Human papillomavirus integration transforms chromatin to drive oncogenesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Human papillomavirus (HPV) drives almost all cervical cancers and up to 70% of head and neck cancers. Frequent integration into the host genome occurs predominantly in tumorigenic types of HPV. We hypothesize that changes in chromatin state at the location of integration can result in changes in gene expression that contribute to the tumorigenicity of HPV. Results We find that viral integration events often occur along with changes in chromatin state and expression of genes near the integration site. We investigate whether introduction of new transcription factor binding sites due to HPV integration could invoke these changes. Some regions within the HPV genome, particularly the position of a conserved CTCF binding site, show enriched chromatin accessibility signal. ChIP-seq reveals that the conserved CTCF binding site within the HPV genome binds CTCF in 4 HPV + cancer cell lines. Significant changes in CTCF binding pattern and increases in chromatin accessibility occur exclusively within 100 kbp of HPV integration sites. The chromatin changes co-occur with out-sized changes in transcription and alternative splicing of local genes. Analysis of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) HPV + tumors indicates that HPV integration upregulates genes which have significantly higher essentiality scores compared to randomly selected upregulated genes from the same tumors. Conclusions Our results suggest that introduction of a new CTCF binding site due to HPV integration reorganizes chromatin state and upregulates genes essential for tumor viability in some HPV + tumors. These findings emphasize a newly recognized role of HPV integration in oncogenesis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".