• Something wrong with this record ?

A Head-to-Head Analytical Comparison of Cobas 4800 HPV, PapilloCheck HPV Screening, and LMNX Genotyping Kit HPV GP for Detection of Human Papillomavirus DNA in Cervical and Cervicovaginal Swabs

H. Jaworek, V. Koudelakova, J. Drabek, J. Vrbkova, B. Zborilova, I. Oborna, J. Brezinova, R. Marek, K. Huml, P. Vanek, M. Hajduch,

. 2018 ; 20 (6) : 849-858. [pub] 20180828

Language English Country United States

Document type Comparative Study, Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Persistent link   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc19035044

High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) infection is a cause of cervical cancer development. The addition of hrHPV testing to cervical cancer screening and monitoring of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia treatment improves the efficacy of screening and treatment, respectively. Self-sampling for hrHPV testing seems a promising tool for increasing patient participation in cervical cancer screening. In this project, 1198 cervical swabs obtained by physicians and 176 cervicovaginal swabs obtained by self-sampling (not collected in parallel) were analyzed for the presence of 14 hrHPV genotypes using three commercially available assays in comparison. HPV DNA was detected in 21.2% of all samples (21% of cervical swabs and 22.7% of cervicovaginal swabs). The cobas 4800 HPV Test was the most sensitive (0.983) and specific (0.992) for hrHPV detection overall. The PapilloCheck HPV-Screening and LMNX Genotyping Kit HPV GP had comparable specificity with that of the cobas (0.989 and 0.955, respectively), but lesser sensitivity (0.897 and 0.909, respectively). In physician-obtained cervical swabs, the cobas showed the highest sensitivity and specificity (0.980 and 0.994, respectively) for hrHPV detection, whereas in cervicovaginal swabs, the cobas had the highest sensitivity (1.00), but the PapilloCheck had the highest specificity (0.993). In conclusion, all of the detection methods evaluated were highly sensitive and specific for hrHPV detection from both clinician-collected cervical swabs and self-sampled cervicovaginal swabs.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc19035044
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20191015114537.0
007      
ta
008      
191007s2018 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2018.07.004 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)30165205
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Jaworek, Hana $u Institute of Molecular and Translational Medicine, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic; Cancer Research Czech Republic, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
245    12
$a A Head-to-Head Analytical Comparison of Cobas 4800 HPV, PapilloCheck HPV Screening, and LMNX Genotyping Kit HPV GP for Detection of Human Papillomavirus DNA in Cervical and Cervicovaginal Swabs / $c H. Jaworek, V. Koudelakova, J. Drabek, J. Vrbkova, B. Zborilova, I. Oborna, J. Brezinova, R. Marek, K. Huml, P. Vanek, M. Hajduch,
520    9_
$a High-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) infection is a cause of cervical cancer development. The addition of hrHPV testing to cervical cancer screening and monitoring of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia treatment improves the efficacy of screening and treatment, respectively. Self-sampling for hrHPV testing seems a promising tool for increasing patient participation in cervical cancer screening. In this project, 1198 cervical swabs obtained by physicians and 176 cervicovaginal swabs obtained by self-sampling (not collected in parallel) were analyzed for the presence of 14 hrHPV genotypes using three commercially available assays in comparison. HPV DNA was detected in 21.2% of all samples (21% of cervical swabs and 22.7% of cervicovaginal swabs). The cobas 4800 HPV Test was the most sensitive (0.983) and specific (0.992) for hrHPV detection overall. The PapilloCheck HPV-Screening and LMNX Genotyping Kit HPV GP had comparable specificity with that of the cobas (0.989 and 0.955, respectively), but lesser sensitivity (0.897 and 0.909, respectively). In physician-obtained cervical swabs, the cobas showed the highest sensitivity and specificity (0.980 and 0.994, respectively) for hrHPV detection, whereas in cervicovaginal swabs, the cobas had the highest sensitivity (1.00), but the PapilloCheck had the highest specificity (0.993). In conclusion, all of the detection methods evaluated were highly sensitive and specific for hrHPV detection from both clinician-collected cervical swabs and self-sampled cervicovaginal swabs.
650    _2
$a mladiství $7 D000293
650    _2
$a dospělí $7 D000328
650    _2
$a senioři $7 D000368
650    _2
$a DNA virů $x analýza $x genetika $7 D004279
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a genotypizační techniky $x metody $7 D060005
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a Papillomaviridae $x genetika $7 D027383
650    _2
$a infekce papilomavirem $x diagnóza $x virologie $7 D030361
650    12
$a reagenční diagnostické soupravy $7 D011933
650    _2
$a senzitivita a specificita $7 D012680
650    _2
$a nádory děložního čípku $x virologie $7 D002583
650    _2
$a vagina $x virologie $7 D014621
650    _2
$a mladý dospělý $7 D055815
655    _2
$a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a Koudelakova, Vladimira $u Institute of Molecular and Translational Medicine, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic; Cancer Research Czech Republic, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Drabek, Jiri $u Institute of Molecular and Translational Medicine, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic; Cancer Research Czech Republic, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Vrbkova, Jana $u Institute of Molecular and Translational Medicine, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic; Cancer Research Czech Republic, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Zborilova, Blazena $u Fertimed Ltd., Olomouc, Czech Republic; Department of Biology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Oborna, Ivana $u Fertimed Ltd., Olomouc, Czech Republic; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Brezinova, Jana $u Arleta IVF Ltd., Kostelec nad Orlici, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Marek, Radim $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Huml, Karel $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Vanek, Peter $u Institute of Molecular and Translational Medicine, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic; Cancer Research Czech Republic, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Hajduch, Marian $u Institute of Molecular and Translational Medicine, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic; Cancer Research Czech Republic, Olomouc, Czech Republic. Electronic address: marian.hajduch@upol.cz.
773    0_
$w MED00012712 $t The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD $x 1943-7811 $g Roč. 20, č. 6 (2018), s. 849-858
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30165205 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20191007 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20191015115002 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1451704 $s 1073594
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2018 $b 20 $c 6 $d 849-858 $e 20180828 $i 1943-7811 $m The Journal of molecular diagnostics $n J Mol Diagn $x MED00012712
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20191007

Find record

Citation metrics

Archiving options