head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) in the Western world are smoking and alcohol consumption. However, during the past 2 decades the role of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) has been studied, and data supporting HPV as a causative agent in the development and progression of a subset of these cancers have accumulated. 4 -6 The overall frequency of HPV in HNSCC is around 25-30%, with considerable variability depending on the tumor location. 7 The highest frequency is reported from studies on tonsillar cancer, 7-9 where 35-70% of tumors are HPV-positive, most commonly with HPV-16 and/or HPV-33. Furthermore, we and others have shown that patients with HPV-positive tonsillar cancer have a statistically significant reduction in risk of death from cancer compared to patients with HPV-negative tumors and that this is independent of tumor stage. 4,8 In addition, in a relatively limited study, patients with high viral load tumors had a significantly better prognosis compared to patients with low viral load tumors. 10 The fact that HPV is a favorable predictive/prognostic factor in tonsillar cancer prompted us to analyze whether differences in the pattern of chromosomal gains and losses were correlated with the presence of HPV. We hypothesized that such differences could explain the variable clinical course of HPV-positive cancer.In high-risk HPV-positive cancer of the tonsil, the early proteins E6 and E7 are generally expressed, 11 and it is known that the presence of t...

show abstract

“…Moreover, systems based on L1 consensus primers PCR may give a negative HPV test result on detection of cervical cancer in which the L1 region of the genome has been disrupted. 16,17 One interesting point is that, the positive rate of HPV18 tested by OncoE6 was higher than that of cobas among SCC patients. However, the HPV18 prevalence in SCC varied from 2.0% to 13.2% 5,6,18,19 reported by previous studies conducted in China or worldwide, which was consistent with our study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Clinical evaluation of human papillomavirus 16/18 oncoprotein test for cervical cancer screening and HPV positive women triage

Jiang

et al. 2018

Intl Journal of Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

HPV-16 and -18 account for about 80% of cervical cancers. We evaluated the performance of HPV-16/18 oncoprotein to predict precancer and cancer in corresponding tissue biopsy specimens. 1,008 women attending cervical cancer screening program and 638 women referred to colposcopy with biopsy-confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) from 4 hospitals were recruited (1,646 in total). All women were tested OncoE6 (AVC), Liquid-Based Cytology (Hologic) and cobas HPV test (Roche). Colposcopy was performed on women with any abnormal results. The final diagnoses were based on a consensus panel review of the histology. There were 919 normal, 69 CIN1, 53 CIN2, 91 CIN3,474 squamous cell carcinoma(SCC) and 40 adenocarcinoma (ADC) cases, the prevalence of OncoE6 was 1.7%, 10.1%, 13.2%, 44.0%, 80.4% and 65.0%, respectively. The percent positive for cobas was higher than that of OncoE6 in detection of HPV16/18 in entire population (p < 0.001). However, the disparity of positive rate between these two tests became tiny among cervical cancer patients (CIN2: 26.4% vs. 13.2%, CIN3: 73.6% vs. 44.0%, SCC: 84.0% vs. 80.4%, ADC: 67.5% vs. 65.0%). OncoE6 was less sensitive than cobas (73.9% vs. 93.6%, p < 0.001), but more specific (97.1% vs. 75.4%, p < 0.001) for CIN3+ in entire population; OncoE6 yielded a sensitivity of 77.7% and a specificity of 91.0% for CIN3+ among cobas positive women, which can reduce nearly half of the colposcopy referral numbers. OncoE6 can be considered as a useful tool for cervical cancer screening and a potential powerful biomarker for HPV positive triage.

show abstract

Use of multiple PCR primer sets for optimal detection of human papillomavirus

Cited by 222 publications

References 36 publications

Distribution of HPV 53, HPV 73 and CP8304 in genital epithelial lesions with different grades of dysplasia

Distribution of HPV 53, HPV 73 and CP8304 in genital epithelial lesions with different grades of dysplasia

Comparative genomic hybridization analysis of tonsillar cancer reveals a different pattern of genomic imbalances in human papillomavirus‐positive and ‐negative tumors

Clinical evaluation of human papillomavirus 16/18 oncoprotein test for cervical cancer screening and HPV positive women triage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About