Literature DB >> 2173397

Comparison of Southern transfer hybridization and dot filter hybridization for detection of cervical human papillomavirus infection with types 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, and 35.

N B Kiviat1, L A Koutsky, C W Critchlow, D A Galloway, D A Vernon, M L Peterson, P E McElhose, S J Pendras, C E Stevens, K K Holmes.   

Abstract

A commercial dot filter hybridization kit (Virapap Kit) was compared with Southern transfer hybridization for the detection of seven types of human papillomavirus (HPV) in cervical specimens from 450 consecutive females attending a sexually transmitted diseases clinic. In comparison with Southern transfer hybridization, performed with the same probes used in the dot filter kit, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of dot filter hybridization were 90%, 94%, 74%, and 98%, respectively. Among patients with cervical cytologic dysplasia, HPV DNA was detected in 44% by dot filter hybridization and in 35% by Southern transfer hybridization. Although 26% of specimens positive by dot filter hybridization were not confirmed by Southern transfer hybridization, cervical dysplasia was detected in 5 (25%) of 20 with HPV DNA detected by dot filter hybridization alone, compared with 25 (8%) of those with no definitive evidence of HPV by either method (P = 0.009) and with 16 (30%) of 53 with HPV DNA detected by both methods (P = 0.7). The kappa statistic for interobserver and intraobserver reproducibility for interpretation of blots was similar for the two methods. The dot filter hybridization method evaluated appears to be a satisfactory alternative to Southern transfer hybridization for detection of HPV DNA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2173397     DOI: 10.1093/ajcp/94.5.561

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol        ISSN: 0002-9173            Impact factor:   2.493


  7 in total

1.  Comparison of ViraPap, Southern hybridization, and polymerase chain reaction methods for human papillomavirus identification in an epidemiological investigation of cervical cancer.

Authors:  E Guerrero; R W Daniel; F X Bosch; X Castellsagué; N Muñoz; M Gili; P Viladiu; C Navarro; M L Zubiri; N Ascunce
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 2.  Cervical cancer: developments in screening and evaluation of the abnormal Pap smear.

Authors:  J M Walsh
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  1998-11

3.  Accuracy and interlaboratory reliability of human papillomavirus DNA testing by hybrid capture.

Authors:  M H Schiffman; N B Kiviat; R D Burk; K V Shah; R W Daniel; R Lewis; J Kuypers; M M Manos; D R Scott; M E Sherman
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Detection of human papillomavirus in cervical scrapings by in situ hybridization and the polymerase chain reaction in relation to cytology.

Authors:  M Ramael; K Segers; N Pannemans; F Wesling; E Van Marck
Journal:  Histochem J       Date:  1995-01

5.  Comparison of Virapap filter hybridization with polymerase chain reaction and Southern blot hybridization methods for detection of human papillomavirus in tonsillar and pharyngeal cancers.

Authors:  S Watanabe; H Ogura; K Fukushima; Y Yabe
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 2.503

6.  Comparison of dot filter hybridization, Southern transfer hybridization, and polymerase chain reaction amplification for diagnosis of anal human papillomavirus infection.

Authors:  J M Kuypers; C W Critchlow; P E Gravitt; D A Vernon; J B Sayer; M M Manos; N B Kiviat
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  Evaluation of two commercially available DNA tests for detection of human papillomavirus.

Authors:  D C Halstead; S L Pfleger; W Dupree
Journal:  Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1995
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.