Objective The aim of this study was to detect high risk human papillomavirus in cervical cancer with a pretreatment negative high risk human papillomavirus DNA genotype test and to evaluate clinicopathologic characteristics and survival outcomes according to high risk human papillomavirus status.
Methods We investigated high risk human papillomavirus status in surgical specimens from 30 cases of cervical cancer using polymerase chain reaction. Polymerase chain reaction primers were set to detect the presence of the common L1 and E7 regions of human papillomavirus types 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58. We analyzed the following clinicopathologic parameters to evaluate their relationships with high risk human papillomavirus status: age, histology, stage, tumor size, invasion depth, lymphovascular invasion, and recurrent status.
Results Among 30 cases with a pretreatment negative DNA genotype test, high risk human papillomavirus was detected in 12 (40.0%), whereas 18 (60.0%) were negatives. Of 12 high risk human papillomavirus positive cases, 10 (33.3%) were positive for the L1 region, 6 (20.0%) of the 7 types were positive for the E7 region, and 4 (13.1%) were positive for both L1 and E7 regions. According to a multiple logistic regression model, tumor size (odds ratio 7.80; 95% confidence interval 1.476 to 41.216; P=0.0097) and stage (odds ratio 7.00; 95% confidence interval 1.293 to 37.910; P=0.0173) were associated with negative high risk human papillomavirus DNA status. Kaplan–Meier survival plots showed that negative high risk human papillomavirus status was associated with worse disease free survival in contrast with positive high risk human papillomavirus status (P=0.0392).
Conclusions Negative high risk human papillomavirus was found in 60% of cervical cancers with a pretreatment negative DNA genotype test. Moreover, the negative high risk human papillomavirus group was associated with worse survival outcome.
- Cervical cancer
- high-risk human papilloma virus
Statistics from Altmetric.com
HSH and JYP contributed equally.
Contributors Study concept and design: GOC, HSH, and JYP. Performed the experiments: SDL, GOC, and HSH. Acquisition of the data: GOC, JYP, and YHL. Analysis and interpretation of the data: GOC, YHL, and HJL. Drafting of the manuscript: GOC and SDL. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: DGH and YSL. Study supervision: HSH and JYP.
Funding This research was supported by a grant from Kyungpook National University.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent Not required.
Ethics approval Retrospective data collection and analysis were approved by the institutional review board of Kyungpook National University Chilgok Hospital.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.