MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409690633 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2025-680

Abstract 680: HPV serology and circulating viral DNA for detection, genotyping, and measurement of disease burden in oropharyngeal cancer

2025· article· en· W4409690633 on OpenAlexaff
Eric Y. Stutheit-Zhao, Birgitta E. Michels, Fabian Rosing, Jinfeng Zou, Zhen Zhao, Yangqiao Zheng, Shao Hui Huang, Johnny Carlton, Andrew McPartlin, John R. de Almeida, David P. Goldstein, Andrew Hope, Ali Hosni, John Kim, Fei‐Fei Liu, C. Jillian Tsai, John Waldron, Anna Spreafico, Enrique Sanz Garcia, Lillian L. Siu, Tim Waterboer, Geoffrey Liu, Scott V. Bratmn

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSerologyGenotypingMedicineCancerVirologyDiseaseImmunologyPathologyAntibodyGenotypeInternal medicineBiologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: The incidence of human papillomavirus-positive (HPV+) oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) has increased rapidly, and HPV early antigen serology has been proposed as a scalable and cost-effective early detection test. HPV seropositivity can precede clinical presentation of OPC by several years, so additional surveillance procedures may be necessary to optimize early cancer detection. The potential for HPV circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) to confirm a diagnosis of OPC in seropositive individuals is poorly understood. Here, we assess the relationship between HPV serology and HPV ctDNA with disease burden in a large cohort of HPV+ OPC. Methods: We analyzed pre-treatment peripheral blood plasma from 262 patients with non-metastatic p16+ OPC treated with definitive (chemo)radiotherapy. A multiplex ELISA was used for serologic evidence of HPV proteins from 10 HPV genotypes, quantified by mean fluorescence intensity (MFI). Plasma HPV ctDNA was quantified by whole viral genome sequencing utilizing a custom HPV-targeted capture panel for 38 HPV genotypes. Gross tumor volume (GTV) was obtained from the sum of all target contours on computed tomography scans. Results: Both assays identified HPV16 as the most prevalent genotype (84%), with results indicating a total of 4 and 6 HPV genotypes for serology and HPV ctDNA, respectively. HPV ctDNA results demonstrated higher sensitivity and lower cross-reactivity between HPV types compared with HPV serology results. Furthermore, HPV ctDNA but not HPV16 E6 antibody levels were positively associated with disease burden as determined by N-category (Table 1) and tumor volume (ctDNA vs GTV, r=0.48 p=6.4e-13; E6 vs GTV, r= -0.079 p=0.26). Conclusion: This is the largest cohort to compare HPV serology and ctDNA results in OPC. These findings highlight the potential for ctDNA to augment future strategies for blood-based early detection of HPV+ OPC. Citation Format: Lucas Penny, Eric Y. Stutheit-Zhao, Birgitta E. Michels, Fabian Rosing, Jinfeng Zou, Zhen Zhao, Yangqiao Zheng, Shao Hui Huang, Johnny Carlton, Andrew McPartlin, John R. de Almeida, David Goldstein, Andrew Hope, Ali Hosni, John Kim, Fei-Fei Liu, C Jillian Tsai, John N. Waldron, Anna Spreafico, Enrique Sanz Garcia, Lillian L. Siu, Tim Waterboer, Geoffrey Liu, Scott V. Bratmn. HPV serology and circulating viral DNA for detection, genotyping, and measurement of disease burden in oropharyngeal cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2025 Apr 25-30; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(8_Suppl_1):Abstract nr 680.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.097
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.325 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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