BACKGROUND: HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, and 66 are considered carcinogenic for human beings. DNA-chip technology, Papillocheck HPV-screening (Greiner) and reverse dot blot, Linear Array (LA) (Roche) are tools to assess the distribution of HPV genotypes. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to compare the clinical performance of Papillocheck and LA assays using a clinical cut-off of CIN2+. The secondary aim was to comparatively assess the distribution of HPV types using these two assays. STUDY DESIGN: The study population comprised 239 women referred for colposcopy and histology. Papillocheck, LA, and Hybrid Capture II (HCII) tests were done on all samples. RESULTS: All tests showed good sensitivity and NPV (greater than 90%). None of the comparisons of sensitivities, specificities, PPVs, and NPVs showed statistically relevant differences between tests. High-risk HPV positivity rate was similar for all tests (Papillocheck 75%, LA 77%, and HCII 73%). Agreement between tests was good. The concordance levels between HCII and Papillocheck and between HCII and LA were 93% (k=0.82) and 92% (k=0.80), respectively. Papillocheck and LA tests showed a high overall concordance rate of 96% (k=0.90). HPV16 was the most detected type (45% with Papillocheck, and 47% with LA), and HPV31 was the second most detected type (13% with Papillocheck, and 14% with LA). CONCLUSIONS: The Papillocheck HPV-screening test and LA test have a good clinical sensitivity to detect HPV types in CIN2+ patients. These assays allow, in the same experiment, to detect and determine the virus type. Our study showed that HPV types 16 and 31/33 are the most prevalent. Copyright (c) 2009. Published by Elsevier B.V.
BACKGROUND: HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, and 66 are considered carcinogenic for human beings. DNA-chip technology, Papillocheck HPV-screening (Greiner) and reverse dot blot, Linear Array (LA) (Roche) are tools to assess the distribution of HPV genotypes. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to compare the clinical performance of Papillocheck and LA assays using a clinical cut-off of CIN2+. The secondary aim was to comparatively assess the distribution of HPV types using these two assays. STUDY DESIGN: The study population comprised 239 women referred for colposcopy and histology. Papillocheck, LA, and Hybrid Capture II (HCII) tests were done on all samples. RESULTS: All tests showed good sensitivity and NPV (greater than 90%). None of the comparisons of sensitivities, specificities, PPVs, and NPVs showed statistically relevant differences between tests. High-risk HPV positivity rate was similar for all tests (Papillocheck 75%, LA 77%, and HCII 73%). Agreement between tests was good. The concordance levels between HCII and Papillocheck and between HCII and LA were 93% (k=0.82) and 92% (k=0.80), respectively. Papillocheck and LA tests showed a high overall concordance rate of 96% (k=0.90). HPV16 was the most detected type (45% with Papillocheck, and 47% with LA), and HPV31 was the second most detected type (13% with Papillocheck, and 14% with LA). CONCLUSIONS: The Papillocheck HPV-screening test and LA test have a good clinical sensitivity to detect HPV types in CIN2+ patients. These assays allow, in the same experiment, to detect and determine the virus type. Our study showed that HPV types 16 and 31/33 are the most prevalent. Copyright (c) 2009. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Authors: Sepehr N Tabrizi; Matthew P Stevens; Zaheer A Khan; Conan Chow; Martin A Devitt; Suzanne M Garland Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2012-05-30 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Oscar Gee-Wan Wong; C K Lo; Joanne N K Chow; Obe K L Tsun; Elaine Szeto; Stephanie S Liu; Hextan Y S Ngan; Annie N Y Cheung Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2012-02-15 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Emma J Crosbie; Andrew Bailey; Alex Sargent; Clare Gilham; Julian Peto; Henry C Kitchener Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2015-09-02 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Mohamed A Youssef; Lobna Abdelsalam; Reem Abdelhameed Harfoush; Iman Mamdouh Talaat; Eman Elkattan; Abeer Mohey; Rana M A Abdella; Marwa Salah Farhan; Hany Ahmed Foad; Abeer Mostafa Elsayed; Naglaa A Elkinaai; Doaa Ghaith; Mohamed Elsayed Rashed; Mohamed Abd-El Ghafar; Yasser Khamis; Ahmed N Hosni Journal: Infect Agent Cancer Date: 2016-02-17 Impact factor: 2.965