Human Papillomavirus and Oral Cancer: the International Agency for Research on Cancer Multicenter Study

Background: Human papillomavirus (HPV), the causal agent of cervical cancer, appears to be involved in the etiology of cancer of the oral cavity and oropharynx. To investigate these associations, we conducted a multicenter case-control study of cancer of the oral cavity and oropharynx in nine countries. Methods: We recruited 1670 case patients (1415 with cancer of the oral cavity and 255 with cancer of the oropharynx) and 1732 control subjects and obtained an interview, oral exfoliated cells, and blood from all participants and fresh biopsy specimens from case patients. HPV DNA was detected by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Antibodies against HPV16 L1, E6, and E7 proteins in plasma were detected with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. Multivariable models were used for case-control and case-case comparisons. Results: HPV DNA was detected in biopsy specimens of 3.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]=2.5% to 5.3%) of 766 cancers of the oral cavity with valid PCR results and 18.3% (95% CI=12.0% to 24.7%) of 142 cancers of the oropharynx (oropharynx and tonsil combined) with valid PCR results. HPV DNA in cancer biopsy specimens was detected less frequently among tobacco smokers and paan chewers and more frequently among subjects who reported more than one sexual partner or who practiced oral sex. HPV16 DNA was found in 94.7% of HPV DNA-positive case patients. HPV DNA in exfoliated cells was not associated with cancer risk or with HPV DNA detection in biopsy specimens. Antibodies against HPV16 L1 were associated with risk for cancers of the oral cavity (odds ratio [OR]=1.5, 95% CI=1.1 to 2.1) and the oropharynx (OR=3.5, 95% CI=2.1 to 5.9). Antibodies against HPV16 E6 or E7 were also associated with risk for cancers of the oral cavity (OR=2.9, 95% CI=1.7 to 4.8) and the oropharynx (OR=9.2, 95% CI=4.8 to 17.7). Conclusions: HPV appears to play an etiologic role in many cancers of the oropharynx and possibly a small subgroup of cancers of the oral cavity. The most common HPV type in genital cancers (HPV16) was also the most common in these tumors. The mechanism of transmission of HPV to the oral cavity warrants further investigation.

Randomised controlled trial of effects of Helicobacter pylori infection and its eradication on heartburn and gastro-oesophageal reflux: the bristol helicobacter project

Objectives To investigate the effects of Helicobacter pylori infection and its eradication on heartburn and gastro-oesophageal reflux. Design Cross sectional study, followed by a randomised placebo controlled trial. Setting Seven general practices in Bristol, England. Participants 10 537 people, aged 20-59 years, with and without H pylori infection (determined by the 13C-urea breath test). Main outcome measures Prevalence of heartburn and gastro-oesophageal acid reflux at baseline and two years after treatment to eradicate H pylori infection. Results At baseline, H pylori infection was associated with increased prevalence of heartburn (odds ratio 1.14, 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 1.23) but not reflux (1.05, 0.97 to 1.14). In participants with H pylori infection, active treatment had no effect on the overall prevalence of heartburn (0.99, 0.88 to 1.12) or reflux (1.04, 0.91 to 1.19) and did not improve pre-existing symptoms of heartburn or reflux. Conclusions H pylori infection is associated with a slightly increased prevalence of heartburn but not reflux. Treatment to eradicate H pylori has no net benefit in patients with heartburn or gastro-oesophageal reflux

Randomized controlled trial of interferential therapy and manipulative therapy for acute low back pain.

Study Design. A multi-center assessor-blinded randomized clinical trial was conducted. Objectives. To investigate the relative effectiveness of interferential therapy and manipulative therapy for patients with acute low back pain when used as sole treatments and in combination. Summary of Background Data. Both manipulative therapy and interferential therapy are commonly used treatments for low back pain. Evidence for the effectiveness of manipulative therapy is available only for the short term. There is no evidence for interferential therapy and no study has investigated the effectiveness of interferential therapy combined with manipulative therapy. Methods. Consenting subjects (n=240) were randomly assigned to receive a copy of the Back Book and either manipulative therapy (MT; n=80), interferential therapy (IFT; n=80) or combined manipulative therapy and interferential therapy (CT; n=80). Follow-up outcome questionnaires were posted at discharge, 6 and 12 months. Results. The groups were balanced at baseline for low back pain and demographic characteristics. All interventions were found to significantly reduce functional disability and pain and increase quality of life at discharge and to maintain these improvements at 6 and 12 months. No significant differences were found between groups for reported LBP recurrence, work absenteeism, medication consumption, exercise participation and healthcare use at 12 months. Conclusions. For acute low back pain, interferential therapy whether used in isolation or in combination with manipulative therapy was as effective as manipulative therapy alone (in addition to the Back Book).

A descriptive study of the usage of spinal manipulative therapy techniques within a randomised clinical trial in acute low back pain

The majority of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of spinal manipulative therapy have not adequately de?ned the terms ‘mobilization’ and ‘manipulation’, nor distinguished between these terms in reporting the trial interventions. The purpose of this study was to describe the spinal manipulative therapy techniques utilized within a RCT of manipulative therapy (MT; n=80), interferential therapy (IFT; n=80), and a combination of both (CT; n=80) for people with acute low back pain (LBP). Spinal manipulative therapy was de?ned as any ‘mobilization’ (low velocity manual force without a thrust) or ‘manipulation’ (high velocity
thrust) techniques of the spine described by Maitland and Cyriax.
The 16 physiotherapists, all members of the Society of Orthopaedic Medicine, utilized three spinal manipulative therapy patterns in the RCT: Maitland Mobilization (40.4%, n=59), Maitland Mobilization/Cyriax Manipulation (40.4%, n=59) and Cyriax Manipulation (19.1%, n=28). There was a signi?cant difference between the MT and CT groups in their usage of spinal manipulative therapy techniques (w2=9.178; df=2;P=0.01); subjects randomized to the CT group received three times more Cyriax Manipulation (29.2%, n=21/72) than those randomized to the MT group (9.5%, n=7/74; df=1; P=0.003).
The use of mobilization techniques within the trial was comparable with their usage by the general population of physiotherapists in Britain and Ireland for LBP management. However, the usage of manipulation techniques was considerably higher than reported in physiotherapy surveys and may re?ect the postgraduate training of trial therapists.