Prevalence of human papillomavirus in oral epithelial dysplasia: Systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to estimate the overall and type-specific prevalence of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA in oral epithelial dysplasia and assess p16INK4a overexpression in relation to HPV-status. A systematic literature search identified 31 eligible studies (832 cases) evaluating the presence of HPV DNA in oral epithelial dysplasia cases by PCR. Of these, six studies evaluated p16INK4a overexpression in relation to HPV-status. The overall pooled prevalence of HPV DNA in oral epithelial dysplasia was 27.2% (95% CI: 17.6-38.1). We observed substantial interstudy heterogeneity, which could not be explained by differences in continent, tissue type, or severity of epithelial dysplasia. HPV16 was the predominant genotype detected. Moreover, 62.2% of HPV positive and 17.8% of HPV negative oral epithelial dysplasia samples stained intensively positive for p16INK4a . This meta-analysis found that 27% of oral epithelial dysplasia harbor HPV DNA. Whether this represents a transient infection or has a carcinogenic role is unknown.
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Understanding the factors influencing fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda J.E. Smith) damage in African smallholder maize fields and quantifying its impact on yield. A case study in Eastern Zimbabwe
- Alarming situation of emerging H5 and H7 avian influenza and effective control strategies
- Livestock and food security: vulnerability to population growth and climate change
- Atmosphere–ocean oxygen and productivity dynamics during early animal radiations
- Characterization of the global distribution and diversified plasmid reservoirs of the colistin resistance gene mcr-9
- The global seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii in pigs: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.