Brooke J Gipson1, Hilary A Robbins2, Carole Fakhry3, Gypsyamber D'Souza4. 1. Department of Global and Community Health, George Mason University College of Health and Human Services, United States; Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, United States. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, United States. 3. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins University, United States. 4. Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, United States. Electronic address: gdsouza2@jhu.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The incidence of HPV-related head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HPV-HNSCC) is increasing. Oral samples are easy and non-invasive to collect, but the diagnostic accuracy of oral HPV detection methods for classifying HPV-positive HNSCC tumors has not been well explored. METHODS: In a systematic review, we identified eight studies of HNSCC patients meeting our eligibility criteria of having: (1) HPV detection in oral rinse or oral swab samples, (2) tumor HPV or p16 testing, (3) a publication date within the last 10 years (January 2007-May 2017, as laboratory methods change), and (4) at least 15 HNSCC cases. Data were abstracted from each study and a meta-analysis performed to calculate sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: Eight articles meeting inclusion criteria were identified. Among people diagnosed with HNSCC, oral HPV detection has good specificity (92%, 95% CI = 82-97%) and moderate sensitivity (72%, 95% CI = 45-89%) for HPV-positive HNSCC tumor. Results were similar when restricted to studies with only oropharyngeal cancer cases, with oral rinse samples, or testing for HPV16 DNA (instead of any oncogenic HPV) in the oral samples. DISCUSSION: Among those who already have HNSCC, oral HPV detection has few false-positives but may miss one-half to one-quarter of HPV-related cases (false-negatives). Given these findings in cancer patients, the utility of oral rinses and swabs as screening tests for HPV-HNSCC among healthy populations is probably limited.
BACKGROUND: The incidence of HPV-related head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HPV-HNSCC) is increasing. Oral samples are easy and non-invasive to collect, but the diagnostic accuracy of oral HPV detection methods for classifying HPV-positive HNSCC tumors has not been well explored. METHODS: In a systematic review, we identified eight studies of HNSCC patients meeting our eligibility criteria of having: (1) HPV detection in oral rinse or oral swab samples, (2) tumor HPV or p16 testing, (3) a publication date within the last 10 years (January 2007-May 2017, as laboratory methods change), and (4) at least 15 HNSCC cases. Data were abstracted from each study and a meta-analysis performed to calculate sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: Eight articles meeting inclusion criteria were identified. Among people diagnosed with HNSCC, oral HPV detection has good specificity (92%, 95% CI = 82-97%) and moderate sensitivity (72%, 95% CI = 45-89%) for HPV-positive HNSCC tumor. Results were similar when restricted to studies with only oropharyngeal cancer cases, with oral rinse samples, or testing for HPV16 DNA (instead of any oncogenic HPV) in the oral samples. DISCUSSION: Among those who already have HNSCC, oral HPV detection has few false-positives but may miss one-half to one-quarter of HPV-related cases (false-negatives). Given these findings in cancerpatients, the utility of oral rinses and swabs as screening tests for HPV-HNSCC among healthy populations is probably limited.
Authors: Eleni M Rettig; Alicia Wentz; Marshall R Posner; Neil D Gross; Robert I Haddad; Maura L Gillison; Carole Fakhry; Harry Quon; Andrew G Sikora; William J Stott; Jochen H Lorch; Christine G Gourin; Yingshi Guo; Weihong Xiao; Brett A Miles; Jeremy D Richmon; Peter E Andersen; Krzysztof J Misiukiewicz; Christine H Chung; Jennifer E Gerber; Shirani D Rajan; Gypsyamber D'Souza Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Yuxuan Wang; Simeon Springer; Carolyn L Mulvey; Natalie Silliman; Joy Schaefer; Mark Sausen; Nathan James; Eleni M Rettig; Theresa Guo; Curtis R Pickering; Justin A Bishop; Christine H Chung; Joseph A Califano; David W Eisele; Carole Fakhry; Christine G Gourin; Patrick K Ha; Hyunseok Kang; Ana Kiess; Wayne M Koch; Jeffrey N Myers; Harry Quon; Jeremy D Richmon; David Sidransky; Ralph P Tufano; William H Westra; Chetan Bettegowda; Luis A Diaz; Nickolas Papadopoulos; Kenneth W Kinzler; Bert Vogelstein; Nishant Agrawal Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2015-06-24 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Mererid Evans; Robert Newcombe; Alison Fiander; James Powell; Martin Rolles; Selvam Thavaraj; Max Robinson; Ned Powell Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2013-05-01 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Anne S Tsao; Vassiliki Papadimitrakopoulou; Heather Lin; Ming Guo; J Jack Lee; F Christopher Holsinger; Waun Ki Hong; Erich M Sturgis Journal: Infect Agent Cancer Date: 2016-04-27 Impact factor: 2.965
Authors: Ryan C Chai; Yenkai Lim; Ian H Frazer; Yunxia Wan; Christopher Perry; Lee Jones; Duncan Lambie; Chamindie Punyadeera Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2016-03-03 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Gypsyamber D'Souza; Gwendolyn Clemens; Tanya Troy; Rachel G Castillo; Linda Struijk; Tim Waterboer; Noemi Bender; Phillip M Pierorazio; Simon R Best; Howard Strickler; Dorothy J Wiley; Robert I Haddad; Marshall Posner; Carole Fakhry Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2019-08-16
Authors: Laura Martin-Gomez; William J Fulp; Michael J Schell; Bradley Sirak; Martha Abrahamsen; Kimberly A Isaacs-Soriano; Attila Lorincz; Bruce Wenig; Christine H Chung; Jimmy J Caudell; Anna R Giuliano Journal: Oral Oncol Date: 2019-04-03 Impact factor: 5.337
Authors: Ryan Suk; Parag Mahale; Kalyani Sonawane; Andrew G Sikora; Jagpreet Chhatwal; Kathleen M Schmeler; Keith Sigel; Scott B Cantor; Elizabeth Y Chiao; Ashish A Deshmukh Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2018-09-07