Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
190,839 studies31 sourcesUpdated 46 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY-NCCancer management and research

Heterogeneity of GYPC Methylation and p16/Ki67 Immunostaining in Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia: Implications for Risk Stratification.

  1. 1Department of Pathology, The Affiliated Changsha Central Hospital, Hengyang Medical School, University of South China, Changsha, 410004, People's Republic of China.

Abstract

Background

GYPC methylation (GYPCm )is an early event in cancer transformation, whereas p16 and Ki67 are critical markers in cervical lesion pathology. This study aimed to explore the relationship between GYPCm status and the immunohistochemical markers p16, Ki67, and the combined immunostaining score (IS) in cervical lesions.Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 203 histologically confirmed cervical lesion specimens collected from October 2022 to July 2023. The specimens included 79 cases of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 1 (CIN1) (38.9%), 48 cases of CIN2 (23.6%), 66 cases of CIN3 (32.5%), and 10 cases of cervical squamous cell carcinoma (SCC; 4.9%). Immunohistochemical staining for p16 and Ki67, as well as GYPCm testing, was performed. The association between GYPCm and IS was assessed.Results

GYPCm ΔCp decreased with increasing severity of cervical lesions (Cuzick trend test, P < 0.001). p16, Ki67, and IS showed an increasing trend with the severity of cervical lesions (all P trend < 0.001). Moreover, GYPCm increased with p16, Ki67, and IS (all P trend < 0.001). An IS of 5-6 and high GYPCm were observed in all SCC cases. Heterogeneity of GYPCm and IS was present in CIN: in CIN1, 15 cases had an IS of 3-4 with a moderate or high GYPCm . In CIN2, seven cases had an IS of 3-4 with low GYPCm .Conclusion

Significant heterogeneity in IS and GYPCm exists in CIN. These findings suggest that GYPCm combined with p16/Ki67 immunostaining may be useful for risk stratification of cervical lesions. However, because this was a retrospective cross-sectional study without longitudinal follow-up, the value of these markers in predicting short-term cancer progression requires prospective validation before they can be used to guide personalized management.

Related

  1. Integrated multi-omics reveals methylation-linked biological heterogeneity in intermediate-risk pediatric acute myeloid leukemia
    Harshita Makkar, Jagdish Prasad Meena, Riyaz Ahmad Mir +18
    iSciencePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Genetics & genomicsImmunologyCrossrefCell Press
  2. Radiomics-based machine learning models decipher heterogeneity of anoikis-related molecular subtypes for prognostic stratification in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma
    Linyong Wu, Dayou Wei, Wubiao Chen +4
    Translational cancer researchPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-NDFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  3. Selection without Collider Stratification can Bias Instrumental Variable Analyses in the Presence of Causal Effect Heterogeneity
    A. Gkatzionis, F. P. Hartwig, K. Tilling
    medRxivPreprintCC BY-NCFull textEpidemiology & public healthmedRxiv
  4. RNF152 promoter methylation and gene expression in oral premalignant lesions and oral squamous cell carcinoma: implications for epigenetic biomarker development
    Madona Gjona, Seval Turna, Cömert Şen +6
    Frontiers in oncologyPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textOncologyEurope PMC
  5. Multimodal preoperative risk stratification of pancreatic mass lesions using clinical variables, imaging radiomics and plasma cfDNA methylation: protocol for an ambispective multicentre diagnostic prediction model study
    Ziru Xue, Wenning Jia, Xiaoling Weng +4
    BMJ OpenPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC 4.0Full textMedical imaging & radiologyCrossrefPMC
BibTeX
@article{lian2026heterogeneity,
  title = {{Heterogeneity of GYPC Methylation and p16/Ki67 Immunostaining in Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia: Implications for Risk Stratification.}},
  author = {Yixiang Lian and Haijun Luo and Jing Zhou and Can Gong and Shali Jiang},
  journal = {Cancer management and research},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.2147/cmar.s653756},
  url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42960123},
  note = {CC BY-NC},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Heterogeneity of GYPC Methylation and p16/Ki67 Immunostaining in Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia: Implications for Risk Stratification.
AU  - Yixiang Lian
AU  - Haijun Luo
AU  - Jing Zhou
AU  - Can Gong
AU  - Shali Jiang
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/25
JO  - Cancer management and research
DO  - 10.2147/cmar.s653756
UR  - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42960123
AB  - Background  GYPC methylation (GYPCm )is an early event in cancer transformation, whereas p16 and Ki67 are critical markers in cervical lesion pathology. This study aimed to explore the relationship between GYPCm status and the immunohistochemical markers p16, Ki67, and the combined immunostaining score (IS) in cervical lesions.Methods  A retrospective analysis was conducted on 203 histologically confirmed cervical lesion specimens collected from October 2022 to July 2023. The specimens included 79 cases of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 1 (CIN1) (38.9%), 48 cases of CIN2 (23.6%), 66 cases of CIN3 (32.5%), and 10 cases of cervical squamous cell carcinoma (SCC; 4.9%). Immunohistochemical staining for p16 and Ki67, as well as GYPCm testing, was performed. The association between GYPCm and IS was assessed.Results  GYPCm ΔCp decreased with increasing severity of cervical lesions (Cuzick trend test, P < 0.001). p16, Ki67, and IS showed an increasing trend with the severity of cervical lesions (all P trend < 0.001). Moreover, GYPCm increased with p16, Ki67, and IS (all P trend < 0.001). An IS of 5-6 and high GYPCm were observed in all SCC cases. Heterogeneity of GYPCm and IS was present in CIN: in CIN1, 15 cases had an IS of 3-4 with a moderate or high GYPCm . In CIN2, seven cases had an IS of 3-4 with low GYPCm .Conclusion  Significant heterogeneity in IS and GYPCm exists in CIN. These findings suggest that GYPCm combined with p16/Ki67 immunostaining may be useful for risk stratification of cervical lesions. However, because this was a retrospective cross-sectional study without longitudinal follow-up, the value of these markers in predicting short-term cancer progression requires prospective validation before they can be used to guide personalized management.
SN  - 1179-1322
ER  -