BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a risk factor for head and neck cancers (HNC), yet HPV-associated tumors have better prognosis than HPV-negative tumors. METHODS: We evaluated whether pretreatment presence of antibodies to HPV capsids [virus-like particles (VLP)] or to HPV-16 oncoproteins E6 and E7 was a predictor of HPV-positive HNC and clinical outcomes. Sera from 156 HNC patients were tested for antibodies to HPV-16-derived antigens using ELISA. HPV-16 in tumors was evaluated by PCR and DNA sequencing. RESULTS: HPV-16 antibodies were found in 33% with HPV-16 VLP, 21% with HPV-16 E6, and 21% with E7. HPV-16 was detected in 26% of tumors. There was a strong correlation between detection of HPV-16 tumor DNA and antibodies to HPV-16 E6 or E7 (kappa = 0.7) but not to HPV-16 VLP (kappa = 0.4). Multivariate analyses showed significantly better disease-specific survival in seropositive HPV-16 VLP [hazard ratio (HR), 0.4; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.1-0.9], HPV-16 E6 (HR, 0.1; 95% CI, 0.02-0.5), and HPV-16 E7 (HR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1-0.9) cases. Less disease recurrence occurred among those with antibodies to both E6 and E7 compared with those negative to both (P = 0.003). There was better disease-specific survival in patients who were E6 positive at baseline and remained positive at follow-up compared with individuals who were E6 negative at both time points (P = 0.03; kappa = 0.9). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of antibodies to HPV-16 E6 and E7 is associated with HPV in tumor cells and with better clinical outcomes. These findings suggest that the presence of E6/E7 antibodies before treatment is predictive of better clinical outcomes and that they may serve as biomarkers for selecting targeted therapeutic modalities developed for HPV-associated tumors.
BACKGROUND:Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a risk factor for head and neck cancers (HNC), yet HPV-associated tumors have better prognosis than HPV-negative tumors. METHODS: We evaluated whether pretreatment presence of antibodies to HPV capsids [virus-like particles (VLP)] or to HPV-16 oncoproteins E6 and E7 was a predictor of HPV-positive HNC and clinical outcomes. Sera from 156 HNC patients were tested for antibodies to HPV-16-derived antigens using ELISA. HPV-16 in tumors was evaluated by PCR and DNA sequencing. RESULTS:HPV-16 antibodies were found in 33% with HPV-16VLP, 21% with HPV-16 E6, and 21% with E7. HPV-16 was detected in 26% of tumors. There was a strong correlation between detection of HPV-16tumor DNA and antibodies to HPV-16 E6 or E7 (kappa = 0.7) but not to HPV-16VLP (kappa = 0.4). Multivariate analyses showed significantly better disease-specific survival in seropositive HPV-16VLP [hazard ratio (HR), 0.4; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.1-0.9], HPV-16 E6 (HR, 0.1; 95% CI, 0.02-0.5), and HPV-16 E7 (HR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1-0.9) cases. Less disease recurrence occurred among those with antibodies to both E6 and E7 compared with those negative to both (P = 0.003). There was better disease-specific survival in patients who were E6 positive at baseline and remained positive at follow-up compared with individuals who were E6 negative at both time points (P = 0.03; kappa = 0.9). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of antibodies to HPV-16 E6 and E7 is associated with HPV in tumor cells and with better clinical outcomes. These findings suggest that the presence of E6/E7 antibodies before treatment is predictive of better clinical outcomes and that they may serve as biomarkers for selecting targeted therapeutic modalities developed for HPV-associated tumors.
Authors: K Zumbach; M Hoffmann; T Kahn; F Bosch; S Gottschlich; T Görögh; H Rudert; M Pawlita Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2000-03-15 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: H L Greenstone; J D Nieland; K E de Visser; M L De Bruijn; R Kirnbauer; R B Roden; D R Lowy; W M Kast; J T Schiller Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 1998-02-17 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Elaine M Smith; Justine M Ritchie; Michael Pawlita; Linda M Rubenstein; Thomas H Haugen; Lubomir P Turek; Eva Hamsikova Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2007-02-15 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Elaine M Smith; Justine M Ritchie; Kurt F Summersgill; Jens P Klussmann; John H Lee; Donghong Wang; Thomas H Haugen; Lubomir P Turek Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2004-02-20 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Owen M Wilkins; Alexander J Titus; Lucas A Salas; Jiang Gui; Melissa Eliot; Rondi A Butler; Erich M Sturgis; Guojun Li; Karl T Kelsey; Brock C Christensen Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2018-06-07 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Caihua Liang; Carmen J Marsit; Michael D McClean; Heather H Nelson; Brock C Christensen; Robert I Haddad; John R Clark; Richard O Wein; Gregory A Grillone; E Andres Houseman; Gordana Halec; Tim Waterboer; Michael Pawlita; Jeffrey F Krane; Karl T Kelsey Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2012-09-18 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Karen S Anderson; Kristina R Dahlstrom; Julia N Cheng; Rizwan Alam; Guojun Li; Qingyi Wei; Neil D Gross; Diego Chowell; Marshall Posner; Erich M Sturgis Journal: Oral Oncol Date: 2015-05-06 Impact factor: 5.337
Authors: Christian R Salazar; Nicole Anayannis; Richard V Smith; Yanhua Wang; Missak Haigentz; Madhur Garg; Bradley A Schiff; Nicole Kawachi; Jordan Elman; Thomas J Belbin; Michael B Prystowsky; Robert D Burk; Nicolas F Schlecht Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-04-17 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: K S Anderson; J Wong; G D'Souza; A B Riemer; J Lorch; R Haddad; S I Pai; J Longtine; M McClean; J LaBaer; K T Kelsey; M Posner Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2011-06-07 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Adrian von Witzleben; Eve Currall; Oliver Wood; Lindsey Chudley; Oluyemisi Akinyegun; Jaya Thomas; Kaïdre Bendjama; Gareth J Thomas; Peter S Friedmann; Emma V King; Simon Laban; Christian H Ottensmeier Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-01-26 Impact factor: 6.244