Anyplex II HPV28 detection and Anyplex II HPV HR detection assays are highly concordant with other commercial assays for detection of high-risk HPV genotypes in women with high grade cervical abnormalities

Purpose: to evaluate the performance of Anyplex II HPV28 and HPV HR Detection assays against the EuroArray HPV, Cobas 4800 HPV (Cobas), HPV Amplicor (Amp), Linear Array HPV (LA) and Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) in detection of high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) from liquid-based cervical cytology samples. Methods: cervical specimens from 404 women undergoing management of high-grade cytological abnormality were evaluated by Anyplex II HPV28 and HPV HR Detection assays for detection of HR-HPV genotypes and prediction of histologically-confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (≥CIN2). The results were compared to EuroArray, HC2, Cobas, Amp, and LA. Results: specimens were evaluated from 404 women with an average age of 30 years, including 336 with a histological diagnosis of?≥?CIN2 and 68 with?≤?CIN1. Concordance of HR-HPV detection between Anyplex II HPV28 and other genotyping assays was 94.79 % (κ?=?0.84; EuroArray) and 97.27 % (κ?=?0.91; LA); and between Anyplex II HPV HR and other HR-HPV detection assays was 86.35 % (κ?=?0.62; HC2), 96.03 % (κ?=?0.87; Cobas) and 96.77 % (κ?=?0.89; Amp). Using HR-HPV detection for prediction of?≥?CIN2 by Anyplex II HPV28 and HPV HR, sensitivity (90.18, 95 % CI 86.48–93.14; 90.77, 95 % CI 87.16–93.65) and specificity (both 67.16, 95 % CI 54.60–78.15) were not significantly different to the other HPV assays tested, with one exception. Both Anyplex assays had significantly higher sensitivity than HC2 (p?<?0.0001), with a specificity of 96 % (p?>?0.05) of HC2 in this high-risk population. Conclusions: both Anyplex II HPV detection assays were concordant with other commercial assays for HR-HPV detection, with comparable sensitivity and specificity for?≥?CIN2 detection.     

Agreement between the AMPLICOR Human Papillomavirus Test and the Hybrid Capture 2 assay in detection of high-risk human papillomavirus and diagnosis of biopsy-confirmed high-grade cervical disease

The AMPLICOR HPV test (AMP) and the Hybrid Capture 2 assay (HC2) detect 13 high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) types. Evaluation of comparative performance with clinical samples is needed to allow informed implementation of AMP into clinical practice. AMP was used (i) to assess the prevalence of HR-HPV in 1,032 samples of known cytology, HC2 status, and/or confirmed histology; (ii) to determine agreement between AMP and HC2; (iii) to evaluate the clinical sensitivity and specificity for detecting HR-HPV; and (iv) to detect the presence of biopsy-confirmed high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. The prevalence of HR-HPV was 39.3% and 45.6% by AMP and HC2, respectively. Overall agreement was 89.2% (kappa value, 0.78). Of 509 HR-HPV-negative specimens by HC2, 488 (95.9%) were AMP negative. Of 427 HR-HPV-positive specimens by HC2, 347 (81.2%) were AMP positive. In comparing the ability to detect high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL), the two tests were positive for all HSIL samples. Both tests performed similarly on CIN2+ samples (clinical sensitivities were 96.7% and 97.8%, respectively, for AMP and HC2). The clinical specificities of AMP and HC2 were comparable (54.9% versus 51.6%; P=0.18). Genotyping of 20 HC2-negative/AMP-positive cases using alternative technologies revealed target HR genotypes in 63.1% of cases and low-risk types in 15.7% of cases, while 21% of cases were negative. In conclusion, AMP provides a viable alternative to HC2, with good agreement for samples with high-grade cytology and similar sensitivity in detecting CIN2+ lesions.     

Comparison of careHPV and Hybrid Capture 2 Assays for Detection of High-Risk Human Papillomavirus DNA in Cervical Samples from HIV-1-Infected African Women

The careHPV and HC2 assays were compared for high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) DNA detection in cervical samples from 149 HIV-1-infected African women. The HR-HPV DNA detection rates were 37.6% and 34.9% for careHPV and HC2, respectively. Agreement between the two tests was 94.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.7% to 97.7%) with a kappa value of 0.88 (95% CI, 0.81 to 0.96), indicating an excellent agreement. careHPV may be considered as suitable as HC2 for cervical cancer screening among HIV-infected African women.     

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

The cobas human papillomavirus (HPV) test (cobas) was recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and identifies HPV16 and HPV18 separately as well as detecting a pool of 11 HR-HPV genotypes (HPV31, -33, -35, -39, -45, -51, -52, -56, -58, -59, -68) and also HPV66. We compared cobas, Linear Array (LA), and Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) assays for detection of carcinogenic HPV DNA, and cobas and LA for detection of HPV16 and HPV18 DNA, among the first 1,852 women enrolled in the HPV Persistence and Progression Cohort (PaP Cohort) study. Specimens were tested by all 3 assays 1 year after an HC2-positive result. In 1,824 specimens with cobas results, cobas had an 85.9% agreement with HC2 and 91.0% agreement with LA for carcinogenic HPV detection. When results between cobas and HC2 disagreed, cobas tended to call more women HPV positive (P < 0.01). Categorizing cobas and LA results hierarchically according to cancer risk (HPV16, HPV18, other carcinogenic HPV genotypes, or carcinogen negative), there was a 90% agreement for all categories of HPV (n = 1,824). We found good agreement between the two U.S. FDA-approved HPV tests, with discrepancies between the two assays due to specific characteristics of the individual assays. Additional studies are needed to compare HC2 and cobas for detecting and predicting CIN3 to understand the clinical implications of the discrepant test results between the two tests.     

Comparison of HPV genotyping assays and Hybrid Capture 2 for detection of high-risk HPV in cervical specimens

High-risk types of human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) are among the primary causes of cervical cancers. Hybrid Capture 2 (HC-II) (Digene, Gaithersburg, MD), which detects 13 HR-HPVs as a group, is the only HPV assay approved to date by the United States Food and Drug Administration. In Korea, several HPV genotyping assays are commercially available, including HPV RFMP (GeneMatrix Co., Seoul), HPVDNACHIP (Biomedlab Co., Seoul), and MyHPV Chip (Mygene Co., Seoul). We compared the results of these assays with those of HC-II. Among 553 residual samples of liquid-based Pap tests, a total of 435 (78.7%) were available for HPV assays. They were classified into four cytologic categories: normal, atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS), low-grade cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL), and high grade SIL or carcinoma (HSIL+). Among these samples, 23.0%, 40.6%, 82.5%, 93.8% were HR-HPV positive by HC-II, respectively; 6.6%, 18.1%, 44.4%, 84.4%, by HPV RFMP, respectively; 5.7%, 24.5%, 54.0%, 84.4%, by HPVDNACHIP, respectively; and 6.6%, 11.6%, 42.9%, 84.4%, by MyHPV, respectively. Compared with HC-II, the concordance rates and kappa values were 70.6% and 0.421 for HPV RFMP; 75.4% and 0.514 for HPVDNACHIP; and 67.8% and 0.367 for MyHPV. The concordance rates and kappa values between genotyping assays were 85.1% and 0.644 for HPV RFMP and HPVDNACHIP; 83.4% and 0.574 for HPV RFMP and MyHPV Chip; and 82.8% and 0.579 for HPVDNACHIP and MyHPV Chip. In conclusion, compared with HC-II test, the genotyping tests showed more than fair concordance but lower sensitivity in the detection of HR-HPVs, limiting their usefulness as HR-HPV screening tools.     

Comparison of the Cobas 4800 HPV Test and the Seeplex HPV4A ACE with the Hybrid Capture 2 Test

Background: It is well-known that persistent cervical infections with high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) are related to the development of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and invasive cervical cancer and that infection with HPV 16 and HPV 18 accounts for approximately 70% of all cases of invasive cervical cancer.Methods: We performed 3 HPV molecular tests―the Cobas 4800 HPV test, the Seeplex HPV4A ACE, and the hybrid capture 2 (HC2) test―in 146 cervical swab samples to compare between these three tests.Results: There was a concordance rate of 82.8% between the results of the Cobas 4800 HPV and the HC2 test and a concordance rate of 84.9% between the results of the Seeplex HPV4A ACE and the HC2 test. Between the Cobas 4800 HPV test and the Seeplex HPV4A ACE, there was a concordance rate of 89.6% in the detection of high-risk HPV between the results and a concordance rate of 98.7% in the detection of HPV 16 or 18. When an abnormal Pap test was defined as ≥low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL), the sensitivity of the Cobas 4800 HPV test, the Seeplex HPV4A ACE and the HC2 test were 71.1%, 80.0%, and 88.9%, respectively, while their specificities were 76.4%, 74.5%, and 67.9%, respectively.Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that the Cobas 4800 HPV test and the Seeplex HPV4A ACE may be as effective as the HC2 test in detecting HR HPV and that the concordance between the results of the Cobas 4800 HPV test and the Seeplex HDV4A ACE may be higher in the detection of HPV 16 and HPV18 than concerning high-risk HPV.     

Clinical role of p16INK4a expression in liquid-based cervical cytology: correlation with HPV testing and histologic diagnosis

p16INK4a is overexpressed in high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV)-infected preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions of the uterine cervix. Our aim was to verify whether p16 is a diagnostic marker also in cervical liquid-based cytology. We performed p16 immunocytochemical analysis and the Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) test (Digene, Gaithersburg, MD) for HR-HPV infection in 471 ThinPrep-processed (Cytyc, Boxborough, MA) cervicovaginal samples and correlated the results with histologic findings. A total of 32.3% of the specimens showed p16 immunoreactivity, whereas the HC2 test was positive in 41.2% of the cases (65.2% concordance rate). Correlating the cytologic, p16, and HPV results with histologic findings revealed HC2 as the most sensitive test for a diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse, whereas cytologic examination was the most specific. The positive predictive value was significantly higher for cytologic examination than for p16 and HR-HPV testing. These data suggest that p16 evaluation in ThinPrep samples does not have better clinical effectiveness for identifying high-grade lesions than conventional morphologic examination and HPV testing.     

Comparison of Digene Hybrid Capture 2, GeneMatrix PapilloScreen,and a PCR sequencing assay in detecting high-risk and probable high-risk oncogenic HPV genotypes in specimens from Korean women

Most cervical cancers are caused by 15 high-risk (HR) and three probable high-risk (pHR) oncogenic types of human papillomavirus (HPV). However, current commercial HR HPV screening test products do not include pHR HPV genotypes. Recently, PapilloScreen has been developed to detect the 15 HR and three pHR HPV types. In this study, we evaluated the concordance levels and clinical performance of Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2), PapilloScreen, and a PCR sequencing assay in detecting HR and pHR HPV. The PapilloScreen (96.8 %) and PCR sequencing assay (96.8 %) demonstrated higher sensitivity than HC2 (80.7 %) for detecting HR and pHR HPV. The three assays showed similar specificities and positive or negative predictive values. The concordance levels were 86.5 % (κ = 0.68) and 86.5 % (κ = 0.67) between HC2 and PapilloScreen and between HC2 and PCR sequencing, respectively. A near-perfect concordance was observed between PapilloScreen and PCR sequencing (97.8 %, κ = 0.95). Overall, the agreement between the three assays suggests that the results obtained by the HC2 assay are more often discordant (12.6 %) than the PCR-based tests. In conclusion, PapilloScreen is highly sensitive for detecting high-grade CIN or cervical cancer. The PapilloScreen assay should be considered an accurate and sensitive method for detecting HR and pHR HPV infections and an epidemiological tool for prevalence studies as well as early diagnosis and intervention in HR and pHR HPV infections.     

Assessment of MagNA pure LC extraction system for detection of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA in PreservCyt samples by the Roche AMPLICOR and LINEAR ARRAY HPV tests

Roche Molecular Systems recently released two PCR-based assays, AMPLICOR and LINEAR ARRAY (LA), for the detection and genotyping, respectively, of human papillomaviruses (HPVs). The manual specimen processing method recommended for use with both assays, AmpliLute, can be time-consuming and labor-intensive and is open to potential specimen cross-contamination. We evaluated the Roche MagNA Pure LC (MP) as an alternative for specimen processing prior to use with either assay. DNA was extracted from cervical brushings, collected in PreservCyt media, by AmpliLute and MP using DNA-I and Total Nucleic Acid (TNA) kits, from 150 patients with histologically confirmed cervical abnormalities. DNA was amplified and detected by AMPLICOR and the LA HPV test. Concordances of 96.5% (139 of 144) (kappa=0.93) and 95.1% (135 of 142) (kappa=0.90) were generated by AMPLICOR when we compared DNA extracts from AmpliLute to MP DNA-I and TNA, respectively. The HPV genotype profiles were identical in 78.7 and 74.7% of samples between AmpliLute and DNA-I or TNA, respectively. To improve LA concordance, all 150 specimens were extracted by MP DNA-I protocol after the centrifugation of 1-ml PreservCyt samples. This modified approach improved HPV genotype concordance levels between AmpliLute and MP DNA-I to 88.0% (P=0.043) without affecting AMPLICOR sensitivity. Laboratories that have an automated MP extraction system would find this procedure more feasible and easier to handle than the recommended manual extraction method and could substitute such extractions for AMPLICOR and LA HPV tests once internally validated.     

Comparison of Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV and Hybrid Capture 2 for the detection of high-risk HPV DNA in a referral population setting

Background

The Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV assay (ART) is an automated multiplex real-time PCR test for detection of DNA from 14 high risk (HR) HPV types in cervical specimens and simultaneous distinction of HPV16 and HPV18 from other HR-HPV.

Objectives

To evaluate the performance of the ART assay in specimens referred for HPV testing to our laboratory (referral population) by comparison with historical data from HC2 and INNO-LiPA as well as histological status, if available.

Study design

412 cervical specimens were collected from women between 18 and 70 years of age: 301 previously tested by HC2 without clinical data and 111 previously tested by HC2 and INNO-LiPA with histological diagnosis of CIN3+.

Results

Our study demonstrated good overall agreement between ART, HC2 and INNO-LiPA. In the group of the CIN3+ specimens HR-HPV was detected by ART in 93.07% (95% CI: 88.12-98.02), while HR-HPV detection rates with HC2 and INNO-LiPA were 91.09% (95% CI: 85.53-96.65) and 95.05% (95% CI: 90.82-99.28), respectively. The typing capability of ART for HPV16, HPV18 and a pool of twelve other HR-HPV types was investigated by comparison with INNO-LiPA demonstrating high overall assay concordance (89.81%; k 0.87).

Conclusions

The Abbott RealTime assay showed similar clinical performance for detection of CIN3+ compared with HC2. The high level of automation and ability to identify HPV16, HPV18 and other HR-HPV make this assay a very attractive option for HR-HPV testing, potentially improving patient management by risk stratification of cytological abnormal populations.     

Agreement between self- and clinician-collected specimen results for detection and typing of high-risk human papillomavirus in specimens from women in Gugulethu, South Africa

We assessed the agreement in detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV), as well as specific HPV types, between self- and clinician-obtained specimens for 450 women over 18 years of age attending a community health center in Gugulethu, South Africa. Both self-collected swabs and tampons had high agreement with clinician-obtained brushes when the Roche Reverse Line Blot Assay (RLBA) was used (for swabs, 86% concordance, with a kappa statistic [kappa] of 0.71; for tampons, 89% concordance, with kappa of 0.75). Agreement was lower, although still fair, with the Digene Hybrid Capture 2 test (HC2), with kappa higher for swabs than for tampons (for swabs, 81% concordance, with kappa of 0.61; for tampons, 82% concordance, with kappa of 0.55). Low-risk HPV types were nearly two times more common in self-collected specimens than in clinician-collected specimens tested by RLBA. All 15 women diagnosed with high-grade lesions by cytology tested positive for high-risk HPV with clinician-collected specimens tested by RLBA and HC2, while 11 out of 15 tested positive with self-collected specimens by HC2 and 5 out of 6 tested positive by RLBA. Self-collected specimens can provide valid specimens for HPV testing using nucleic acid amplification tests, although a few cytological abnormalities may be missed.     

Comparative analysis of three methods for HPV DNA detection in cervical samples

High risk HPV infection is considered to play a central role in cervical carcinogenesis. HPV DNA testing has shown to be a very useful tool for screening and following cervical infections. The aim of this study was to compare three methods for HPV DNA detection, along with cytology and colposcopy analysis. Cervical samples were collected from 100 sexually active women in Mérida, western Venezuela. HPV infection was screened using Hybrid-Capture 2 (HC2), L1-Nested-PCR and E6/E7-PCR assays. 40% of the samples (40/100) were HPV positive by at least one of the DNA detection methods. HC2 detected HPV in 12% specimens. L1- and E6/E7-PCRs showed 50% sensitivity and 77% specificity.The agreement rate between HC2 and both PCR assays was 65%. Kappa value showed moderate concordance between HC2 and both PCR methods (kappa=0.55; CI 95%). Also moderate concordance was seen when L1- and E6/E7-PCRs were compared (kappa=0.48; CI 95%). There was a significant association between the Schiller test and E6/E7-PCR (p=0.006) for HPV infection. An acceptable agreement between all three assays for HPV detection was observed. Nevertheless, different PCR formats need to be further analyzed in order to make the right choice of method for HPV testing.     

Comparison of the Digene HC2 assay and the Roche AMPLICOR human papillomavirus (HPV) test for detection of high-risk HPV genotypes in cervical samples

Many different methods with different sensitivity and specificity have been proposed to detect the presence of high-risk human papillomavirus (HR HPV) in cervical samples. The HC2 is one of the most widely used. Recently, a new standardized PCR-based method, the AMPLICOR HPV test, has been introduced. Both assays recognize the same 13 HR HPV genotypes. The performances of these two commercially available assays were compared in 167 consecutive women (for a total of 168 samples) who presented at the Colposcopy Clinic either for a follow-up or for a diagnostic visit. Concordant results were found in 140/168 cervical samples (overall agreement, 83%; Cohen's kappa = 0.63). Twenty-eight samples gave discordant results: 20 were positive with the AMPLICOR HPV test and negative with the HC2 assay, and 8 were negative with the AMPLICOR HPV test and positive with the HC2 assay. The genotyping showed that no HR HPV was detected in the 8 HC2 assay-positive AMPLICOR HPV test-negative samples, while in 8/20 AMPLICOR HPV test-positive HC2 assay-negative samples, an HR HPV genotype was found. The AMPLICOR HPV test scored positive in a significantly higher percentage of subjects with normal Pap smears. All 7 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 patients scored positive with the AMPLICOR HPV test, while 2 of them scored negative with HC2. Both tests had positive results in the only patient with squamous cell carcinoma. In conclusion, this study shows that the HC2 assay and the AMPLICOR HPV test give comparable results, with both being suitable for routine use. The differences noted in some cases may suggest a different optimal clinical use.     

Comparison of the Novel Human Papillomavirus 4 Auto-capillary Electrophoresis Test with the Hybrid Capture 2 Assay and with the PCR HPV Typing Set Test in the Detection of High-Risk HPV Including HPV 16 and 18 Genotypes in Cervical Specimens

The aim of this study was to compare the novel human papillomavirus (HPV) detection method, the HPV 4 Auto-capillary Electrophoresis (ACE) test with the hybrid capture (HC) 2 assay for the detection of high-risk HPVs. In addition, we compared the HPV 4 ACE test with the polymerase chain reaction HPV Typing Set test for the detection of HPV 16 and HPV 18 genotypes. One hundred ninety-nine cervical swab samples obtained from women with previous abnormal Pap smears were subjected to testing with the three HPV tests. The HPV 4 ACE test and the HC 2 assay showed substantial agreement for detection of high-risk HPVs (85.4%, kappa=0.71). The HPV 4 ACE test also showed substantial agreement with the PCR HPV Typing Set test in the detection of HPV 16 and HP V 18 genotypes (89.9%, kappa=0.65). In correlation with cytologic results, the sensitivities and specificities of the HPV 4 ACE test and HC 2 assay were 92.9% vs. 92.9% and 48.1% vs. 50.8%, respectively, when high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions were regarded as abnormal cytologies. The novel HPV 4 ACE test is a valuable tool for the detection of high-risk HPVs and for genotyping of HPV 16 and HPV 18.     

Viral load and genomic integration of HPV 16 in cervical samples from HIV-1-infected and uninfected women in Burkina Faso

The relationships between human papillomavirus type 16 (HPV 16) viral load, HPV 16 integration status, human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) status, and cervical cytology were studied among women enrolled in a cohort of female sex workers in Burkina Faso. The study focused on 24 HPV 16-infected women. The HPV 16 viral load in cervical samples was determined by real-time PCR. Integration ratio was estimated as the ratio between E2 and E6 genes DNA copy numbers. Integrated HPV16 viral load was defined as the product of HPV 16 viral load by the integration ratio. High HPV 16 viral load and high integration ratio were more frequent among women with squamous intraepithelial lesions compared with women with normal cytology (33% vs. 11%, and 33% vs. 0%, respectively), and among women with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions compared with women without high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (50% vs. 17%, and 50% vs. 11%, respectively). High HPV 16 DNA load, but not high integration ratio, was also more frequent among HIV-1-positive women (39% vs. 9%; and 23% vs. 18%, respectively). The absence of statistical significance of these differences might be explained by the small study sample size. High-integrated HPV 16 DNA load was significantly associated with the presence of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (50% vs. 5%, P = 0.03) in univariate and multivariate analysis (adjusted odds-ratio: 19.05; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.11-328.3, P = 0.03), but not with HIV-1 or other high-risk HPV types (HR-HPV). Integrated HPV 16 DNA load may be considered as a useful marker of high-grade cervical lesions in HPV 16-infected women.     

Evaluation of any or type-specific persistence of high-risk human papillomavirus for detecting cervical precancer

High-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing is increasingly important. We therefore examined the impact on accuracy of repeated versus one-time testing, type-specific versus pooled detection, and assay analytic sensitivity. By using a nested case-control design from the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study, we selected women with incident cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or grade 3 (CIN2/3; n = 325) and a random sample of women with 相似文献   

Evaluation of type-specific HPV persistence and high-risk HPV viral load quantitation in HPV positive women under 30 with normal cervical cytology

The persistence of high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) infection is necessary for the development of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. The aim of this study was to evaluate if HR-HPV typing and HPV16, 18, 31, and 33 quantitation are predictive for type-specific infection persistence and/or the development of CIN in women under 30 with normal cervical cytology. Young women (under 30) attending a family planning clinic who were HPV positive with normal cervical cytology were included. HPV genotyping was assessed by MY09/MY11 PCR, sequencing, phylogenetic analysis, and cloning when necessary. HR-HPV viral load was quantified using duplex real-time PCR. Study patients were offered for a second smear and HR-HPV detection and quantitation after 12 months. HR-HPV was identified in 43 (21.9%) of the 199 included women. Of these, 39 patients had a second cervical sample taken within a mean interval of 11.7 months (8.8-18.3 months). The mean HR-HPV 16, 18, 31, and 33 initial viral load was 1.9 × 10(6) copies/million cells. The level of viral load did not reveal any significant association with type-specific HR-HPV persistence or the subsequent development of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Only HPV16 infection was significantly more likely to persist (91.7% vs. 33.1%, P=0.001) and to develop CIN (33.3% vs. 3.7%, P=0.025). In women under 30 with normal cytology, HR-HPV viral load is common and is not predictive of HPV persistence or the development of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. HPV16 positive women are significantly more likely to have persistent infection and to develop cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.     

Comparison of the GenoFlow human papillomavirus (HPV) test and the Linear Array assay for HPV screening in an Asian population

High-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) DNA detection in cervical cytology samples is useful for primary screening of cervical cancer and for triage of patients with equivocal cytological findings. The GenoFlow HPV array test (GF assay; Diagcor Bioscience Inc., Hong Kong) was recently developed to detect 33 HPV genotypes by a "flowthrough" hybridization technology. In this study, we assessed the analytical sensitivity and reproducibility of the GF assay and compared its genotyping results with those of the Linear Array (LA) assay (Roche Molecular Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN), using 400 archived liquid-based cytology samples representing the full range of cytology findings. Genotyping findings of the GF and LA assays were concordant or compatible for 93.44% of tested samples, with a good (κ = 0.797) to very good (κ = 0.812) strength of agreement for assay-common and oncogenic HPV types, respectively. The two assays showed good (κ = 0.635) agreement in detecting infections with multiple HPV genotypes. The lowest detection limits of the GF assay for HPV16 and HPV18 were 25 copies and 20 copies, respectively. Repeat testing of 60 samples by use of two different lots of the GF assay revealed no discordant results, suggesting good reproducibility of the assay. Both assays achieved approximately 80% and 100% sensitivity for identifying cases of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL) with subsequent detection of LSIL+ and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or higher (HSIL+) in 2 years, respectively. Among ASC-US samples, the GF assay achieved the highest specificity (23.08%) for indicating subsequent identification of HSIL compared with the LA (19.23%) and Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) (8.97%) assays. The GF and LA assays showed significant discrepancy in detecting HPV genotypes 11, 26, 39, 52, and 66. More sensitive detection of HPV52 by GF assay offers an advantage in regions where HPV52 is more prevalent. The sensitivity of the GF assay for detecting patients with HSIL+ was noninferior to that of the LA assay.     

Comparison of the AMPLICOR human papillomavirus test and the hybrid capture 2 assay for detection of high-risk human papillomavirus in women with abnormal PAP smear

Infection with human papillomavirus (HPV) is a necessary step in the progression to cervical cancer. Many methods for HPV testing are currently available, mostly developed to detect pools of HPV types. Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) is one of the most widely used. A new PCR-based assay, the Roche AMPLICOR HPV test, has been recently developed. Both assays recognize a group of 13 HR HPV types contemporaneously. This study evaluated the performance of both methods for detecting high-grade cervical lesions as a part of management for abnormal PAP smears. The study population was composed of 213 women, all referred to colposcopy and histologic diagnosis following an abnormal PAP test. Biopsy-confirmed high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia was used as a gold standard. Overall agreement was 84.9% with a kappa value of 0.6. When comparing the ability to detect moderate cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+) and high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN3+/cancer), AMPLICOR proved slightly more sensitive than HC2, a finding that is important when HPV testing is used in a triage of borderline smear results. Genotyping of discordant results showed a prevalence of LR-HPV types in HC2 positive/AMPLICOR negative samples, and a similar prevalence of HR- and LR-HPV types in AMPLICOR positive/HC2 negative samples. In conclusion, the study shows that the AMPLICOR assay is more sensitive than HC2, which makes it a valid alternative for routine clinical use.     

Comparison of the Abbott RealTime High-Risk Human Papillomavirus (HPV), Roche Cobas HPV, and Hybrid Capture 2 assays to direct sequencing and genotyping of HPV DNA

Infection with high-risk (HR) human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes is an important risk factor for cervical cancers. We evaluated the clinical performances of two new real-time PCR assays for detecting HR HPVs compared to that of the Hybrid Capture 2 test (HC2). A total of 356 cervical swab specimens, which had been examined for cervical cytology, were assayed by Abbott RealTime HR and Roche Cobas HPV as well as HC2. Sensitivities and specificities of these assays were determined based on the criteria that concordant results among the three assays were regarded as true-positive or -negative and that the results of genotyping and sequencing were considered true findings when the HPV assays presented discrepant results. The overall concordance rate among the results for the three assays was 82.6%, and RealTime HR and Cobas HPV assays agreed with HC2 in 86.1% and 89.9% of cases, respectively. The two real-time PCR assays agreed with each other for 89.6% of the samples, and the concordance rate between them was equal to or greater than 98.0% for detecting HPV type 16 or 18. HC2 demonstrated a sensitivity of 96.6% with a specificity of 89.1% for detecting HR HPVs, while RealTime HR presented a sensitivity of 78.3% with a specificity of 99.2%. The sensitivity and specificity of Cobas HPV for detecting HR HPVs were 91.7% and 97.0%. The new real-time PCR assays exhibited lower sensitivities for detecting HR HPVs than that of HC2. Nevertheless, the newly introduced assays have an advantage of simultaneously identifying HPV types 16 and 18 from clinical samples.