Abstract
We have compared the efficacy of digoxigenin- and biotin-labelled probes in detecting HPV DNA by in situ hybridization on paraffin-embedded tissue sections of 57 male condyloma-suspect genital lesions. Each biopsy was hybridized with at least three of the following four methods: digoxigenin-labelled HPV DNA probes (Dig-HPV), biotinylated HPV-DNA probes (Bio-HPV), and two commercial methods (ViraType in situ and PathoGene), both based on biotinylated DNA probes. The hybridization products were visualized with colourigenic enzyme substrates.
In most biopsies, the 4 methods gave equal results although cross-hybridization was most often found with the low-stringency ViraType method. Dig-HPV 6/11 probes gave positive results about twice as often as either of the commercial methods. No such difference, however, was found for HPV 16/18 probes.
DNA of any type of HPV 6/11, 16/18 or 31/33/35 or 51 was detected in 28/43 (65%) of lesions showing condyloma acuminatum histology but in none of the 14 biopsies with no histological signs of HPV infection. In HPV-positive condylomata with no cellular atypia. HPV 6/11 was detected in 87% (13/15), and HPV 16/18 in 27% (4/15). In biopsies with cellular atypia, HPV types 6/11 were detected in 62% (8/13), HPV types 16/18 in 46% (6/13), and HPV types 31/33/35 or 51 in 50% (6/12). In about 50% of the biopsies where at least one hybridization method gave a positive result, either one of the commercial methods gave a negative result. Thus, in situ hybridization using digoxigenin-labelled HPV DNA probes is at least as sensitive a method for HPV detection in paraffin embedded biopsy tissue as in situ hybridization using biotin-labelled probes. Combination of in situ hybridization using digoxigenin-labelled HPV DNA probes with in situ hybridization with biotinylated HPV DNA probes may further improve sensitivity of HPV DNA detection in paraffin-embedded biopsy material.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.