| Literature DB >> 31709004 |
Guofei Zhang1, Zipu Yu1, Gang Shen1, Ying Chai1, Chengxiao Liang2.
Abstract
The possible role of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) in the pathogenesis of thymic epithelial tumors (TET) remains controversial. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of EBV in TET. We conducted a systematic review of relevant English-language studies published between January 1980 and December 2013. Effect size was calculated as event rates (95% confidence interval [CI]) by homogeneity testing using Cochran's Q and I2 statistics for benign TET, benign TET with myasthenia gravis (MG), and thymic carcinoma (TC). Among 136 potentially relevant studies, 22 met the inclusion criteria. Despite a considerable degree of heterogeneity, the pooled estimated incidences were 9% (95% CI, 1-23%), 20% (95% CI, 0-54%), and 6% (95% CI, 0-21%) for benign TET, benign TET with MG, and TC, respectively. There was significant heterogeneity among studies that used in situ hybridization (ISH) for both benign TET and benign TET with MG. According to the random-effects model, studies employing ISH yielded lower point estimates of EBV prevalence (5%) than those employing other methods (33%). Using the random-effects model, we found a lack of significant heterogeneity among studies from different geographic regions (p = 0.0848). Further, 12 of 23 lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma (LELC) cases tested EBV-positive. The prevalence of EBV in benign TET with or without MG was lower than in nasopharyngeal carcinoma, suggesting that EBV plays a minor role in TET pathogenesis. Although the prevalence of EBV in TC was also low, EBV may play an important causal role in LELC. Further research is needed to clarify these associations.Entities:
Keywords: Epstein-Barr virus; Myasthenia gravis; Systematic review; Thymic carcinomas; Thymic epithelial tumor
Year: 2019 PMID: 31709004 PMCID: PMC6836426 DOI: 10.1186/s13027-019-0254-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Infect Agent Cancer ISSN: 1750-9378 Impact factor: 2.965
Studies reporting EBV detection in TET
| Year | Study (reference) | Country | Detection method | Pathological type | MG | No. assessed | No. positive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1988 | McGuire et al. [ | China | SBH | T, LT, TI | MG | 11 | 6 |
| 1990 | Inghirami et al. [ | USA, Italy | SBH, PCR | T | MG | 16 | 0 |
| 1990 | Borisch et al. [ | Germany | ISH, SBH | NT, TH | MG | 51 | 0 |
| 1992 | Mann et al. [ | USA | ISH | LT, T/TC | – | 40/7 | 0/1 |
| 1993 | Wu et al. [ | China | ISH | T/TC | – | 21/20 | 0/1 |
| 1993 | Fujii et al. [ | Japan | ISH | T/TC | – | 7/8 | 0/1 |
| 2000 | Hishima et al. [ | Japan | ISH | T/TC | – | 18/9 | 0 |
| 2000 | Engel et al. [ | Denmark | ISH | T/TC | – | 105/52 | 0 |
| 2001 | Tateyama et al. [ | Japan | ISH | T/TC | – | 9/2 | 4/1 |
| 2002 | Chen et al. [ | China | ISH, PCR | T/TC | – | 78/21 | 0/6 |
| 2010 | Cavalcante et al. [ | Italy | ISH, IH, PCR | TH, LT, TI | MG | 17 | 17 |
| 2011 | Meyer et al. [ | Germany | ISH, IH | LT | MG | 44 | 0 |
| 2011 | Cavalcante et al. [ | Italy | PCR | TH, LT, TI | MG | 19 | 12 |
| 2011 | Kakalacheva et al. [ | Europe | ISH, IH, PCR | LT | MG | 16 | 1 |
| 2013 | Jing et al. [ | China | ISH, IH | TH | MG | 30 | 0 |
| 2017 | Cavalcante et al. [ | Italy | PCR |
EBV, Epstein-Barr virus; TET, thymic epithelial tumors; SBH, Southern blot hybridization; PCR, polymerase chain reaction; ISH, in situ hybridization; IH, immunohistochemistry; MG, myasthenia gravis; LT, lymphofollicular thymitis; T, thymoma; TH, thymic hyperplasia; TI, thymic involution; NT, normal thymus; TC, thymic carcinoma
Fig. 1Forest plot of the 15 studies reporting Epstein-Barr virus in benign thymic epithelium tumors. CI, confidence interval
Analysis of the 15 studies stratified according to EBV detection method
| Detection method | No. of studies | Events | Sample size | Point estimates of event rates (FE) | Point estimates of event rates (RE) | Homogeneity (Cochran’s Q) | Homogeneity ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Point estimate | 95% CI | Point estimate | 95% CI | |||||||
| ISH | 12 | 22 | 436 | 0 | 0–0.02 | 0.05 | 0–0.17 | 144.03 | 92.4 | < 0.0001 |
| Other | 3 | 18 | 46 | 0.32 | 0.19–0.47 | 0.33 | 0–0.84 | 24.96 | 92 | < 0.0001 |
| Summary | 15 | 40 | 472 | 0.02 | 0.01–0.03 | 0.08 | 0.01–0.21 | 206.73 | 93.2 | < 0.0001 |
| Total within (FE) | 168.99 | < 0.0001 | ||||||||
| Total between (FE) | 37.74 | < 0.0001 | ||||||||
| Total between (RE) | 1.69 | 0.1931 | ||||||||
FE, fixed-effects model; RE, random-effects model. EBV, human papillomavirus; ISH, in situ hybridization
1 Only calculated for the fixed-effects model
Analysis of the 15 studies stratified by geographic origin
| Geographic origin | No of studies | Events | Sample size | Point estimates of event rates (FE) | Point estimates of event rates (RE) | Homogeneity (Cochran’s Q) | Homogeneity ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Point estimate | 95% CI | Point estimate | 95% CI | |||||||
| Asia | 7 | 10 | 174 | 0 | 0–0.03 | 0.05 | 0–0.2 | 37.38 | 83.9 | < 0.0001 |
| Europe | 6 | 30 | 252 | 0.04 | 0.02–0.07 | 0.19 | 0–0.56 | 164.51 | 97 | < 0.0001 |
| Other | 2 | 0 | 56 | 0 | 0–0.03 | 0 | 0–0.03 | 0.09 | 0 | 0.7628 |
| Summary | 15 | 40 | 472 | 0.02 | 0–0.03 | 0.09 | 0–0.23 | 206.73 | 93.2 | < 0.0001 |
| Total within (FE) | 201.98 | < 0.0001 | ||||||||
| Total between (FE) | 4.75 | 0.093 | ||||||||
| Total between (RE) | 4.93 | 0.0848 | ||||||||
FE, fixed-effects model; RE, random-effects model
1 Only calculated for the fixed-effects model
Fig. 2Forest plot of the 8 studies reporting Epstein-Barr in myasthenia gravis. CI, confidence interval
Analysis of the 8 studies stratified by the EBV detection method
| Detection method | No. of studies | Events | Sample size | Point estimates of event rates (FE) | Point estimates of event rates (RE) | Homogeneity (Cochran’s Q) | Homogeneity (p-value) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Point estimate | 95% CI | Point estimate | 95% CI | |||||||
| ISH | 5 | 18 | 133 | 0.06 | 0.02–0.12 | 0.14 | 0–0.57 | 111.55 | 96.4 | < 0.0001 |
| Other | 3 | 18 | 46 | 0.32 | 0.19–0.47 | 0.33 | 0–0.84 | 10.34 | 92 | < 0.0001 |
| Summary | 8 | 36 | 179 | 0.11 | 0.07–0.17 | 0.20 | 0–0.54 | 152.8 | 95.4 | < 0.0001 |
| Total within (FE) | 136.51 | < 0.0001 | ||||||||
| Total between (FE) | 15.29 | < 0.0001 | ||||||||
| Total between (RE) | 0.41 | 0.5233 | ||||||||
FE, fixed-effects model; RE, random-effects model. EBV, Epstein-Barr virus; ISH, in situ hybridization
1 Only calculated for the fixed-effects model
Fig. 3Forest plot of the 6 studies reporting Epstein-Barr in thymic carcinoma. CI, confidence interval
Relationship between EBV and LELC reported in the literature
| Year | Technique | Cases | EBV-positive cases | Age/sex | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1985 | SB | 1 | 1 | 19/M | Leyvraz et al. [ |
| 1988 | SB | 1 | 1 | 30/F | Dimery et al. [ |
| 1988 | SB | 1 | 1 | 73/F | McGuire et al. [ |
| 1992 | PCR | 4 | 1 | 10/M | Matsuno et al. [ |
| 1992 | ISH | 4 | 1 | 26/F | Mann et al. [ |
| 1993 | SB | 1 | 1 | 15/M | Patton et al. [ |
| 1993 | ISH | 5 | 1 | 19/M | Wu et al. [ |
| 1993 | ISH | 1 | 1 | 13/F | Fujii et al. [ |
| 1996 | ISH | 1 | 1 | 14/M | Niehues et al. [ |
| 2001 | ISH | 2 | 1 | 59/M | Tateyama et al. [ |
| 2009 | IH | 1 | 1 | 26/M | Koppula et al. [ |
| 2012 | PCR | 1 | 1 | 17/M | Januszkiewicz et al. [ |
| Total | – | 23 | 12 | – | – |
EBV, Epstein-Barr virus; LELC, lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma