Literature DB >> 18957520

Comparison of predictors for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in women with abnormal smears.

Anne Szarewski1, Laurence Ambroisine, Louise Cadman, Janet Austin, Linda Ho, George Terry, Stuart Liddle, Roberto Dina, Julie McCarthy, Hilary Buckley, Christine Bergeron, Pat Soutter, Deirdre Lyons, Jack Cuzick.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA provides higher sensitivity but lower specificity than cytology for the identification of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). This study compared the sensitivity and specificity of several adjunctive tests for the detection of high-grade CIN in a population referred to colposcopy because of abnormal cytology.
METHODS: 953 women participated in the study. Up to seven tests were carried out on a liquid PreservCyt sample: Hybrid Capture II (Digene), Amplicor (Roche), PreTect HPV-Proofer (NorChip), APTIMA HPV assay (Gen-Probe), Linear Array (Roche), Clinical-Arrays (Genomica), and CINtec p16INK4a Cytology (mtm Laboratories) immunocytochemistry. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) were based on the worst histology seen on either the biopsy or the treatment specimen after central review.
RESULTS: 273 (28.6%) women had high-grade disease (CIN2+) on worst histology, with 193 (20.2%) having CIN3+. For the detection of CIN2+, Hybrid Capture II had a sensitivity of 99.6%, specificity of 28.4%, and PPV of 36.1%. Amplicor had a sensitivity of 98.9%, specificity of 21.7%, and PPV of 33.5%. PreTect HPV-Proofer had a sensitivity of 73.6%, specificity of 73.1%, and PPV of 52.0%. APTIMA had a sensitivity of 95.2%, specificity of 42.2%, and PPV of 39.9%. CINtec p16INK4a Cytology had a sensitivity of 83.0%, specificity of 68.7%, and PPV of 52.3%. Linear Array had a sensitivity of 98.2%, specificity of 32.8%, and PPV of 37.7%. Clinical-Arrays had a sensitivity of 80.9%, specificity of 37.1%, and PPV of 33.0%.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18957520     DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0508

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  67 in total

1.  Comparison of the cobas Human Papillomavirus (HPV) test with the hybrid capture 2 and linear array HPV DNA tests.

Authors:  Julia C Gage; Mark Sadorra; Brandon J Lamere; Randi Kail; Carrie Aldrich; Walter Kinney; Barbara Fetterman; Thomas Lorey; Mark Schiffman; Philip E Castle
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Characteristics of 44 cervical cancers diagnosed following Pap-negative, high risk HPV-positive screening in routine clinical practice.

Authors:  Walter Kinney; Barbara Fetterman; J Thomas Cox; Thomas Lorey; Tracy Flanagan; Philip E Castle
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2011-01-26       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 3.  Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer: biomarkers for improved prevention efforts.

Authors:  Vikrant V Sahasrabuddhe; Patricia Luhn; Nicolas Wentzensen
Journal:  Future Microbiol       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 3.165

4.  A Suggested Approach to Simplify and Improve Cervical Screening in the United States.

Authors:  Mark Schiffman; Nicolas Wentzensen
Journal:  J Low Genit Tract Dis       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 1.925

5.  Relevance of HPV Screening for Triaging Equivocal Cytology Findings in the Pap II-p, Pap III and Pap IIID Groups - Results of Two Long-Term Studies.

Authors:  A Luyten; K U Petry
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 2.915

6.  MassARRAY spectrometry is more sensitive than PreTect HPV-Proofer and consensus PCR for type-specific detection of high-risk oncogenic human papillomavirus genotypes in cervical cancer.

Authors:  Partha Basu; Puneet Chandna; R N K Bamezai; Maqsood Siddiqi; Dhananjaya Saranath; Adrian Lear; Sam Ratnam
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2011-08-03       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  Validation of a low-cost human papillomavirus genotyping assay based on PGMY PCR and reverse blotting hybridization with reusable membranes.

Authors:  C Estrade; P-A Menoud; D Nardelli-Haefliger; R Sahli
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2011-08-10       Impact factor: 5.948

8.  Comparison of seven tests for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in women with abnormal smears: the Predictors 2 study.

Authors:  Anne Szarewski; David Mesher; Louise Cadman; Janet Austin; Lesley Ashdown-Barr; Linda Ho; George Terry; Stuart Liddle; Martin Young; Mark Stoler; Julie McCarthy; Corrina Wright; Christine Bergeron; W P Soutter; Deirdre Lyons; Jack Cuzick
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2012-03-14       Impact factor: 5.948

9.  Optimizing technology for cervical cancer screening in high-resource settings.

Authors:  Lyndsay A Richardson; Joseph Tota; Eduardo L Franco
Journal:  Expert Rev Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-05

10.  Triage of women with minor cervical lesions: data suggesting a "test and treat" approach for HPV E6/E7 mRNA testing.

Authors:  Sveinung Wergeland Sørbye; Silje Fismen; Tore Gutteberg; Elin Synnøve Mortensen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-09-13       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.