Human papillomavirus (HPV) 16 E6 variants in tonsillar cancer in comparison to those in cervical cancer in Stockholm, Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV), especially HPV16, is associated with the development of both cervical and tonsillar cancer and intratype variants in the amino acid sequence of the HPV16 E6 oncoprotein have been demonstrated to be associated with viral persistence and cancer lesions. For this...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Juan Du, Cecilia Nordfors, Anders Näsman, Michal Sobkowiak, Mircea Romanitan, Tina Dalianis, Torbjörn Ramqvist
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2012-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3338690?pdf=render
Description
Summary:BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV), especially HPV16, is associated with the development of both cervical and tonsillar cancer and intratype variants in the amino acid sequence of the HPV16 E6 oncoprotein have been demonstrated to be associated with viral persistence and cancer lesions. For this reason the presence of HPV16 E6 variants in tonsillar squamous cell carcinoma (TSCC) in cervical cancer (CC), as well as in cervical samples (CS), were explored. METHODS: HPV16 E6 was sequenced in 108 TSCC and 52 CC samples from patients diagnosed 2000-2008 in the County of Stockholm, and in 51 CS from young women attending a youth health center in Stockholm. RESULTS: The rare E6 variant R10G was relatively frequent (19%) in TSCC, absent in CC and infrequent (4%) in CS, while the well-known L83V variant was common in TSCC (40%), CC (31%), and CS (29%). The difference for R10G was significant between TSCC and CC (p = 0.0003), as well as between TSCC and CS (p = 0.009). The HPV16 European phylogenetic lineage and its derivatives dominated in all samples (>90%). CONCLUSION: The relatively high frequency of the R10G variant in TSCC, as compared to what has been found in CC both in the present study as well as in several other studies in different countries, may indicate a difference between TSCC and CC with regard to tumor induction and development. Alternatively, there could be differences with regard to the oral and cervical prevalence of this variant that need to be explored further.
ISSN:1932-6203