Jennifer Wang1, Bishr Aldabagh2, Justin Yu3, Sarah Tuttleton Arron4. 1. Department of Dermatology, New York Medical College, Valhalla, New York. 2. Department of Dermatology, University of California, San Francisco, California. 3. Department of Dermatology, St Louis University, St Louis, Missouri. 4. Department of Dermatology, University of California, San Francisco, California. Electronic address: ArronS@derm.ucsf.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The role of human papillomavirus (HPV) in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cuSCC) is not well defined, with past studies showing conflicting results. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine if there is a significant association between HPV and cuSCC and whether cuSCC from immunosuppressed patients are more likely to carry HPV than cuSCC from immunocompetent patients. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and abstracted data from articles that included: skin samples by biopsy, HPV detection by polymerase chain reaction, and a minimum of 10 cases and 10 controls. Pooled effect size and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using random effects meta-analysis using the inverse variance method. RESULTS: cuSCC were more likely to carry HPV than normal-appearing skin (pooled effect size [ES] 3.43, 95% confidence interval 1.97-5.98, P < .0001) in all patients. An increase in HPV prevalence was found in tumors from immunosuppressed patients compared with immunocompetent patients (pooled ES 3.01, 95% confidence interval 2.00-4.52, P < .0001). LIMITATIONS: The greatest limitation is the heterogeneity of the studies included. The association of higher HPV prevalence in squamous cell carcinoma compared with normal-appearing skin does not imply causality. CONCLUSION: These results contribute to evidence that HPV is associated with cuSCC. Higher HPV burden in tumors from immunosuppressed patients compared with immunocompetent patients may have therapeutic implications.
BACKGROUND: The role of human papillomavirus (HPV) in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cuSCC) is not well defined, with past studies showing conflicting results. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine if there is a significant association between HPV and cuSCC and whether cuSCC from immunosuppressed patients are more likely to carry HPV than cuSCC from immunocompetent patients. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and abstracted data from articles that included: skin samples by biopsy, HPV detection by polymerase chain reaction, and a minimum of 10 cases and 10 controls. Pooled effect size and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using random effects meta-analysis using the inverse variance method. RESULTS: cuSCC were more likely to carry HPV than normal-appearing skin (pooled effect size [ES] 3.43, 95% confidence interval 1.97-5.98, P < .0001) in all patients. An increase in HPV prevalence was found in tumors from immunosuppressed patients compared with immunocompetent patients (pooled ES 3.01, 95% confidence interval 2.00-4.52, P < .0001). LIMITATIONS: The greatest limitation is the heterogeneity of the studies included. The association of higher HPV prevalence in squamous cell carcinoma compared with normal-appearing skin does not imply causality. CONCLUSION: These results contribute to evidence that HPV is associated with cuSCC. Higher HPV burden in tumors from immunosuppressed patients compared with immunocompetent patients may have therapeutic implications.
Authors: Mariet C W Feltkamp; Maurits N C de Koning; Jan Nico Bouwes Bavinck; Jan Ter Schegget Journal: J Clin Virol Date: 2008-11-04 Impact factor: 3.168
Authors: Claire M Vajdic; Stephen P McDonald; Margaret R E McCredie; Marina T van Leeuwen; John H Stewart; Matthew Law; Jeremy R Chapman; Angela C Webster; John M Kaldor; Andrew E Grulich Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-12-20 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Sophie Queille; Lionel Luron; Alain Spatz; Marie Françoise Avril; Vincent Ribrag; Pierre Duvillard; Christian Hiesse; Alain Sarasin; Jean Pierre Armand; Leela Daya-Grosjean Journal: Carcinogenesis Date: 2006-10-25 Impact factor: 4.944
Authors: S Zheng; A Adachi; M Shimizu; S-I Shibata; S Yasue; A Sakakibara; M Sugiura; T Nagasaka; Y Tomita Journal: Br J Dermatol Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 9.302
Authors: Maryam M Asgari; Nancy B Kiviat; Cathy W Critchlow; Joshua E Stern; Zsolt B Argenyi; Gregory J Raugi; Daniel Berg; Peter B Odland; Stephen E Hawes; Ethel-Michele de Villiers Journal: J Invest Dermatol Date: 2008-01-10 Impact factor: 8.551
Authors: Karin J Purdie; Thirunavukarasu Surentheran; Jane C Sterling; Louise Bell; Jane M McGregor; Charlotte M Proby; Catherine A Harwood; Judith Breuer Journal: J Invest Dermatol Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 8.551
Authors: Anna J Nichols; Amber Heyna Allen; Shahjahan Shareef; Evangelos V Badiavas; Robert S Kirsner; Tim Ioannides Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 10.282
Authors: Camila Fátima Biancardi Gavioli; Cyro Festa Neto; Stephen K Tyring; Lana Luiza da Cruz Silva; Walmar Roncalli Pereira de Oliveira Journal: An Bras Dermatol Date: 2018 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 1.896
Authors: Flora Yan; Brittny N Tillman; Rajiv I Nijhawan; Divya Srivastava; David J Sher; Vladimir Avkshtol; Jade Homsi; Justin A Bishop; Erin M Wynings; Rebecca Lee; Larry L Myers; Andrew T Day Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-06-30 Impact factor: 5.344