Medical Virology, Section Experimental Virology, University Hospital of Tübingen, Elfriede-Aulhorn Str. 6, 72076Tübingen.
Am J Cancer Res. 2012;2(2):192-203. Epub 2012 Feb 15.
Persistent infection with a high risk (hr) human papillomavirus (HPV) has been established as the main cause of cervical cancer and high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN3). Because most infections are transient, testing for hrHPV lacks specificity and has a low positive predictive value. It has been suggested that additional parameters like viral load and physical status of the viral genome could improve the effectiveness of HPV-based screening. We investigated the association between HPV16 viral load and physical state with viral persistence or risk of incident CIN3 or worse in a population-based prospective cohort study comprising 8656 women (20-29 years). All participants had two gynecological examinations two years apart and were followed through the nationwide Danish Pathology Data Bank (median follow-up: 12.9 yrs). Seventynine cervical swabs from women with a persistent HPV16 infection were available for analysis. For comparison we selected a random age-matched sample of transiently HPV16 infected women (N=91). Persistently infected women with incident CIN3 or cancer (CIN3+; N=31) were compared to women with normal cytology during follow up (non-progressors; N=39). Quantitative real-time PCR for HPV16E6, E2 and IFNb1 was done to determine the HPV16 viral load and the E2/E6 ratio was used as a surrogate marker for integration. Women with normal cytology who became persistently HPV16 infected had a significantly lower HPV16 load at baseline than women who cleared the infection (median 4.72 copies/cell versus median 20.0 copies/cell, respectively; p=0.0003). There was no difference in viral load at enrollment between women who progressed to CIN3+ and women who stayed cytologically normal (p=0.85). At the second examination viral load tended to be higher in women who progressed, but the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.39). The E2/E6 ratio was shown to be lower in the persistently infected group (p<0.0001) already at the first examination, but no difference between non-progressors and CIN3+ cases was observed at any of the two examinations (p=0.61 and 0.86). Lower viral load and integration of the viral genome are predictive for the persistence of HPV16 DNA, but not for the progression of a persistent HPV16 infection to CIN3+ in women with normal cytology.
高危型(hr)人乳头瘤病毒(HPV)持续感染已被确定为宫颈癌和高级别宫颈上皮内瘤变(CIN3)的主要病因。由于大多数感染是一过性的,因此针对 hrHPV 的检测缺乏特异性,阳性预测值较低。有人提出,病毒载量和病毒基因组的物理状态等其他参数可以提高 HPV 筛查的效果。我们在一项基于人群的前瞻性队列研究中调查了 HPV16 病毒载量和物理状态与病毒持续性或发生 CIN3 或更高级别病变风险之间的关系,该研究纳入了 8656 名年龄在 20-29 岁的女性。所有参与者每两年接受两次妇科检查,并通过全国丹麦病理数据库进行随访(中位随访时间:12.9 年)。有 79 名 HPV16 持续感染的女性宫颈拭子可用于分析。为了进行比较,我们选择了随机年龄匹配的 HPV16 一过性感染女性(n=91)的样本。将发生 CIN3 或癌症的持续性 HPV16 感染女性(CIN3+;n=31)与随访期间细胞学正常的女性(非进展者;n=39)进行比较。进行 HPV16E6、E2 和 IFNb1 的定量实时 PCR 以确定 HPV16 病毒载量,并使用 E2/E6 比值作为整合的替代标志物。与清除感染的女性相比,细胞学正常但持续 HPV16 感染的女性基线 HPV16 载量明显更低(中位数 4.72 拷贝/细胞与中位数 20.0 拷贝/细胞,p=0.0003)。进展为 CIN3+的女性与细胞学仍正常的女性在入组时的病毒载量无差异(p=0.85)。第二次检查时,进展组的病毒载量往往更高,但差异无统计学意义(p=0.39)。第一次检查时,持续性感染组的 E2/E6 比值明显较低(p<0.0001),但在两次检查中,非进展者与 CIN3+病例之间均未观察到差异(p=0.61 和 0.86)。较低的病毒载量和病毒基因组的整合与 HPV16 DNA 的持续性相关,但与细胞学正常的持续性 HPV16 感染进展为 CIN3+无关。