Knowledge about the human papillomaviruses (HPV) types in anal cancers in some world regions is scanty. Here we describe the HPV DNA prevalence and type distribution in a series of invasive anal cancers and anal intraepithelial neoplasias (AIN) grades 2/3 from 24 countries. We analyzed 43 AIN 2/3 cases and 496 anal cancers diagnosed from 1986 to 2011. After histopathological evaluation of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded samples, HPV DNA detection and genotyping was performed using SPF-10/DEIA/LiPA25 system (version 1). A subset of 116 cancers was further tested for p16INK4a expression, a cellular surrogate marker for HPV-associated transformation. Prevalence ratios were estimated using multivariate Poisson regression with robust variance in cancer dataset. HPV DNA was detected in 88.3% of anal cancers (95%CI:85.1–91.0%) and in 95.4% of AIN 2/3 (95%CI:84.2–99.4%). Among cancers, the highest prevalence was observed in warty-basaloid subtype of squamous cell carcinomas, in younger patients and in North American geographical region. There were no statistically significant differences in prevalence by gender. HPV16 was the most frequent HPV type detected in both cancers (80.7%) and AIN 2/3 lesions (75.4%). HPV18 was the second most common type in invasive cancers (3.6%). p16INK4a overexpression was found in 95% of HPV DNA positive anal cancers. In view of HPV DNA results and high proportion of p16INK4a overexpression, infection by HPV is most likely to be a necessary cause for anal cancers in both men and women. The large contribution of HPV16 reinforces the potential impact of HPV vaccines in the prevention of these lesions.
BackgroundMinimally invasive surgery in cervical cancer has demonstrated in recent publications worse outcomes than open surgery. The primary objective of the SUCCOR study, a European, multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort study was to evaluate disease-free survival in patients with stage IB1 (FIGO 2009) cervical cancer undergoing open vs minimally invasive radical hysterectomy. As a secondary objective, we aimed to investigate the association between protective surgical maneuvers and the risk of relapse.MethodsWe obtained data from 1272 patients that underwent a radical hysterectomy by open or minimally invasive surgery for stage IB1 cervical cancer (FIGO 2009) from January 2013 to December 2014. After applying all the inclusion-exclusion criteria, we used an inverse probability weighting to construct a weighted cohort of 693 patients to compare outcomes (minimally invasive surgery vs open). The first endpoint compared disease-free survival at 4.5 years in both groups. Secondary endpoints compared overall survival among groups and the impact of the use of a uterine manipulator and protective closure of the colpotomy over the tumor in the minimally invasive surgery group.ResultsMean age was 48.3 years (range; 23–83) while the mean BMI was 25.7 kg/m2 (range; 15–49). The risk of recurrence for patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery was twice as high as that in the open surgery group (HR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.35 to 3.15; P=0.001). Similarly, the risk of death was 2.42-times higher than in the open surgery group (HR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.30 to 4.60, P=0.005). Patients that underwent minimally invasive surgery using a uterine manipulator had a 2.76-times higher hazard of relapse (HR, 2.76; 95% CI, 1.75 to 4.33; P<0.001) and those without the use of a uterine manipulator had similar disease-free-survival to the open surgery group (HR, 1.58; 95% CI, 0.79 to 3.15; P=0.20). Moreover, patients that underwent minimally invasive surgery with protective vaginal closure had similar rates of relapse to those who underwent open surgery (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.15 to 2.59; P<0.52).ConclusionsMinimally invasive surgery in cervical cancer increased the risk of relapse and death compared with open surgery. In this study, avoiding the uterine manipulator and using maneuvers to avoid tumor spread at the time of colpotomy in minimally invasive surgery was associated with similar outcomes to open surgery. Further prospective studies are warranted.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.