Evaluation of human papillomavirus type 16 viral load and genome physical status in Iranian women with cervical disease

BACKGROUND

This study examined the viral load and physical status of the human papillomavirus 16 (HPV-16) genome in non-cancerous, precancerous and cancerous cervical lesions.

METHODS

Quantitative real-time PCR was performed to determine HPV-16 E2 and E6 viral load in 132 cervical specimens. E2/E6 viral load ratio was used to determine the physical status of HPV-16 genome.

RESULTS

E2 gene viral load was a significant (P < 0.001) predicting biomarker in differentiating non-cancerous from precancerous and cancerous samples. E6 gene viral load was significantly different between the groups (P < 0.001). The specificity and sensitivity of E2 and E6 in distinguishing SCC samples were 100% and 95% respectively.

CONCLUSION

HPV-16 viral load measured through E2 and E6 genes is a reliable indicator of lesion type.

Utility of human papillomavirus L1 capsid protein and HPV test as prognostic markers for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2+ in women with persistent ASCUS /LSIL cervical cytology

Objective: Efficient and highly predictive biomarkers reflecting the prognosis of persistent atypical squamous cells of unknown significance(ASCUS) and low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion(LSIL)s are unavailable and need to be developed urgently. We aimed to develop a predictive model for diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia(CIN)2+ by analyzing the immunocytochemical expression of the HPV L1 capsid protein in patients with persistent ASCUS and LSIL with a high risk of HPV infection. Methods: Cervical cytology samples comprising (70 ASCUS and 215 LSIL Pap smears) were analyzed. Immunocytochemical identification of the HPV L1 capsid protein in cervical cytology samples was performed. Expression levels of HPV L1 capsid protein in cervical cytology samples were measured, and the correlation between HPV L1 expression and cervical pathologic diagnosis was evaluated. The risk for CIN2+ was calculated using the results of immunocytochemistry and the HPV DNA test. Results: Negative results for HPV L1 immunochemistry test were more frequently observed in CIN2+, and expression of the HPV L1 capsid protein was higher in CIN1 or cervicitis (Fisher's exact test, p<0.05). Diagnosis rates for CIN2+ were highest for the combination of HPV L1 capsid protein immunocytochemistry, cytology and HPV test when compared with other combinations (Akaike information criterion (AIC): 191.7, Schwarz criterion(SC): 206.3, p<0.001). Conclusion: Absence of HPV L1 capsid expression and presence of HPV type 16 or 18 infection are reliable predictors of progression to CIN2+ in patients showing persistent ASCUS and LSIL.