S. K. Kassim, S. A. Ibrahim, S. Eissa, S. S. A. Zaki, M. A. El-Begermy, M. H. Abdou, M. I. Hassan, A. Khalifa, "Epstein-Barr Virus, Human Papillomavirus, and Flow Cytometric Cell Cycle Kinetics in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma and Inverted Papilloma among Egyptian Patients", Disease Markers, vol. 14, Article ID 260392, 8 pages, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1155/1998/260392
Epstein-Barr Virus, Human Papillomavirus, and Flow Cytometric Cell Cycle Kinetics in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma and Inverted Papilloma among Egyptian Patients
It is widely accepted that the Epstein-Barr virus is etiologically associated with the development of nasopharyngeal carcinoma. The human papillomavirus is also associated with inverted papilloma. We used the polymerase chain reaction technique to detect both viruses in both types of tumors. Flow cytometry was also used to study the DNA pattern and proliferative behavior of the tumors in relation to the viruses. EBV was detected in 13/20 (65%) of NPC specimens, and in none of IP (n = 10) or control specimens (n = 10). This indicates the contribution of EBV as an etiologic factor in NPC. Five cases of NPC (25%) were positive for HPV 16, two of them were EBV positive. Four HPV 16 positive cases were found among cases with inverted papilloma, but none among the control cases. Flow cytometry revealed that all NPC, IP, and control samples were diploid except one aneuploid NPC sample. Proliferative capacity (PC) of primary tumors was predictive of tumor recurrence in NPC. Using 13.6% as a cut-off point for PC, we were able to discriminate between high risk and low risk groups with 100% sensitivity and 86% specificity. PC can be used as a baseline prognostic parameter in NPC, making it possible to modify courses of treatment in an attempt to inhibit tumor recurrence.
Copyright © 1998 Hindawi Publishing Corporation. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.