Table 1.
Summary of all 16 studies assessing blood cfHPV-DNA in HPV-related OPSCC included in review and meta-analysis.
| Study | Year | Country | Study Design | Patients (Total/ Control) (n) |
Primary Site of Tumor (n) |
Tissue HPV+ (n) |
Method/Assay | Tumor Stage | Sample | TP | FP | FN | TN | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Cao et al. [22] #** | 2012 | USA | NR | 40/34 | OPSCC (40) | 40 | cPCR qPCR |
I-IV | Plasma | 26 | 0 | 14 | 34 | 65% | 100% |
| 2. Ahn et al. [23] #** | 2014 | USA | Retrospective | 93/9 | OPSCC (87) US (6) |
52 | qPCR | 0-IV | Plasma | 35 | 0 | 17 | 9 | 67% | 100% |
| 3. Dahlstrom et al. [24] #** | 2015 | USA | Prospective | 262/27 | OPSCC (262) | 114 | qPCR | I-IV | Serum | 69 | 0 | 45 | 27 | 61% | 100% |
| 4. Wang et al. [25] # | 2015 | USA | Retrospective | 93/10 | OC (46) OPSCC (34) L(10) HP(3) |
21 | ddPCR | I-IV | Plasma | 18 | 0 | 3 | 10 | 86% | 100% |
| 5. Kuhs et al. [26] # | 2017 | Germany | NR | 161/25 | OPSCC (87) | 87 | Multiplex serologic testing | I-IV | Serum | 78 | 1 | 9 | 24 | 89.70% | 96% |
| 6. Lee et al. [27] #** | 2017 | England | Prospective | 88/14 Test: 55 Validation: 33 |
Test cohort OPSCC (47) L (4) HP (4) |
27 (Test cohort) | HPV16-detect | I-IV | Plasma | 27 | 1 | 0 | 13 | 100% | 93% |
| 7. Chera et al. [28] # | 2019 | USA | Prospective | 103/115 | 103 (OPSCC) | 103 | ddPCR | 0-IV | Plasma | 92 | 3 | 11 | 112 | 89% | 97% |
| 8. Damerla et al. [29] # | 2019 | USA | Retrospective | 105/27 | 97 (OPSCC) 8 (ASCC) |
97 | ddPCR qPCR |
0-IV | Plasma | 93 | 0 | 4 | 27 | 96% | 100% |
| 9. Nguyen et al. [30] # | 2020 | Australia | Prospective | 23/5 | OPSCC (23) | 23 | ddPCR | III-IV | Plasma | 21 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 91% | 100% |
| 10. Reder et al. [31] # | 2020 | Germany | NR | 30/20 | OPSCC (30) | 30 | qPCR | I-IV | Plasma | 23 | 0 | 7 | 20 | 76.60% | 100% |
| Study | Year | Country | Study design | Patients (Total/ Control) (n) |
Primary site of tumor (n) |
Tissue HPV+ (n) |
Method/ Assay |
Tumor stage | Sample | TP | FP | FN | TN | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) |
| 11. Mazurek et al. [32] | 2016 | Poland | NR | 200/15 | 72 (OPSCC) | NR | TaqMan-based TERT amplification | I-IV | Plasma | NR | NR | NR | NR | n.a. | n.a. |
| 12. Jeannot et al. [33] | 2016 | France | Retrospective | 70/18 | UC (47) ASCC (15) HNSCC (8) |
NR | ddPCR qPCR |
II, IV | Serum/Plasma | 8 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 100% | 100% |
| 13. Rutkowski et al. [34] | 2017 | Poland | NR | 179/NR | OPSCC (55) | 47 | TaqMan-based TERT amplification | I-IV | Plasma | NR | NR | NR | NR | n.a. | n.a. |
| 14. Hanna et al. [35] | 2018 | USA | NR | 22/NR | OPSCC (22) | 22 | ddPCR | I-IV | Plasma | NR | NR | NR | NR | n.a. | n.a. |
| 15. Veyer et al. [36] | 2019 | France | NR | 66/NR | OPSCC (66) | 66 | ddPCR | I-IV | Plasma | 47 | NR | 19 | NR | 71% | n.a. |
| 16. Chera et al. [37] ** | 2020 | USA | Prospective | 115/NR | OPSCC (115) | 115 | ddPCR | I-III | Plasma | NR | NR | NR | NR | n.a. | n.a. |
Abbreviations: NR—Not reported, ddPCR—Droplet digital PCR, qPCR— Quantitative PCR, cPCR—Conventional PCR, TP—True positive, FP—False positive, FN—False negative, TN—True negative, OPSCC—Oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma, US—Unknown site, OC—Oral cavity, L—Larynx, HP—Hypopharynx, ASCC—Anal squamous cell carcinoma, UC—Uterine cervix, HNSCC—Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, n.a.—not applicable. # studies included in meta-analysis at first diagnosis and ** studies included in meta-analysis during follow-up.