Dataset Information

Better or Worse? The Independent Prognostic Role of HPV-16 or HPV-18 Positivity in Patients With Cervical Cancer: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT: Background: The literature reports conflicting results regarding the effect of human papillomavirus (HPV) genotype 16 (HPV-16)/18 (HPV-18) positivity on cervical cancer (CC) prognosis. Aim: To conduct a meta-analysis to examine the effect of HPV-16/18 positivity on the prognosis of patients with CC. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for available papers published up to March 2020. The main outcome was the hazard ratio (HR) of overall survival (OS) or disease-free survival (DFS) comparing HPV-16 or HPV-18 positivity and negativity. The random-effects model was used for synthesizing survival outcomes. Results: Nine studies and 2,028 patients were included. Four studies reported OS in HPV-16 positivity, and no association was found between HPV-16 positivity and OS to CC (HR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.26-2.39, P = 0.675). Three studies reported DFS in HPV-16 positivity, and no association was found between HPV-16 positivity and DFS to CC (HR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.30-2.11, P = 0.654). Two studies reported DFS in HPV-18 positivity, and no association was found between HPV-18 positivity and DFS to CC (HR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.55-1.78, P = 0.984). One study reported progression-free survival (PFS) in HPV-18 positivity, and an association was observed between HPV-18 positivity and PFS to CC (HR = 2.66, 95% CI: 1.44-4.94, P = 0.002). The sensitivity analyses showed that one study biased the analysis of the association between HPV-16 and OS, and another study biased the association between HPV-16 and DFS. Conclusion: The presence of HPV-16 and HPV-18 positivity appears to have no significant association with prognosis in CC in either OS or PFS. The presence of HPV-16 or HPV-18 positivity has no significant association with prognosis in CC in either OS or PFS.

SUBMITTER: Chen X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7577117 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Better or Worse? The Independent Prognostic Role of HPV-16 or HPV-18 Positivity in Patients With Cervical Cancer: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Chen Xing X Zhang Ping P Chen Shanshan S Zhu Hanxiao H Wang Kai K Ye Liya L Wang Jun J Yu Junhui J Mei Shuangshuang S Wang Zhengrong Z Cheng Xiaodong X

Frontiers in oncology 20201007

Background: The literature reports conflicting results regarding the effect of human papillomavirus (HPV) genotype 16 (HPV-16)/18 (HPV-18) positivity on cervical cancer (CC) prognosis. Aim: To conduct a meta-analysis to examine the effect of HPV-16/18 positivity on the prognosis of patients with CC. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for available papers published up to March 2020. The main outcome was the hazard ratio (HR) of overall survival (O ...[more]

PMID: 33117670

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To calculate pooled risk estimates for combinations of cytology result, human papillomavirus (HPV) 16/18 genotype and colposcopy impression to provide a basis for risk-stratified colposcopy and biopsy practice. DATA SOURCE:A PubMed search was conducted on June 1, 2016, and a ClinicalTrials.gov search was conducted on June 9, 2018, using key words such as "uterine cervical neoplasms," "cervical cancer," "mass screening," "early detection of cancer," and "colposcopy." METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION:Eligible studies must have included colposcopic impression and either cytology results or HPV 16/18 partial genotype results as well as a histologic biopsy diagnosis from adult women. Manuscripts were reviewed for the following: cytology, HPV status, and colposcopy impression as well as age, number of women, and number of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2, CIN 3, and cancer cases. Strata were defined by the various combinations of cytology, genotype, and colposcopic impression. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS:Of 340 abstracts identified, nine were eligible for inclusion. Data were also obtained from three unpublished studies, two of which have since been published. We calculated the risk of CIN 2 or worse and CIN 3 or worse based on cytology, colposcopy, and HPV 16/18 test results. We found similar risk patterns across studies in the lowest risk groups such that risk estimates were similar despite different referral populations and study designs. Women with a normal colposcopy impression (no acetowhitening), less than high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion cytology, and HPV 16/18-negative were at low risk of prevalent precancer. Women with at least two of the following: high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion cytology, HPV16- or HPV18-positive, and high-grade colposcopic impression were at highest risk of prevalent precancer. CONCLUSION:Our results support a risk-based approach to colposcopy and biopsy with modifications of practice at the lowest and highest risk levels.

Dataset Information

Better or Worse? The Independent Prognostic Role of HPV-16 or HPV-18 Positivity in Patients With Cervical Cancer: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Publications

Better or Worse? The Independent Prognostic Role of HPV-16 or HPV-18 Positivity in Patients With Cervical Cancer: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets