Literature DB >> 17021097

Cross-sectional comparison of an automated hybrid capture 2 assay and the consensus GP5+/6+ PCR method in a population-based cervical screening program.

A T Hesselink1, N W J Bulkmans, J Berkhof, A T Lorincz, C J L M Meijer, P J F Snijders.   

Abstract

In this cross-sectional study, clinical performances of the hybrid capture 2 assay using an automated instrument (i.e., rapid capture system) (hc2-RCS) and the high-risk human papillomavirus GP5+/6+ PCR-enzyme immunoassay (EIA) test were compared using cervical scrape specimens from 8,132 women that participated in a population-based screening trial. The hc2-RCS test scored significantly more samples positive (6.8%) than the GP5+/6+ PCR-EIA (4.8%) (P < 0.0005). This could be attributed largely to a higher positivity rate by the hc2-RCS test for women with cytologically normal, borderline, or mild dyskaryosis. A receiver operator characteristics analysis of the semiquantitative hc2-RCS results in relation to different cytology categories revealed that these differences are owing to differences in assay thresholds. For women classified as having moderate dyskaryosis or worse who also had underlying histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or cervical cancer (> or =CIN3), the hc2-RCS scored 97% (31/32) of samples positive, versus 91% (29/32) by GP5+/6+ PCR-EIA. However, this difference was not significant (P = 0.25). After increasing the hc2-RCS cutoff from 1.0 to 2.0 relative light units/cutoff value of the HPV16 calibrator (RLU/CO), no additional CIN3 lesions were missed by hc2-RCS, but the number of test-positive women with normal, borderline, or mild dyskaryosis was significantly decreased (P < 0.0005). However, at this RLU/CO, the difference in test positivity between hc2-RCS and the GP5+/6+ PCR-EIA was still significant (P = 0.02). The use of an RLU/CO value of 3.0 revealed no significant difference between hc2-RCS and GP5+/6+ PCR-EIA results, and equal numbers of smears classified as > or =CIN3 (i.e., 29/32) were detected by both methods. In summary, both assays perform very well for the detection of >or =CIN3 in a population-based cervical screening setting. However, adjustment of the hc2-RCS threshold to an RLU/CO value of 2.0 or 3.0 seems to produce an improved balance between the clinical sensitivity and specificity for > or =CIN3 in population-based cervical screening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17021097      PMCID: PMC1594747          DOI: 10.1128/JCM.02078-05

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Microbiol        ISSN: 0095-1137            Impact factor:   5.948


  31 in total

1.  POBASCAM, a population-based randomized controlled trial for implementation of high-risk HPV testing in cervical screening: design, methods and baseline data of 44,102 women.

Authors:  Nicole W J Bulkmans; Lawrence Rozendaal; Peter J F Snijders; Feja J Voorhorst; A Joan P Boeke; Gladys R J Zandwijken; Folkert J van Kemenade; René H M Verheijen; Krijn v Groningen; Mathilde E Boon; Hans J F Keuning; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Adriaan J C van den Brule; Chris J L M Meijer
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2004-05-20       Impact factor: 7.396

2.  Human papillomavirus load in Hybrid Capture II assay: does increasing the cutoff improve the test?

Authors:  Jaume Ordi; Imma Alonso; Aureli Torné; Roser Esteve; Erika Sierra; Elias Campo; Luis M Puig-Tintoré
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2005-08-19       Impact factor: 5.482

3.  Prevalence of types 16 and 33 is increased in high-risk human papillomavirus positive women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse.

Authors:  Nicole W J Bulkmans; Maaike C G Bleeker; Johannes Berkhof; Feja J Voorhorst; Peter J F Snijders; Chris J L M Meijer
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2005-11-01       Impact factor: 7.396

4.  Human papillomavirus is a necessary cause of invasive cervical cancer worldwide.

Authors:  J M Walboomers; M V Jacobs; M M Manos; F X Bosch; J A Kummer; K V Shah; P J Snijders; J Peto; C J Meijer; N Muñoz
Journal:  J Pathol       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 7.996

5.  Comparison of three different PCR methods for quantifying human papillomavirus type 16 DNA in cervical scrape specimens.

Authors:  A T Hesselink; A J C van den Brule; Z M A Groothuismink; M Molano; J Berkhof; C J L M Meijer; P J F Snijders
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Assessment of human papillomavirus mRNA detection over time in cervical specimens collected in liquid based cytology medium.

Authors:  Kate S Cuschieri; Gerry Beattie; Sameena Hassan; Kevin Robertson; Heather Cubie
Journal:  J Virol Methods       Date:  2004-12-16       Impact factor: 2.014

7.  The elevated 10-year risk of cervical precancer and cancer in women with human papillomavirus (HPV) type 16 or 18 and the possible utility of type-specific HPV testing in clinical practice.

Authors:  Michelle J Khan; Philip E Castle; Attila T Lorincz; Sholom Wacholder; Mark Sherman; David R Scott; Brenda B Rush; Andrew G Glass; Mark Schiffman
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-07-20       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Interlaboratory reliability of Hybrid Capture 2.

Authors:  Philip E Castle; Cosette M Wheeler; Diane Solomon; Mark Schiffman; Cheri L Peyton
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 2.493

9.  Human papillomavirus testing with the hybrid capture 2 assay and PCR as screening tools.

Authors:  S-M Kulmala; S Syrjänen; I Shabalova; N Petrovichev; V Kozachenko; J Podistov; O Ivanchenko; S Zakharenko; R Nerovjna; L Kljukina; M Branovskaja; V Grunberga; A Juschenko; P Tosi; R Santopietro; K Syrjänen
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 5.948

10.  Hybrid capture 2 viral load and the 2-year cumulative risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or cancer.

Authors:  Philip E Castle; Mark Schiffman; Cosette M Wheeler
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 8.661

View more
  17 in total

1.  Comparison of the clinical performance of PapilloCheck human papillomavirus detection with that of the GP5+/6+-PCR-enzyme immunoassay in population-based cervical screening.

Authors:  A T Hesselink; D A M Heideman; J Berkhof; F Topal; R P Pol; C J L M Meijer; P J F Snijders
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2009-12-30       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  HPV testing on self collected cervicovaginal lavage specimens as screening method for women who do not attend cervical screening: cohort study.

Authors:  Murat Gök; Daniëlle A M Heideman; Folkert J van Kemenade; Johannes Berkhof; Lawrence Rozendaal; Johan W M Spruyt; Feja Voorhorst; Jeroen A M Beliën; Milena Babovic; Peter J F Snijders; Chris J L M Meijer
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-03-11

3.  Comparison of Hybrid capture 2 testing at different thresholds with cytology as primary cervical screening test.

Authors:  D C Rijkaart; V M H Coupe; F J van Kemenade; D A M Heideman; A T Hesselink; W Verweij; L Rozendaal; R H Verheijen; P J Snijders; J Berkhof; C J L M Meijer
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2010-08-31       Impact factor: 7.640

4.  Interlaboratory reproducibility and proficiency testing within the human papillomavirus cervical cancer screening program in Catalonia, Spain.

Authors:  R Ibáñez; M Félez-Sánchez; J M Godínez; C Guardià; E Caballero; R Juve; N Combalia; B Bellosillo; D Cuevas; J Moreno-Crespi; L Pons; J Autonell; C Gutierrez; J Ordi; S de Sanjosé; I G Bravo
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Comparison of GP5+/6+-PCR and SPF10-line blot assays for detection of high-risk human papillomavirus in samples from women with normal cytology results who develop grade 3 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.

Authors:  A T Hesselink; M A P C van Ham; D A M Heideman; Z M A Groothuismink; L Rozendaal; J Berkhof; F J van Kemenade; L A F G Massuger; W J G Melchers; C J L M Meijer; P J F Snijders
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2008-08-06       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Guidelines for human papillomavirus DNA test requirements for primary cervical cancer screening in women 30 years and older.

Authors:  Chris J L M Meijer; Johannes Berkhof; Philip E Castle; Albertus T Hesselink; Eduardo L Franco; Guglielmo Ronco; Marc Arbyn; F Xavier Bosch; Jack Cuzick; Joakim Dillner; Daniëlle A M Heideman; Peter J F Snijders
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2009-02-01       Impact factor: 7.396

7.  Clinical evaluation of a GP5+/6+-based luminex assay having full high-risk human papillomavirus genotyping capability and an internal control.

Authors:  D T Geraets; K Cuschieri; M N C de Koning; L J van Doorn; P J F Snijders; C J L M Meijer; W G V Quint; M Arbyn
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2014-09-10       Impact factor: 5.948

8.  Prevalence of type-specific HPV infection by age and grade of cervical cytology: data from the ARTISTIC trial.

Authors:  A Sargent; A Bailey; M Almonte; A Turner; C Thomson; J Peto; M Desai; J Mather; S Moss; C Roberts; H C Kitchener
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2008-04-08       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  Triage of high-risk human papillomavirus-positive women by methylated POU4F3.

Authors:  Par Bahadur Pun; Yu-Ping Liao; Po-Hsuan Su; Hui-Chen Wang; Yu-Chih Chen; Yaw-Wen Hsu; Rui-Lan Huang; Cheng-Chang Chang; Hung-Cheng Lai
Journal:  Clin Epigenetics       Date:  2015-08-21       Impact factor: 6.551

10.  Type- and age-specific distribution of human papillomavirus in women attending cervical cancer screening in Finland.

Authors:  M K Leinonen; A Anttila; N Malila; J Dillner; O Forslund; P Nieminen
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-10-17       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.