HPV-independent Vulvar Squamous Cell Carcinoma is Associated With Significantly Worse Prognosis Compared With HPV-associated Tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vulvar squamous cell carcinomas (VSCC) represent the most common carcinoma of the female external genitalia, with increasing incidence. Although high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection has long been implicated in the majority of cervical and anal squamous cell carcinomas, there is uncertainty about its prevalence and prognostic impact in VSCC. In this study, we conducted a retrospective integrated morphologic and multimodal HPV analysis of a cohort of 114 VSCC cases treated at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre/University Health Network, Toronto, Canada between 2000 and 2010. VSCC histology was reviewed. We analyzed the cohort for HPV using polymerase chain reaction based method, and tissue microarray DNA and RNA in situ hybridization (ISH), and p16 immunohistochemistry. Among the 114 cases (age 70±16 yr), 36.7% of cases were classified as having histomorphology of HPV infection. HPV was detected in 31.9% (polymerase chain reaction), 14.0% (DNA ISH), and 27.3% (RNA ISH) of cases. p16 immunohistochemistry was positive in 37.8% of cases. On univariate analysis, HPV morphology (P=0.009), p16+ (P=0.00013), DNA ISH+ (P=0.021), and RNA ISH+ (P=0.00061) were associated with better 5-yr progression-free survival. DNA ISH+ (P=0.049) was associated with better 5-yr overall survival. On multivariate analysis, HPV morphology (P=0.033), p16+ (P=0.01), and RNA ISH+ (P=0.035) were associated with better 5-yr progression-free survival. In conclusion, a subset of VSCC is associated with HPV, which correlates with better outcome. Relatively inexpensive tests such as histomorphologic evaluation, p16 immunohistochemistry, and HPV RNA ISH can be used to predict outcome in VSCC. Therefore, routine reporting of HPV status in VSCC is recommended.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".