Literature DB >> 32562292

Performance analysis of high-throughput HPV testing on three automated workflows.

Anne J M Loonen1,2, Cornelis J J Huijsmans1, Willemina R R Geurts-Giele3, Cindy Leeijen1, Johannes C van der Linden1, Adriaan J C van den Brule1.   

Abstract

Primary high risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) DNA testing has been introduced in several countries worldwide, including The Netherlands. The objective of this study was to compare 3 automated workflow procedures for hrHPV testing of which the hrHPV detection assays meet the international guidelines for HPV testing. To mimic a realistic screening situation, we aimed to process 15,000 residual PreservCyt cervical samples in a period of 3 months. During a 3 months-period, 4 technicians were involved in processing 5,000 specimens per month on 3 automated platforms, 1) Qiagen Digene® HC2 HPV DNA test (HC2, signal amplification); 2) Roche Cobas® HPV test (DNA amplification) and 3) Hologic Aptima® HPV test (RNA amplification). We measured and scored general aspects (time-to-results, hands-on-time (HOT)), maintenance, pre-run, run and post-run aspects, inventory (orders, storage) and number of errors on a scale from 1-10. As determined for 1 complete workflow each, maximum processing capacity and HOT were 296 samples and 2h:55m, 282 samples and 3h:20m and 264 samples and 4h:15m for Aptima, Cobas and HC2, respectively. The mean throughput time per run was 5h:51m for Cobas in which 94 samples could be processed. For Aptima the mean throughput time per run was 6h:30m for 60 samples. Mean throughput time for HC2 is longer since results were provided on day 2. In this study, the fully automated Aptima workflow scores best with a 7.2, followed by Cobas with a score of 7.1 and HC2 with a score of 5.8. Although all HPV tests used in this comparison meet the international test guidelines, the performance (workflow) characteristics of the assays vary widely. A specific choice of a lab for high throughput testing can be different based on the labs demands, but also hands-on-time, time-to-results / # samples, maintenance, pre-run, run and post-run parameters, consumables, technical support and number of errors are important operational factors for the selection of a fully automated workflow for hrHPV testing. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  automation; hrHPV testing; performance analysis

Year:  2020        PMID: 32562292     DOI: 10.1111/apm.13064

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  APMIS        ISSN: 0903-4641            Impact factor:   3.205


  2 in total

Review 1.  False Negative Results in Cervical Cancer Screening-Risks, Reasons and Implications for Clinical Practice and Public Health.

Authors:  Anna Macios; Andrzej Nowakowski
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-20

2.  Clinical Validation of the Onclarity Assay After Assay Migration to the High-Throughput COR Instrument Using SurePath Screening Samples From the Danish Cervical Cancer Screening Program.

Authors:  Ditte Møller Ejegod; Helle Pedersen; Birgitte Tønnes Pedersen; Christine Monceyron Jonassen; Agnes Kathrine Lie; Laila Solhaug Hulleberg; Marc Arbyn; Jesper Bonde
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  2022-03-03       Impact factor: 2.493

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.