Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Human Papillomavirus and Management of Cervical Cancer: Does Genotype Matter

  • Management of HPV and Associated Cervical Lesions (C-H Lai, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Obstetrics and Gynecology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection has been established as an etiologic agent for cervical carcinoma (CC). Optimal management of CC depends on precise tumor staging and thorough evaluation of tumor characteristics. HPV-18 is a predictor of poor prognosis in stage I-IIA CC patients receiving primary surgery, while α7-related HPVs are predictors of poor outcomes in locally advanced CC. A high-risk group defined by preoperative variables including HPV-18 positivity is associated with a high probability of postoperative radiotherapy or concurrent chemoradiation (RT/CCRT). Additional HPV genotyping can help to select appropriate patients for primary radical hysterectomy. HPV-16 negativity indicates poor prognosis in cervical adeno-adenosquamous carcinoma (AD/ASC), especially for those treated with primary RT/CCRT. Patients with HPV-16-negative AD/ASCs might better be treated with primary surgery (e.g., primary radical hysterectomy for stage I-II and pelvic exenteration for stage IVA). Multi-country and multi-center studies are necessary to verify the findings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. GLOBOCAN 2012. http://globocan.iarc.fr/Pages/fact_sheets_population.aspx.

  2. Waggoner SE. Cervical cancer. Lancet. 2003;361:2217–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Cervical Cancer. Version 3.2013. NCCN.org http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/cervical.pdf.

  4. Lai CH, Chang CJ, Huang HJ, et al. Role of human papillomavirus genotype in prognosis of early-stage cervical cancer undergoing primary surgery. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3628–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Pecorelli S, Zigliani L, Odicino F. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the cervix. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2009;105:107–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Stehman FB, Bundy BN, DiSaia PJ, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix treated with radiation therapy. I. A multi-variate analysis of prognostic variables in the Gynecologic Oncology Group. Cancer. 1991;67:2776–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Grigsby PW, Heydon K, Mutch DG, et al. Long-term follow-up of RTOG 92-10: cervical cancer with positive para-aortic lymph nodes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;51:982–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kang S, Nam BH, Park JY, et al. Risk assessment tool for distant recurrence after platinum-based concurrent chemoradiation in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer: a Korean gynecologic oncology group study. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:2369–74. This multicenter retrospective study showed that four prognostic parameters were significant in predicting distant failure after platinum-based CCRT; this model can select a patient population for future trials for locally advanced CC.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lai CH, Yen TC, Ng KK. Molecular imaging in the management of cervical cancer. Journal of the Formos Med Assoc. 2012; 111:412-20. This article provides a thorough review of published literature on PET and MRI in the management of CC, as well as of new technologies in molecular imaging.

  10. Chao A, Ho KC, Wang CC, et al. Positron emission tomography in evaluating the feasibility of curative intent in cervical cancer patients with limited distant lymph node metastases. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;110:172–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Buda A, Fossati R, Colombo N, et al. Randomized trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy comparing paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and cisplatin with ifosfamide and cisplatin followed by radical surgery in patients with locally advanced squamous cell cervical carcinoma: the SNAP01 (Studio Neo-Adjuvante Portio) Italian Collaborative Study. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:4137–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Green JA, Kirwan JM, Tierney JF, et al. Survival and recurrence after concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy for cancer of the uterine cervix: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2001;358:781–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Duenas-Gonzalez A, Zarba JJ, Patel F, et al. Phase III, open-label, randomized study comparing concurrent gemcitabine plus cisplatin and radiation followed by adjuvant gemcitabine and cisplatin versus concurrent cisplatin and radiation in patients with stage IIB to IVA carcinoma of the cervix. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:1678–85. This prospective randomized trial suggested that gemcitabine plus cisplatin CCRT followed by adjuvant gemcitabine/cisplatin chemotherapy improved overall and progression-free survival with nearly double the risk of toxicities when compared with cisplatin-alone CCRT standard treatment.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Wang KL, Chang TC, Jung SM, et al. Primary treatment and prognostic factors of small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the uterine cervix: a Taiwanese Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48:1484–94. This multicenter retrospective study found that CCRT with etoposide and platinum for at least five cycles might be the best treatment for small-cell neuroendocrine CC.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Huang YT, Wang CC, Tsai CS, et al. Long-term outcome and prognostic factors for adenocarcinoma/adenosquamous carcinoma of cervix after definitive radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;80:429–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Chou HH, Chang HP, Lai CH, et al. (18)F-FDG PET in stage IB/IIB cervical adenocarcinoma/adenosquamous carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:728–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. zur Hausen H. Papillomaviruses causing cancer: evasion from host-cell control in early events in carcinogenesis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:690–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Schiffman MH, Castle P. Epidemiologic studies of a necessary causal risk factor: human papillomavirus infection and cervical neoplasia. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95:E2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Munoz N, Bosch FX, de Sanjose S, et al. Epidemiologic classification of human papillomavirus types associated with cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:518–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Walboomers JM, Jacobs MV, Manos MM, et al. Human papillomavirus is a necessary cause of invasive cervical cancer worldwide. J Pathol. 1999;189:12–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kang WD, Kim CH, Cho MK, et al. HPV-18 is a poor prognostic factor, unlike the HPV viral load, in patients with stage IB-IIA cervical cancer undergoing radical hysterectomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2011;121:546–50. This study found that HPV-18 genotype was a reliable prognostic factor of early-stage CC, but that the HPV viral load might be not helpful in predicting prognosis.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Wang CC, Lai CH, Huang HJ, et al. Clinical effect of human papillomavirus genotypes in patients with cervical cancer undergoing primary radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;78:1111–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kim SY, Park SP, Nam BH. Low initial human papilloma viral load implicates worse prognosis in patients with uterine cervical cancer treated with radiotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2009;20(27):5088–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Wang CC, Lai CH, Huang YT, et al. HPV genotypes predict survival benefits from concurrent chemotherapy and radiation therapy in advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;84:e499–506. This retrospective study demonstrated that benefit of CCRT was more significant in CC patients with HPV18 and HPV58, but not in those with HPV16 and HPV33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Clifford G, Franceschi S. Members of the human papillomavirus type 18 family (alpha-7 species) share a common association with adenocarcinoma of the cervix. Int J Cancer. 2008;122:1684–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lai CH, Chou HH, Chang CJ, et al. Clinical implications of human papillomavirus genotype in cervical adeno-adenosquamous carcinoma. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49:633–41. This single-institution retrospective study found that patients with an HPV16-negative tumor might better be treated with primary surgery. Those with an unresectable HPV16-negative tumor (stage IIIB) should undergo CCRT in combination with novel drugs.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Qiu JT, Abdullah NA, Chou HH, et al. Outcomes and prognosis of patients with recurrent cervical cancer after radical hysterectomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;127:472–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Elit L, Fyles AW, Devries MC, et al. Follow-up for women after treatment for cervical cancer: a systematic review. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;114:528–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Esajas MD, Duk JM, de Bruijn HW, et al. Clinical value of routine serum squamous cell carcinoma antigen in follow-up of patients with early-stage cervical cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:3960–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Maiman M. The clinical application of serum squamous cell carcinoma antigen level monitoring in invasive cervical carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2002;84:4–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Gadducci A, Tana R, Fanucchi A, et al. Biochemical prognostic factors and risk of relapses in patients with cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;107:S23–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Song YJ, Kim JY, Lee SK, et al. Persistent human papillomavirus DNA is associated with local recurrence after radiotherapy of uterine cervical cancer. Int J Cancer. 2011;129:896–902.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Schwarz JK, Lin LL, Siegel BA, et al. 18-F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography evaluation of early metabolic response during radiation therapy for cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;72:1502–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. de Azevedo AE, Carneiro FP, Neto FF, et al. Association between human papillomavirus infection and cytological abnormalities during early follow-up of invasive cervical cancer. J Med Virol. 2012;84:1115–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Yen TC, See LC, Chang TC, et al. Defining the priority of using 18F-FDG PET for recurrent cervical cancer. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:1632–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Chao A, Lin CT, Lai CH. Updates in systemic treatment for metastatic cervical cancer. Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2014; Epub ahead of print. doi:10.1007/s11864-013-0273-1.

  37. Moody CA, Laimins LA. Human papillomavirus oncoproteins: pathways to transformation. Nat Rev Cancer. 2010;10:550–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Ojesina AI, Lichtenstein L, Freeman SS, et al. Landscape of genomic alterations in cervical carcinomas. Nature. 2013; Epub ahead of print. doi:10.1038/nature12881. A comprehensive genomic analysis of cervical cancer that further elucidated the role of HPV infection in cervical carcinogenesis. The mutations found may also form the basis for the development of therapeutics against these genes.

  39. Zandberg DP, Bhargava R, Badin S, et al. The role of human papillomavirus in nongenital cancers. CA Cancer J Clin. 2013;63:57–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Ang KK, Harris J, Wheeler R, et al. Human papillomavirus and survival of patients with oropharyngeal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:24–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. O'Rorke MA, Ellison MV, Murray LJ, et al. Human papillomavirus related head and neck cancer survival: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oral Oncol. 2012;48:1191–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Kreimer AR, Clifford GM, Boyle P, et al. Human papillomavirus types in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas worldwide: a systematic review. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14:467–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Walline HM, Komarck C, McHugh JB, et al. High-risk human papillomavirus detection in oropharyngeal, nasopharyngeal, and oral cavity cancers: comparison of multiple methods. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013;139:1320–7. PCR-MassArray and p16 immunostaining provided accurate assessment of HPV presence, type, and oncogenic activity in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded head and neck tumor tissue specimens.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Weinberger PM, Yu Z, Haffty BG, et al. Molecular classification identifies a subset of human papillomavirus–associated oropharyngeal cancers with favorable prognosis. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:736–47.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Conway C, Chalkley R, High A, et al. Next-generation sequencing for simultaneous determination of human papillomavirus load, subtype, and associated genomic copy number changes in tumors. J Mol Diagn. 2012;14:104–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Klussmann JP, Mooren JJ, Lehnen M, et al. Genetic signatures of HPV-related and unrelated oropharyngeal carcinoma and their prognostic implications. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15:1779–86.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by grants from the Chang Gung Medical Foundation (OMRPG3A0041) and the Ministry of Health and Welfare, Taiwan (DOH102-TD-B-111-005).

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

ᅟ

Conflict of Interest

Chyong-Huey Lai received a travel grant from GSK.

Angel Chaoa, Chun-Chieh Wang, and Huei-Jean Huang declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Role of funding source

Department of Health-Taiwan was not involved in the design of the study, collection, management, analysis or interpretation of the data, preparation, review or approval of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan

    Chyong-Huey Lai, Angel Chao, Chun-Chieh Wang & Huei-Jean Huang

  2. Gynecologic Cancer Research Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan

    Chyong-Huey Lai, Angel Chao, Chun-Chieh Wang & Huei-Jean Huang

  3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan

    Chun-Chieh Wang

  4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital Linkou Medical Center, 5 Fu-Shin St., Kueishan, Taoyuan, 333, Taiwan

    Chyong-Huey Lai

Authors
  1. Chyong-Huey Lai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Angel Chao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chun-Chieh Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Huei-Jean Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chyong-Huey Lai.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lai, CH., Chao, A., Wang, CC. et al. Human Papillomavirus and Management of Cervical Cancer: Does Genotype Matter. Curr Obstet Gynecol Rep 3, 136–142 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13669-014-0077-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13669-014-0077-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation