Kai Dun Tang1,2, Liz Kenny3,4,5, Ian H Frazer6, Chamindie Punyadeera1,2. 1. The School of Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, Queensland, Australia. 2. The Translational Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 3. School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 4. Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 5. Central Integrated Regional Cancer Service, Queensland Health, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 6. Faculty of Medicine, Translational Research Institute, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Accumulating evidence has suggested the utility of salivary oral rinse as a diagnostic fluid to detect oral human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA, but there are many methods for collecting saliva. METHODS: Salivary oral rinse and unstimulated whole mouth saliva samples were collected from 45 oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) patients. RESULTS: We show a positive correlation of HPV-16 E2 (r = 0.95, P < 0.0001) and E6/7 (r = 0.93, P < 0.0001) relative copy number as well as HPV genotypes in both sample methods. There was a significant correlation between the two sample methods in the ratio of HPV16 E2 to E6/7 DNA (r = 0.46, P < 0.01). Consistent with previous studies, a mixed HPV-16 form (episomal and integrated) was commonly found in both saliva and tumor samples. CONCLUSION: Detection of HPV in saliva samples collected by either method yielded comparable results, and showed good sensitivity for detection of HPV derived from OPC.
BACKGROUND: Accumulating evidence has suggested the utility of salivary oral rinse as a diagnostic fluid to detect oral human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA, but there are many methods for collecting saliva. METHODS: Salivary oral rinse and unstimulated whole mouth saliva samples were collected from 45 oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) patients. RESULTS: We show a positive correlation of HPV-16 E2 (r = 0.95, P < 0.0001) and E6/7 (r = 0.93, P < 0.0001) relative copy number as well as HPV genotypes in both sample methods. There was a significant correlation between the two sample methods in the ratio of HPV16 E2 to E6/7 DNA (r = 0.46, P < 0.01). Consistent with previous studies, a mixed HPV-16 form (episomal and integrated) was commonly found in both saliva and tumor samples. CONCLUSION: Detection of HPV in saliva samples collected by either method yielded comparable results, and showed good sensitivity for detection of HPV derived from OPC.
Authors: Kai Dun Tang; Lilian Menezes; Kurt Baeten; Laurence J Walsh; Bernard C S Whitfield; Martin D Batstone; Liz Kenny; Ian H Frazer; Gert C Scheper; Chamindie Punyadeera Journal: Biomolecules Date: 2020-02-03
Authors: Chameera Ekanayake Weeramange; Danhua Shu; Kai Dun Tang; Jyotsna Batra; Rahul Ladwa; Lizbeth Kenny; Sarju Vasani; Ian H Frazer; Riccardo Dolcetti; Jonathan J Ellis; Richard A Sturm; Paul Leo; Chamindie Punyadeera Journal: Cancer Date: 2022-02-17 Impact factor: 6.921