| Literature DB >> 29451891 |
Nicole V Anayannis1, Nicolas F Schlecht2,3,4, Miriam Ben-Dayan1, Richard V Smith1,5, Thomas J Belbin1,6, Thomas J Ow1,5, Duk M Blakaj7, Robert D Burk2,8,9,10, Sarah M Leonard11, Ciaran B Woodman11, Joanna L Parish11, Michael B Prystowsky1.
Abstract
To assess the relationship of E2 gene disruption with viral gene expression and clinical outcome in human papillomavirus (HPV) positive head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, we evaluated 31 oropharyngeal and 17 non-oropharyngeal HPV16 positive carcinomas using two PCR-based methods to test for disruption of E2, followed by Sanger sequencing. Expression of HPV16 E6, E7 and E2 transcripts, along with cellular ARF and INK4A, were also assessed by RT-qPCR. Associations between E2 disruption, E2/E6/E7 expression, and clinical outcome were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier analysis for loco-regional recurrence and disease-specific survival. The majority (n = 21, 68%) of HPV16 positive oropharyngeal carcinomas had an intact E2 gene, whereas the majority of HPV16 positive non-oropharyngeal carcinomas (n = 10, 59%) had a disrupted E2 gene. Three of the oropharyngeal tumors and two of the non-oropharyngeal tumors had deletions within E2. Detection of an intact E2 gene was associated with a higher DNA viral load and increased E2/E6/E7, ARF and INK4A expression in oropharyngeal tumors. Oropharyngeal carcinomas with an intact E2 had a lower risk of loco-regional recurrence (log-rank p = 0.04) and improved disease-specific survival (p = 0.03) compared to tumors with disrupted E2. In addition, high E7 expression was associated with lower risk of loco-regional recurrence (p = 0.004) as was high E6 expression (p = 0.006). In summary, an intact E2 gene is more common in HPV16 positive oropharyngeal than non-oropharyngeal carcinomas; the presence of an intact E2 gene is associated with higher HPV viral load, higher viral oncogene expression, and improved clinical outcome compared to patients with a disrupted E2 gene in oropharyngeal cancer.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29451891 PMCID: PMC5815588 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0191581
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Study population characteristics stratified by HPV16 E2 gene status and tumor site.
| Intact E2 | Disrupted E2 | p value | Deletions | ||||
| n = 21 (68%) | n = 7 (22%) | 0.01 | n = 3 (10%) | ||||
| | 12 | 57% | 3 | 43% | 0.4 | 0 | 0% |
| | 9 | 43% | 4 | 57% | 3 | 100% | |
| | 18 | 86% | 6 | 86% | 1 | 1 | 33% |
| | 3 | 14% | 1 | 14% | 2 | 67% | |
| | 5 | 24% | 3 | 43% | 0.42 | 1 | 33% |
| | 12 | 57% | 2 | 29% | 1 | 33% | |
| | 4 | 19% | 2 | 29% | 1 | 33% | |
| | 3 | 14% | 1 | 14% | 1 | 1 | 33% |
| | 18 | 86% | 6 | 86% | 2 | 67% | |
| 3 | 14% | 1 | 14% | 0.8 | 1 | 33% | |
| 1 | 5% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% | ||
| 14 | 67% | 4 | 57% | 2 | 67% | ||
| 3 | 14% | 2 | 29% | 0 | 0% | ||
| 17 | 81% | 4 | 57% | 0.32 | 2 | 67% | |
| 4 | 19% | 3 | 43% | 1 | 33% | ||
| 14 | 67% | 2 | 29% | 0.05 | 2 | 67% | |
| 6 | 28% | 2 | 29% | 1 | 33% | ||
| 0 | 0% | 2 | 29% | ||||
| 1 | 5% | 1 | 14% | ||||
| Intact E2 | Disrupted E2 | p value | Deletions | ||||
| n = 5 (29%) | n = 10 (59%) | 0.01 | n = 2 (12%) | ||||
| | 3 | 60% | 6 | 60% | 0.61 | 1 | 50% |
| | 2 | 40% | 4 | 40% | 1 | 50% | |
| | 4 | 80% | 7 | 70% | 1 | 2 | 100% |
| | 1 | 20% | 3 | 30% | 0 | 0% | |
| | 1 | 20% | 5 | 50% | 0.47 | 0 | 0% |
| | 3 | 60% | 3 | 30% | 2 | 100% | |
| | 1 | 20% | 2 | 20% | 0 | 0% | |
| | 1 | 20% | 2 | 20% | 1 | 0 | 0% |
| | 4 | 80% | 8 | 80% | 2 | 100% | |
| 2 | 40% | 4 | 40% | 0.49 | 0 | 0% | |
| 1 | 20% | 2 | 20% | 0 | 0% | ||
| 1 | 20% | 4 | 40% | 2 | 100% | ||
| 1 | 20% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% | ||
| 3 | 60% | 4 | 40% | 0.61 | 0 | 0% | |
| 2 | 40% | 6 | 60% | 2 | 100% | ||
| 1 | 20% | 4 | 40% | 74 | 0 | 0% | |
| 2 | 40% | 3 | 30% | 1 | 50% | ||
| 2 | 40% | 3 | 30% | 0 | 0% | ||
| 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% | 1 | 50% | ||
*p-Value for 2-sided Fisher exact test. Row numbers may not sum to column totals due to missing data.
1p-value determined by Fisher exact or Chi-square test on results from intact and disrupted E2 status for oropharynx and non-oropharynx.
2Smoking status was defined as never smoked, exsmoker (at time of diagnosis) and current smoker
3Oropharynx includes: base of tongue, tonsil, soft palate, oropharyngeal wall, uvula and oropharynx-NOS. Hypopharynx includes: posterior pharyngeal wall, pyriform sinus and hypopharynx-NOS. Larynx includes glottis, supraglottis-aryepiglottic fold and epiglottis. Oral cavity includes buccal, alveolar ridge, anterior tongue, floor of mouth, hard palate, inner lip mucosa and retromolar trigone.