MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract LB-445: Human papillomavirus (HPV) status is a long-term survival indicator for patients with oropharyngeal cancers in British Columbia

2012· article· en· W2326961607 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tarinee Lubpairee, Yiping Liu, John Hay, Tom Thomson, Catherine Poh

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCISHChromogenic in situ hybridizationInternal medicineOncologyIncidence (geometry)Human papillomavirusDiseaseStage (stratigraphy)In situ hybridization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The incidence of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OpSCC) is increasing worldwide. In British Columbia, similar trend is observed. High-risk HPV and p16 have been used as prognostic markers in OpSCC; however, due to the difference in HPV detection methods, the results have been indeterminate. In BC, we do not routinely stain for p16 or investigate tumoral HPV status. This is the first time to link these data with treatment and outcome information. Objectives: To determine HPV status and expression of cyclin D1, p16 and EGFR of OpSCC and their impact on survival. Methods: Patients (N = 151) with primary OpSCC and treated with intent-to-cure at the Vancouver Centre from 2001 to 2007 were retrospectively identified from Pathology database. Outcome data was collected through electronic chart review. Among these patients, 100 (66 %) patients had no recurrence or died without disease at last follow-up (better outcome, Group1) and 50 (33%) patients had persistent disease or died of disease (poorer outcome, Group 2). The high-risk HPV status was determined using Chromogenic in situ hybridization (CISH) (DAKO, Denmark) and expression of p16, EGFR, and cyclin D1 were analyzed using immunohistochemistry. Results: There was no difference in gender, smoking habit, and tumor staging between Groups 1 and 2. However, Group 1 had a significant longer follow-up time comparing to those of Group 2 (50 ± 20 vs. 29 ± 21 months; P < 0.0001). Group1 was 5 years younger than Group 2 (55.5 ± 9.4 vs. 60.1 ± 9.7 years, P= 0.001). HR-HPV had been found in 70% of all cases (N = 105). Group 1 showed significantly higher HR-HPV infection (77% vs. 54%, P = 0.005), more p16 overexpression (80% vs. 64%, P = 0.05), and less cyclin D1 overexpression (16% vs. 36%, P = 0.007). There was no difference observed in EGFR expression. Using Cox Proportional Hazard model for age, sex, treatment type (Surgery and/or radiation, radiation only, combined chemo and radiation therapy), tumor staging (early and late), HPV status, p16, cyclin D1, and EGFR expression, only HPV status (p = 0.0003) and age (p = 0.011) were found to be significant predictors of 5- year survival. After adjusting the age variable, HPV positive patients were 65% less likely to die compared to those HPV negative patients. Those patients with cyclinD1 positive tumors have a 2.8 time elevated risk to die of disease. Conclusion: High frequency of high-risk HPV is identified in OpSCC in British Columbia. Presence of HPV and younger ages have better outcome. The presence of high-risk HPV is an independent factor to long-term survival. (Canadian Cancer Society CCSRI-20336 and BC Cancer Foundation) Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 103rd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2012 Mar 31-Apr 4; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2012;72(8 Suppl):Abstract nr LB-445. doi:1538-7445.AM2012-LB-445

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score0.778

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.073
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.335 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicHead and Neck Cancer Studies→French-language works237,207→