Purpose: Our aim was to assess the ability of simultaneous immunohistochemical staining (IHC) for p16 and p53 to accurately subclassify head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC) as HPV-associated (HPV-A) versus HPV-independent (HPV-I) and compare p53 IHC staining patterns to TP53 mutation status, p16 IHC positivity and HPV status.
Results: In a majority of cases (28/31) interpretation of p16 and p53 IHC was straightforward; 10 were considered HPV-A (p16+/p53wt) and 18 cases were HPV-I (p16-/p53abn). In the remaining three tumours the unusual immunophenotype was resolved by molecular testing, specifically (i) subclonal p16 staining and wild type p53 staining in a tumour positive for HPV and with no TP53 mutation (HPV-A), (ii) negative p16 and wild type p53 staining with a TP53 mutation and negative for HPV (HPV-I), and (iii) equivocally increased p16 staining with mutant pattern p53 expression, negative HPV ISH and with a TP53 mutation (HPV-I).
Conclusion: Performing p16 and p53 IHC staining simultaneously allows classification of most HNSCC as HPV-A (p16 +, p53 wild type (especially basal sparing or null-like HPV associated staining patterns, which were completely specific for HPV-A SCC) or HPV-I (p16 -, p53 mutant pattern expression), with the potential for limiting additional molecular HPV or mutational testing to selected cases only.
期刊介绍:
Head & Neck Pathology presents scholarly papers, reviews and symposia that cover the spectrum of human surgical pathology within the anatomic zones of the oral cavity, sinonasal tract, larynx, hypopharynx, salivary gland, ear and temporal bone, and neck.
The journal publishes rapid developments in new diagnostic criteria, intraoperative consultation, immunohistochemical studies, molecular techniques, genetic analyses, diagnostic aids, experimental pathology, cytology, radiographic imaging, and application of uniform terminology to allow practitioners to continue to maintain and expand their knowledge in the subspecialty of head and neck pathology. Coverage of practical application to daily clinical practice is supported with proceedings and symposia from international societies and academies devoted to this field.
Single-blind peer review
The journal follows a single-blind review procedure, where the reviewers are aware of the names and affiliations of the authors, but the reviewer reports provided to authors are anonymous. Single-blind peer review is the traditional model of peer review that many reviewers are comfortable with, and it facilitates a dispassionate critique of a manuscript.