Time trends in prevalence of p16 positivity and combined HPV/p16 positivity in a large cohort of Danish vulvar cancer patients.

Vulvar cancer is rare, but causes substantial morbidity in affected patients. A subset of vulvar cancers is caused by high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV), which primarily exerts its oncogenic effect through upregulation of tumor suppressor protein p16. Tumors positive for both hrHPV and p16 (double positive) are assumed to be HPV-driven, but only few large studies have investigated the combined prevalence of hrHPV and p16 positivity in vulvar cancer over time. In this Danish cross-sectional study, we assessed the prevalence of p16 positivity and double positivity for hrHPV and p16 in a large sample of vulvar squamous cell carcinomas (VSCCs) diagnosed during 1990 to 2017. In a nationwide register, we identified VSCCs from 13 hospitals across Denmark, and collected archival tumor tissue for hrHPV testing with INNO-LiPA and immunohistochemical p16 staining. We calculated the prevalence of hrHPV, p16 positivity and double positivity according to time, age and histological subtype and evaluated time trends through estimated annual percentage changes. We included 1278 VSCCs. Overall, 35.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 32.4-37.6) were positive for p16 and 31.0% (95% CI: 28.4-33.5) were positive for both hrHPV and p16. The prevalence of p16 positivity and double positivity increased over time, both in women aged ≤59 and ≥60 years. The double positive prevalence was higher in nonkeratinizing (60.7%) and warty/basaloid VSCCs (67.5%) than in keratinizing (16.1%) and verrucous VSCCs (5.0%). These results indicate that approximately one-third of vulvar cancers were caused by hrHPV infection, supporting a substantial preventive potential of the HPV vaccine.

Changes in HPV prevalence in Danish women with vulvar cancer during 28 years - A nationwide study of >1300 cancer cases.

OBJECTIVE: A substantial proportion of vulvar cancers are caused by high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV), but hrHPV prevalence in vulvar cancer has mainly been investigated in smaller studies which did not evaluate time trends. Our aim was to assess hrHPV prevalence in >1300 Danish vulvar cancers diagnosed during 1990-2017, including changes in hrHPV prevalence over time. METHODS: In a nationwide pathology register, we identified women diagnosed with vulvar cancer at thirteen hospitals from all Danish regions. Archival tumor tissue was collected from local repositories and, upon pathology review, sent to a central laboratory for HPV testing using INNO-LiPA. We calculated hrHPV prevalence according to time, age and histology, and evaluated the overall and age-specific estimated annual percentage change (EAPC). RESULTS: We included 1308 vulvar cancer cases, with a median age of 72 years at diagnosis. The overall hrHPV prevalence was 52.0% (95% CI: 49.3-54.7). HPV types 16/18 were found in 39.6% of cases, whereas nine-valent HPV (9vHPV) vaccine types 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58 were found in 50.8%. The hrHPV prevalence showed an increasing trend over time, with an EAPC of 0.35% (95% CI: 0.00-0.71). The hrHPV prevalence was higher in younger women throughout the study period, and increasing trends over time were seen in both older (age ≥ 60) and younger (age < 60) women. The hrHPV prevalence was higher in non-keratinizing (71.0%) and warty/basaloid (78.0%) carcinomas than in keratinizing (39.4%) and verrucous (36.4%) carcinomas. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that the 9vHPV vaccine could potentially prevent a substantial proportion of vulvar cancers in Denmark.

Incidence of vulvar high-grade precancerous lesions and cancer in Denmark before and after introduction of HPV vaccination.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the incidence of vulvar high-grade precancerous lesions and cancer in Denmark during 1997-2018. METHODS: We identified incident vulvar cancer cases in the Danish Cancer Registry and incident cases of vulvar precancerous lesions in the Danish Pathology Register. We calculated age-standardized incidence rates of vulvar squamous cell carcinoma (VSCC), non-SCC and precancerous lesions, and age-specific incidence rates of VSCC and precancerous lesions. Incidence trends were evaluated using linear Poisson regression to estimate the average annual percentage change (AAPC). For vulvar precancerous lesions, trends were evaluated in the period before (1997-2007) and after (2008-2018) implementation of HPV vaccination. RESULTS: In the 22-year study period, the age-standardized incidence rate of VSCC increased from 1.23 (1997-1998) to 1.98 per 100,000 (2017-2018), corresponding to an average yearly increase of 2.95% (95%CI: 2.15-3.75). The incidence of non-SCC increased only slightly. Overall, the incidence of vulvar precancerous lesions increased (AAPC = 2.38%; 95%CI: 1.75-3.02). After implementation of HPV vaccination, the incidence of vulvar precancerous lesions decreased significantly in women aged <20 (AAPC = -22.10% (95%CI: -35.27 to -6.26)) and 20-29 years (AAPC = -6.57, 95% CI: -10.63 to -2.33), whereas the incidence increased in the majority of age groups ≥50 years. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the incidence of VSCC and vulvar precancerous lesions increased during 1997-2018. However, after introduction of HPV vaccination, the incidence of vulvar precancerous lesions decreased among women aged <20 and 20-29 years, pointing towards a possible effect of HPV vaccination in this group. This development should be followed in the future.

Prognostic Significance of HPV DNA and p16INK4a in Anal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies evaluating survival in patients with anal cancer, according to human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA, p16INK4a, and combined HPV DNA/p16INK4a status. We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify studies published in English until July 25, 2018, directly providing or allowing estimation of survival of patients with anal cancer according to the presence of HPV DNA and/or overexpression of p16INK4a We estimated pooled HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for overall survival (OS) using a random-effects model. We included 16 studies, comprising 1,724 patients with anal cancer tested for HPV DNA (65% positive), and 567 patients tested for p16INK4a (87% positive). The pooled HR for OS was 0.54 (95% CI, 0.33-0.89) for HPV DNA positive versus negative, 0.37 (95% CI, 0.24-0.57) for p16INK4a positive versus negative, and 0.36 (95% CI, 0.22-0.58) for HPV DNA positive/p16INK4a positive versus HPV DNA positive/p16INK4a negative patients with anal cancer. Patients with HPV DNA or p16INK4a positive anal cancer have significantly better OS compared with HPV DNA or p16INK4a negative. This points to the possible value of HPV DNA and/or p16INK4a testing when planning the management and follow-up strategy for patients diagnosed with anal cancer.

The prognostic value of p16 and p53 expression for survival after vulvar cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The tumor suppressor proteins p16 and p53 have been suggested to have prognostic value in some human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated cancers, however, this has been less well established for vulvar cancer. The aim of this review and meta-analysis was to examine the prognostic value of p16 and p53 expression status on survival after vulvar squamous cell carcinoma (VSCC). We conducted a thorough systematic literature search of multiple databases to identify studies examining survival after histolocally verified VSCC that were tested for p16 and/or p53. A total of 18 eligible studies were included. Using a fixed-effects model we calculated study-specific and pooled hazard ratios (HRs) of 5-year overall survival (OS). In the analyses of OS, we included 475 VSCC cases tested for p16 expression of which 38% were p16 positive. The pooled HRp16 was 0.40 (95% CI: 0.29-0.55). In addition, the majority of results from studies with adjusted analyses on the prognostic value of p16 indicated that p16 expression status could be an independent prognostic marker for OS in women diagnosed with VSCC, and the same pattern was seen for disease specific survival (DSS). We also included 310 VSCC cases tested for p53 expression of which 54% were p53 positive. The pooled HRp53 was 1.81 (95% CI: 1.22-2.68) indicating that p53 positive VSCC have a significantly lower 5-year OS compared to p53 negative. The results in relation to p53 reported from adjusted analyses OS and on DSS and disease free survival were more equivocal. This meta-analysis and review suggests that p53 and especially p16 expression status are of prognostic importance in women diagnosed with VSCC. This may be clinically important in the future design of targeted therapy and when planning the optimal follow-up strategy. Future studies should include the combined use of biomarkers such as p16, p53 and HPV status.

Human papillomavirus and p16 in squamous cell carcinoma and intraepithelial neoplasia of the vagina.

We estimated the overall and type-specific prevalence of human papillomavirus (HPV) and p16 overexpression in vaginal cancer and vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia (VaIN). We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library to identify studies published between 1986 and 2017 using PCR-based or Hybrid Capture 2 tests to evaluate the presence of HPV DNA and/or using any method to detect p16 overexpression in VaIN, vaginal squamous cell carcinoma (VaSCC), or other types of vaginal cancer. Applying a random effects model, we estimated the pooled prevalence of HPV and p16 overexpression along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The I2 statistic was used to assess heterogeneity. We included 26 studies, reporting HPV prevalence and six studies evaluating p16 overexpression. The pooled HPV prevalences in VaSCC (n = 593) and VaIN (n = 1,374) were 66.7% (95% CI = 54.7-77.8) and 85.2% (95% CI = 78.2-91.0), respectively. Substantial inter-study heterogeneity was observed, and analyses stratified on geographic region, type of tissue, HPV detection method or PCR primer type did not fully explain the observed heterogeneity. The most predominant HPV type among the HPV positive VaSCC and VaIN cases was HPV16, followed by HPV33, and HPV45 (in VaIN) and HPV18, and HPV33 (in VaSCC). In pooled analyses, 89.9% (95% CI = 81.7-94.6) of HPV positive and 38.9% (95% CI = 0.9-90.0) of HPV negative vaginal cancers were positive for p16 overexpression. Our findings suggest that vaccination against HPV might prevent a substantial proportion of vaginal neoplasia and highlight the need for further studies of the possible clinical value of p16 testing in these patients.

Prevalence of human papillomavirus DNA and p16INK4a in penile cancer and penile intraepithelial neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although previous meta-analyses have examined human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA prevalence in penile cancer, none, to our knowledge, have assessed pooled HPV DNA prevalence in penile intraepithelial neoplasia or p16INK4a percent positivity in penile cancer and penile intraepithelial neoplasia. Therefore, we aimed to examine the prevalence of HPV DNA and p16INK4a positivity in penile cancer and penile intraepithelial neoplasia worldwide. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library until July 24, 2017, for English-language articles published from Jan 1, 1986, onwards reporting the prevalence of HPV DNA and p16INK4a positivity, either alone or in combination, in at least five cases of penile cancer or penile intraepithelial neoplasia. Only studies that used PCR or hybrid capture for the detection of HPV DNA and immunohistochemical staining or methylation for the detection of p16INK4a were included. Data were extracted and subsequently crosschecked, and inconsistencies were discussed to reach consensus. Using random-effects models, we estimated the pooled prevalence and 95% CI of HPV DNA and p16INK4a positivity in penile cancer and penile intraepithelial neoplasia, stratifying by histological subtype and HPV DNA or p16INK4a detection method. Type-specific prevalence of HPV6, HPV11, HPV16, HPV18, HPV31, HPV33, and HPV45 in penile cancer was estimated. FINDINGS: Our searches identified 1836 non-duplicate records, of which 73 relevant papers (71 studies) were found to be eligible. The pooled HPV DNA prevalence in penile cancer (52 studies; n=4199) was 50·8% (95% CI 44·8-56·7; I2=92·6%, pheterogeneity<0·0001). A high pooled HPV DNA prevalence was seen in basaloid squamous cell carcinomas (84·0%, 95% CI 71·0-93·6; I2=48·0%, pheterogeneity=0·0197) and in warty-basaloid carcinoma (75·7%, 70·1-81·0; I2=0%, pheterogeneity=0·52). The predominant oncogenic HPV type in penile cancer was HPV16 (68·3%, 95% CI 58·9-77·1), followed by HPV6 (8·1%, 4·0-13·7) and HPV18 (6·9%, 2·9-12·4). The pooled HPV DNA prevalence in penile intraepithelial neoplasia (19 studies; n=445) was 79·8% (95% CI 69·3-88·6; I2=83·2%, pheterogeneity<0·0001). The pooled p16INK4a percent positivity in penile cancer (24 studies; n=2295) was 41·6% (95% CI 36·2-47·0; I2=80·6%, pheterogeneity<0·0001), with a high pooled p16INK4a percent positivity in HPV-related squamous cell carcinoma (85·8%, 95% CI 72·1-95·4; I2=56·4%, pheterogeneity=0·0011) as compared with non-HPV-related squamous cell carcinoma (17·1%, 7·9-29·1; I2=78·3%, pheterogeneity<0·0001). Moreover, among HPV-positive cases of penile cancer, the p16INK4a percent positivity was 79·6% (95% CI 65·7-90·7; I2=89·9%, pheterogeneity<0·0001), compared with 18·5% (9·6-29·6; I2=89·3%, pheterogeneity<0·0001) in HPV-negative penile cancers. The pooled p16INK4a percent positivity in penile intraepithelial neoplasia (six studies; n=167) was 49·5% (95% CI 18·6-80·7). INTERPRETATION: A large proportion of penile cancers and penile intraepithelial neoplasias are associated with infection with HPV DNA (predominantly HPV16), emphasising the possible benefits of HPV vaccination in men and boys. FUNDING: None.

Prognostic Significance of HPV and p16 Status in Men Diagnosed with Penile Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

It has been shown that human papillomavirus (HPV) and p16 status has prognostic value in some HPV-associated cancers. However, studies examining survival in men with penile cancer according to HPV or p16 status are often inconclusive, mainly because of small study populations. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the association between HPV DNA and p16 status and survival in men diagnosed with penile cancer. Multiple electronic databases were searched. Twenty studies were ultimately included and study-specific and pooled HRs of overall survival and disease-specific survival (DSS) were calculated using a fixed effects model. In the analysis of DSS, we included 649 men with penile cancer tested for HPV (27% were HPV-positive) and 404 men tested for p16 expression (47% were p16-positive). The pooled HRHPV of DSS was 0.61 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.38-0.98], and the pooled HRp16 of DSS was 0.45 (95% CI, 0.30-0.69). In conclusion, men with HPV or p16-positive penile cancer have a significantly more favorable DSS compared with men with HPV or p16-negative penile cancer. These findings point to the possible clinical value of HPV and p16 testing when planning the most optimal management and follow-up strategy. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 27(10); 1123-32. ©2018 AACR.

Does HPV status influence survival after vulvar cancer?

High-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is essential in the carcinogenesis of a substantial part of anogenital and oropharyngeal cancers and has additionally been shown to be a possible predictive marker for survival, especially in oropharyngeal cancer. Studies examining the influence of HPV status on survival after vulvar cancer have been conflicting and limited by small study populations. Therefore, the aim of this review and meta-analysis was to examine whether HPV status influences survival after vulvar cancer, which, to our knowledge, has not been done before. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase to identify studies examining survival after histologically verified and HPV tested vulvar cancer. A total of 18 studies were eligible for inclusion. Study-specific and pooled HRs of the 5-year OS and DFS were calculated using a fixed effects model. The I2 statistic was used to describe heterogeneity. The studies included a total of 1,638 women with HPV tested vulvar cancers of which 541 and 1,097 were HPV-positive and HPV-negative, respectively. Fifteen studies included only squamous cell carcinomas. We found a pooled HR of 0.61 (95% CI: 0.48-0.77) and 0.75 (95% CI: 0.57-1.00) for 5-year OS and DFS, respectively. Across study heterogeneity was moderate to high (OS: I2 = 51%; DFS: I2 = 73%). In conclusion, women with HPV-positive vulvar cancers have a superior survival compared to women with HPV-negative, which could be of great clinical interest and provides insight into the differences in the natural history of HPV-positive and negative vulvar cancers.