There have been hundreds of articles that talked about
HPV and oral dating back decades. They were observations of single patients sometimes, small studies, or often just anecdotal, single institution's experience, publications. Gillison, put the nail in the coffin with a study that took all the words "maybe" "could be" "worthy of further exploration" out of the dialog.
Ever since the cervical confirmation, there have been many isolated findings of
HPV in various incarnations (#16, 18, 33, etc.) being tied to cellular event cascades that lead to a malignancy in oral. If you look at Gillison's work, not only did she put the issue to rest, her subsequent publications in peer reviewed journals defined the anatomical sites it occurs in, demographics of those likely to have the disease, transmission mechanisms, and so much more, continually building on her early work. This continuation of unveiling more and more about the situation is what she is recognized for.
OCF is sponsoring a gathering of 14
HPV experts from around the world for two days in London late this summer, to put together some formal "what we know" position statements, that will be published and presented at the following World Oral Medicine meeting in London shortly thereafter. There is little question that as in most things, researchers from the world over, all work in concert, each elucidating a small detail that allows others to build on the knowledge base. Synergy.
Please also note that what you are linking to here is a
news story, which is not the same as a peer reveiwed publication, even though it apears in a journal that has them. It contains the authors' opinions mixed with facts. That doesn't mean that his opinions are not valid, it means that they are exactly that.... his opinions and those of the people he has quotes from. The article is also two years old, and there have been many robust, peer reviewed publications since this was written, that make his statements less valid today than they were at the time. One that resonates with me is is statement that oral cancer is rare. It is not. in the last two years it has gone from a world incidence of about 400,000 per year to 600,000 per year, which hardly seems rare to me. Such is the nature of science and scientific knowledge.... it evolves.
Lastly, note that Dr. Sudbo referenced in the article, was discredited and is no longer a researcher, for falsifying data on oral cancer studies to obtain funding. His research was related to ploidy of cells, and a very promising world wide effort of many researchers working to understand the nature of this issue in being able to determine high risk patients, was trashed before we ever learned if it was valuable or not.
I would also like to state a personal bias. Dr. Gillison is a member of the OCF science advisory board, and OCF has contributed funding to her research work since 2004 at both Johns Hopkins Cancer Center and the James Cancer Center where she is now. I am grateful to have a relationship with her that allows me to learn at the hands of someone way out of my league, who will take the time to ensure that I understand the facts correctly. She is a pure researcher, she states what the science states, without personal bias related to the outcome.
